"One is more certain to influence men, to produce more effect on them, by absurdities than by sensible ideas." - Napoleon.At first, the U.S. media ignored the heavy presence of Jihadist terrorists in Syria because such coverage would deviate from the official line that the anti-Assad rebels are democratic-minded freedom fighters who are worth backing with U.S. money and arms.
But, after a while, the official narrative unraveled. The media couldn't hide the reality anymore so they changed their strategy, choosing instead to celebrate the aggressiveness of the terrorists and their willingness to impose pain on Syrian civilians, regardless of their political sympathies.
Organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations even went as far as to praise Al-Qaeda, showing their indifference towards the suffering of American soldiers who sacrificed their lives to defeat Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In a recent article published on The New York Times called, "Missteps by Rebels Erode Their Support Among Syrians," one sentence stands out for its lack of honesty:
"Small acts of petty humiliation and atrocities like executions have led many more Syrians to believe that some rebels are as depraved as the government they fight."The U.S. media is now officially in the whitewashing business. It is desperately trying to turn crap into gold. The anti-Assad rebels are the scum of the Muslim world, but in the NY Times they are treated as titans for freedom and exemplars of courage.
Since when did mass executions of civilians and terrorist attacks against apolitical people become small examples of atrocities? Did the change begin on 9/11? According to the official story, Al-Qaeda was responsible for 9/11, so why didn't the New York Times defend Al-Qaeda on that day? Why does the mainstream media believe that Al-Qaeda terrorists are fighting for freedom when they kill innocent Syrians but not when they're killing innocent Americans?
According to the crazy U.S. media, Syrian civilians who support Assad are not innocent so the world should not care when they are tortured and killed by invading bands of Jihadist terrorists.
If Assad's supporters deserve death because of their presumed complicity with a brutal system, then what about Obama's supporters? The U.S. empire is infinitely more brutal than the Syrian regime. Obama commits more atrocities in a week than Assad has committed in his entire reign as Syria's leader; the latter is clearly the better man.
But in the insane minds of hypocritical U.S. journalists, Assad's hands are stained with blood and Obama's hands are as pure as snow. But that's not the really troubling part. What really terrifies me is that American journalists condemn terrorism one day and cheer for terrorism the next day. They are worse than schizophrenics. By endorsing terrorism in the light of day, they cannot take back their endorsement in the future when the situation on the home front becomes more dire.
Through its actions, the U.S. government is essentially telling any man with a gun with any grievance anywhere in the world: "You are in the right when you pick up arms and kill innocent civilians. Don't let morality stop you. Don't let your conscience stop you. Don't let the fear of retribution stop you. Don't let God stop you. Be a terrorist. Be a villain. Be a murderer. Join the dark side like us, and you will be victorious!"
It is a tempting message, but any sane man would choose the mercy of God over the immoral dictates of the American government.
The folly of sponsoring Jihadist terrorists and intervening in a sovereign country's internal affairs will haunt the United States for a long time to come. Apparently, the maniacs who direct U.S. foreign policy learned nothing from their mistakes in Afghanistan. But, of course, they didn't want to learn. This is the time of burning, not learning.
The truth is that the Washington elite could care less about the growth of Jihadist terrorism and anti-American hatred in the Muslim world. In fact, they are actively creating these realities by staging false flag terror attacks and plots in the U.S., conducting drone strikes on Muslim villages, and training and arming Jihadist terrorists to do their dirty work.
It is no longer a secret that cunning U.S. leaders, the majority of whom are irrationally obsessed about Israel, want the war between Americans and Muslims to continue indefinitely. It is all about setting the stage for the clash of civilizations.
Peter Dale Scott writes in his article, "Why Americans Must End America’s Self-Generating Wars":
"American politics, both foreign and domestic, are being increasingly deformed by a war on terrorism that is counter-productive, actually increasing the number of perpetrators and victims of terrorist attacks. It is also profoundly dishonest, in that Washington’s policies actually contribute to the funding and arming of the jihadists that it nominally opposes."The Jihadist terrorists in Syria who are being paid and armed by the U.S., Saudi Arabia, and Qatar are low-level arsonists. In order to achieve Washington's goal of regime change, greater fires are required.
The age of burning is far from over. Now that Obama has been reelected, the U.S. military machine will once again roll up its sleeves and get to work. After all, the Middle East is not going to burn by its own hands.
