Media Complicit in the Madness Over Syrian Chemical Attack

Sky News cuts off top British general after he asks

‘Why would Syria launch a gas attack now?’

It's not bad enough that very few news media are questioning the sanity of attacking Syria over the Douma chemical attack, but from this video it would appear they are not only silent but, in fact, force silence upon anyone who questions the madness. In the video below, the presenter cuts-off Major-General Jonathan Shaw, formerly one of the British Army’s most senior officers, in mid-sentence when he dared to question Syria's motive for launching a chemical attack now.

Tucker Carlson, who's show I don't watch, and who's network I don't watch seems to be the only American journalist who is sensible enough to wonder why Syria keeps shooting themselves in the foot in a determined effort to sabotage their own victory. 

Piers Morgan may be asking similar questions in the UK, but this girl, Samantha Washington, on Sky News is not only not asking questions, she's determined not to allow anyone else to.

Watch this hardly believable bit of anti-journalism:

There's no excuse for stopping an interview cold like that. They certainly wouldn't have begun an interview on a complex topic like that when there was a hard commercial scheduled just one-minute later. That's ridiculous! The video is just one minute and 7 seconds! I'm quite sure General Shaw was not aware he had less than a minute to respond.

It's very disturbing how willing the media is to jump behind what is unquestionably an illegal action without any proof of the accusations. All proofs attaching blame to Assad are presumptuous at best and often fall back on statements like - he's a monster who keeps doing this to his own people. That he's a monster, I have little doubt, but there is still no proof that he was responsible for the Khan Sheikoun episode last year - at least according to General Mattis. 

In 2014, investigative journalist Seymour Hersh reported on opposition forces' ability to use chemical weapons. In an article for the "London Review of Books," Hersh obtained documents from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the Pentagon's own spy organization. They suggested that the Nusra Front, a Syrian offshoot of al Qaeda, had access to the sarin nerve agent. A chemical weapons attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta in August 2013, which was blamed on Assad, was carried out by rebels, according to Hersh's article. They wanted Washington to presume Assad had crossed Obama's "red line" and draw the US into a war.

Nevertheless, Assad is blamed for all three chemical attacks with each accusation building on the other. Here's the thing: Assad's enemies are the only ones to gain from the use of chemical weapons. It is clear that they have gained in each of the first two mentioned above and stand to gain greatly from Douma.

It's hard to believe that the governments of 3 major democratic countries, and 99% of the media in those countries are too stupid to see that. It's one thing to want to get rid of Assad; it's a whole 'nuther thing to want the war in Syria to continue into the unforseeable future. That is what will happen if the west seriously weakens Assad; the war will drag on for years more where it could potentially be over by summer. 

Furthermore, if Assad is weakened, Iran and Russia will increase their presence. If Assad is taken out - nothing good can come out of it. Look at the messes we've created in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya. 

I believe there are many Syrians living in Europe right now who would love to go home. This insane, knee-jerk reaction will rule out that possibility for many years to come.

So, again I ask, are our governments really that stupid, or is there something else at play? Are there people who are determined not to allow peace to break out in Syria? Nothing is as it seems in global politics and when countries join together to insist that everything is as it seems - well, that's when we really need to start worrying.