COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE GUARDIAN
Once again, here is an article of which The Guardian, so long as it pretends to genuine journalism, should
be ashamed.
Contrary to the completely uninformed words of the article,
Putin does not work to keep “the West off-balance.” He is keen to cooperate and
work together with Europe and America, as he has demonstrated many, many times.
Do you not see the ugly, needless throwback-to-the-Cold War implications of the
language used in this article about Putin versus the West?
Putin is cautious - combined with a keen intelligence and
decisiveness - this makes him the likely most superb leader in the world today.
Any reader of character can see that Cameron, Hollande, and
Obama are missing some of these qualities in various proportions. Cameron
virtually comes off as a Music Hall parody of a Prime Minister making overly-pompous
pronouncements and demands while Hollande cannot rise above the role of
limp-shouldered provincial school master. Obama is an ambitious blunderer who only
plays official spokesperson for the Pentagon and CIA. None of that is Putin's
fault.
Putin waited a long time before entering Syria, and when he
did so it was under the invitation of what remains the only legitimate
government, no matter what Cameron or Obama assert in strained words. That
government is a legitimate ally of Russia’s and is entitled to assistance
against terrorist forces introduced and armed by third parties. But even now,
Putin’s natural caution sees Russia working only with air and missile forces with
the Syrian Army doing the fighting under them.
Now that he has made the decision, he gives it the effort it
deserves. And while I hate war, much as Jeremy Corbyn does, I cannot help
seeing Putin as a courageous and right-thinking figure. He stands a good chance
of bringing the horrors of Syria to an end. He works towards peace and
stability while America’s public record for years now is almost non-stop war
and deceit.
And all the phony mainline press stories and all the dumb
statements from the ridiculous man who heads NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, and all
the Pentagon threats and name-calling cannot change that. Newspapers running
such propaganda only reduce themselves in the minds of thoughtful people to
being the modern equivalents of the old Soviet apparatchiks constantly
generating bone-headed propaganda no one could possibly believe.
Putin fights only the same terrorists that The Guardian and every other mainline
newspaper have screamed about now for several years, giving great publicity to
their beheadings and other atrocities, although your effort now to question
Putin’s motives does make me question your previous motives. It was so easy to
run stories about the gruesome horrors of ISIS while doing nothing about it,
wasn’t it? Indeed, you claimed the satisfaction, along with that silly puff-ball
of a Prime Minister, David Cameron, of morally pooh-poohing ISIS while remaining
secretly satisfied with the dirty work it did to destroy Syria. And all the
publicity and pompous speeches just happened to play comfortably into
supporting the shameless and continuous stream of Islamophobia with which we’ve
been inundated in Europe and America since 9/11.
Nothing could be more hypocritical and completely dishonest.
Yet again, the horrors of Syria have nothing to do with
Assad. He started nothing. And such horrors as use of chemical weapons had
nothing to do with him. And they certainly have nothing to do with Mr. Putin.
The people responsible for the deaths of a quarter million, countless
atrocities, and the piteous streams of refugees are Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and
Qatar working under the auspices and complete approval of the United States and
its brutal Middle East colony, Israel.
That group of nations wants Syria reduced to the same kind
of divided, helpless mess as Iraq – a bleeding body left on the ground with its
limbs hacked off - but they don't want to take direct responsibility for the criminal
assault, as America and Britain did, often to their regret, in Iraq.
You, The Guardian,
only effectively work to continue the horror by publishing dishonest stuff, but
I’m sure I waste my breath on senior editors who already know much of what I’ve
said. Now, for general readers I’ll only say that if this is what appears in a
paper of The Guardian’s traditional liberal
and non-corporate reputation, you can only imagine what garbage is regularly strewn
over the pages of The Times, The Telegraph, The New York Times, and The Washington
Post. It is extremely difficult for ordinary people to get even a glimpse
of truth through a phalanx like that defending brutal government deceit. And
that is just what is intended.
