The Washington Post should have titled its article published today “U.S. moves toward providing direct aid to Syrian rebels” by adding the following sentence at the end: “Instead of Obama giving aid and comfort to Assad”
Here are two passages that no one should miss.
Legal restrictions? The reporter Karen DeYoung does not elaborate further on what these restrictions are.
On one hand, Obama says “Assad must go” but by the same token, this administration provides Assad with most of the $385m in aid through the State Department.
War on Terror has become aÂ namelessÂ convenience for some US diplomats. How else can they practice their skills? If there is no disease, we would no longer need the doctors. So let us keep Assad alive and kicking.
Most of the funds allocated to aid the Syrian people the US State Department so gracefully boasted about with pride on its own website have been actually earmarked to help the Assad regime.Â Any questions as to why the US State Department should be overhauled, completely from the basement to its top floors?
The second paragraph expands further on the hopelessness of the Obama Administration in understanding the results of its policy in Syria.
The words “Is moving towards.. that could” is a reminder of what spin smells like. This administration has yet to decide to help the Syrian people. Obama.. Putin.. Ahmadinejad.. What is the difference? They are all working in concert against the Syrian people.
Even if change comes, it will have little or no impact. Watch and learn how Chicago works.
So while the media is outraged at Assad, it covers up for the demented policies emanating from the White House.
It goes to show that even when ink goes against power, it loses if it does not also hold that power accountable.