by John Ward
French President Emmanuel Macron spent yesterday reconfiguring the meaning of words like ‘war’, ‘retaliation’, ‘Syrian People’, ‘political solution’, ‘even-handed’, ‘proof’, ‘stalemate’, ‘international legitimacy’ and ‘peaceful diplomacy’. As a fully paid-up MIC creation, he is Our Macron – A Mannie for All Seasons…..but woefully deficient in reasons.
A great 20th century truism was, “In War, the first casualty is always Truth”. In the 21st century, being progressive, the human race gets the Lie Factory production lines rolling long before a war starts.
And the thing to stress right from the outset here people is that firing 100 Cruise-style missiles at another state’s factories is not an act of war. This must be true, because French President Emmanuel Macron says so.
But then, being a total banker, Macron says all kinds of things that make little or no sense.
Last week, Mannie told us he had “irrefutable proof” that Assad ordered and carried out a gas attack on forces who were already pinned down in a tiny corner of Damascus, and subsequently surrendered within 72 hours. He just didn’t share this explosive proof with us.
Unlike Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, who last Saturday delivered on his claim to ‘prove’ that the March 4th poisoning of Sergei Skripal and his daughter in the English city of Salisbury was a Western set-up.
Perhaps seeing some kind of conflict of interest (or possibly after being hit with a baseball bat by US Secretary of State John Bolton) the OPCW subcontracted the Russian samples to a laboratory in Spiez, Switzerland, and they analysed some Salisbury samples. The analysis allegedly shows that the samples contain chemicals “which point at a Western-designed nerve agent as the likely origin”. The New York Times gave the story two paragraphs. The UK old media ignored it in favour of Bomber Macron’s peace overtures.
This is what Mannie the Dove had to say about the strikes:
“It was a retaliation, not an act of war….we had full international legitimacy to intervene in Syria because the strikes were about enforcing international humanitarian law…the allies were forced to act without an explicit U.N. mandate because of the constant stalemate of the Russians in the Security Council….We had arrived at a time when these strikes had become indispensable.”
Yes of course they had, dear, of course they had. And doubtless Madame la Directrice told you to grow a pair.
I love the concept of getting your retaliation in first because of a stalemate. Stalemate is not a game of solitaire: at takes at least two sides to produce it. And as of yesterday, it’s clearly OK to retaliate, because it’s not an act of war. Vladimir Putin: are you taking notes?
Cast your minds back nine months to President Macron’s brief post-electoral honeymoon, during which he had this to say to the media:
“Washington is making a mistake if it assumes that my government will simply go along with its next adventure in the Middle East. It is my firm intention to be even-handed in any future conflict”.
And indeed, Mannie has been as good as his word, for yesterday he switched from CiC Bomber Command to peacemaker. He told a TV station that France wants to launch a diplomatic initiative over Syria that would include Western powers, Russia and Turkey, stressing that French diplomacy is able to talk with Iran, Russia and Turkey on one side, and the United States on the other side.
Well, there you go: launch missiles one day, launch a diplomatic initiative the next. And then finish off with a sting in the tail:
“The regime of Bashar Assad has an enemy who is his people”
Nice soundbite; but as with pretty much everything the USEUNATO axis vomits up, completely untrue.
The last internationally monitored Opinion Poll in Syria gave Bashar Assad a 55% level of support. Of those 55%, half said he should bring in free elections in the near future. Assad claimed at the time he was about to do that, but then quickly found himself being bombed from all sides.
He was attacked by McCain-bankrolled ISIS nutters because they knew perfectly well that the Syrian people as a whole have no desire at all to vote for Islamism. Even today, after years of civil war, Al Jazeera writes that ‘Assad continues to maintain significant levels of support within Syria’.
Look, Assad is no angel. It is blatantly obvious that his régime rose to power on the back of big money from the Syrian élite.
Hmm. ‘Regime rose to power on the back of big money from the élite’. Now, where have I heard that description before? Oh I know…the British Government that ignored public opinion and Parliament in order to do the bidding of the MIC….and then bombed Syria. And, um, the election of Emmanuel Macron on the back of mysterious money and calling for an independent foreign policy for the EU…who then bombed Syria.
Friends, we all know what this whole shebang is about: oyiiiirrallllll.