A week after David Cameron’s speech at the UN where he implied Russian and Chinese responsibility, through their refusal to sanction NATO military interference, for the deaths of Syrian children, yesterday suicide bombs, detonated by terrorists who are funded and supported – and possibly also, somewhere down the line, orchestrated – by the British Government, ripped through Aleppo. Amongst the civilian victims was a girl whose lonely death was captured in a gut wrenching photograph carried by the Daily Mail; it was an image that testified Cameron’s own and real child-killing culpability, and yet the Coalition’s flagship propaganda outlet span it as “collateral damage” in a post-normal defence of Islamist terrorism.
Last week, in a move given coverage by Iranian broadcaster, PressTV, – but which the British corporate-media failed to mention bar very rare exceptions - the British Government quietly announced that it was to give yet another £8million towards “humanitarian aid” in Syria – bringing the total to £38.5million. In the past, British tax-payers money has been aimed directly at supplying NATO’s proxy army – deceptively entitled the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which incontrovertibly consists of, and by a vast majority, foreign mercenaries and jihadists – with communications equipment for producing propaganda and, assumedly, for coordinating tactics. This latest amount is claimed to be being channelled through UN agencies, but any support, however it is supposedly spent in public, is a disgrace when it ultimately manifests itself in the mass killing methods used by Islamist terrorists.
Spelling trouble for the British Government is the way that their support for people who are, in the narrative of the War on Terror, the same sort which kill British servicemen in Afghanistan – in this most recent case, al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra (pictured above, and who have terrible previous) – threatens to undermine completely the integrity of an entire ruling Establishment in the awakening eyes of the British people. Corporate-media has had to become resourceful about disguising the damaging paradox in its coverage of Syria, and the Daily Mail article which carried the aforementioned image proved no exception. It likened the Aleppo bombings – targeted acts of terror – with what very possibly could be, given the nature of the ordnance, stray Syrian shells that landed over the Turkish border and killed 5 people, including, tragically, a 5 year-old child. In a despicable piece of moral cowardice, after the Mail article writer correctly identified the “lifeless body of a young girl… in the street” as “an innocent victim of a series of suicide bomb attacks” he went on to describe the “young girl’s body” as a “potent symbol of the collateral damage each side [in a civil war] is prepared to risk”.
The horrifying problem with this sort of journalism (which is yet another indicator that the corporate-media in the UK exists to propagandise for the Establishment) is that the Syrian conflict is clearly not a civil war, and there is no such thing as collateral damage in a suicide bomb because everyone, whether they be civilian or military, is an intended target. Unfortunately for British politicians who have failed to condemn the terrorism in Aleppo, and whose silence in the aftermath has been deafening, pretending that terrorist bombs form part of a legitimate military strategy for an army who are supposedly fighting for democracy can only destabilize their credibility, and provoke the electorate into questioning British Government support for evident Islamist terrorists and their heinous crimes.
As for the shelling that landed on Turkey, this is also indicative of the success of the Syrian Arab Army that is forcing Britain’s proxy army of jihadists, who are clearly being beaten in straightforward military encounters, to show their hands as the terrorists they really are. If ordnance is landing in Turkey, it means that Syrian forces are engaging the areas along the border that the terrorists assert to be their own areas of autonomy – a claim that is willingly parroted by corporate-media in implied support of no-fly zones. Furthermore, supposedly retaliatory fire from Turkey could also be efforts to protect Ankara’s supply routes to the NATO terrorists in Syria, rather than spasmodic reaction. Indeed, the BBC reports that “the government in Ankara is expected to ask parliament shortly to authorise cross-border military operations in Syria”; such news indicates that the NATO operation is in jeopardy of becoming completely routed.
In another demonstration that the tide has fully turned against the NATO plan to overthrow the al-Assad government, last week, during an officially-sanctioned meeting in Damascus of internal opposition dedicated to peaceful political change in Syria, an FSA Lieutenant-Colonel apperently made an appearance to announce that he and his men had defected back to the government side and would “cooperate with the Ministry of National Reconciliation.” To applause from the audience, Khaled Abdel Rahman al-Zamel said “we are all Syrians, we reject a revolution that starts with the shedding of blood.”
It seems as if there is an organised and sensible effort by Syrian Government, with a promise of real reconciliation, to get Syrians to defect from the FSA - an effort which, if it is as successful as the stories of repentant Syrians carried by the Syrian state news agency, SANA, indicate it might be, would seriously undermine the fiction that the FSA, or its political parent, the Syrian National Council, is representative of Syrians.