The message, or the Propaganda

In a statement about the agreement of a new ceasefire in the Syrian province of Idlib, the largest German messages in Packed format again plenty of Narrative, which are suitable to throw with Dirt on the Syrian and Russian government. A mountain of distortions, omissions and lies came out inevitably. Let’s go through this prime example of flawless Propaganda, sentence by sentence.

The examined Tagesschau report begins with the headline “ceasefire in Idlib comes into force”, and the broadcaster should have left it at that, because this Information is not colored by opinion – making-after all, in the title, which can already be considered progress. But that changes immediately.

According to Kremlin data, a ceasefire negotiated by Russia and Turkey has entered into force in the Syrian province of Idlib. Meanwhile, UN aid for the victims of the civil war threatens to end because of a political stalemate.

The story from fairyland begins in the second movement. It may be true that the UN aid is threatening to stop. But this is only because powerful stakeholders in the UN themselves want it that way! The passive form is cleverly chosen in the message, which refrains from listing who it is that threatens to quit. Completely independent of the draft resolutions to be discussed below, together with the votes taken on them, it is always and at any time possible for the UN to provide aid for Syria and also to bring it into the country.

How mendacious is the constant tearing away of the victims in Syria has been repeatedly discussed here. In view of the brutal economic sanctions and the still ongoing covert war against the country, it is hard to bear cynicism when the ARD Tagesschau repeatedly draws the empathy of its viewers and readers to the victims, while maintaining the fairy tale of the evil dictator. More precisely: due to its reporting, the ARD Tagesschau is clearly on the side of the perpetrators. That is why the cynicism is what your editorial team is launching with regard to Syria.

We are still at the teaser of the Tagesschau news and can quickly see how committed the broadcaster feels to serving a mendacious narrative. Anyone who is not powdered with a staple bag can be aware that this war there in Syria is by no means a civil war. To do this, he requires only the knowledge of two facts: The armed participants in this war, on the one hand, and the respective supporters on the other side. Once he has grasped this, he quickly understands that the myth of the popular uprising in Syria does not really fit either.

The Text itself begins with:

According to Moscow, a ceasefire has entered into force in the Syrian rebel stronghold of Idlib.

Since this is supposedly a civil war, the fighters there in Idlib can of course only be rebels. thus the story is constructed around the lie of the popular uprising. So put a wrong basic assumption into space and build logical constructs on it. The instructive thing is that the constructs are full of contradictions. Therefore, a few more questions are enough to expose this lie as well:

What goals do the “rebels” in Syria pursue, what ideologies do they carry within them? What is the" civil society " you are building? Where do the fighters come from, who pays them, who equips them and provides for them – the Syrian population, for example?

A paragraph further on, the current events are appropriately woven into the basic construct “popular uprising – civil war – rebels”. The complete paragraph reads like this:

The province of Idlib in the North-West of the civil war is the last rebel stronghold in Syria. In the face of an advance by the government troops, countless people are fleeing there. According to the United Nations, more than 280,000 people fled air strikes and skirmishes in December alone.

By the way, this is false information from the beginning to the end and you don’t know where to start with the dissolution. Let’s start with “countless people on the run”. This does not belong in a message, it is a blanket statement that is used to exaggerate the misinformation. Yes, and we will never live to see the day when the Tagesschau illuminates exactly what sources are behind it when it proclaims “information from the United Nations”.

Repetition is the mother of Propaganda and it is precisely the repeated admonition to viewers and readers that this is a country of civil war with the last rebel stronghold that seduces them to “correctly” classify the following sentence." Emotionally, we take it this way: with the advance of government troops – after all, not “Assad’s troops”, congratulations for Learning in small steps, ARD love-editors – escape the hundreds of thousands. Evil, evil government troops, right?

It is undisputed that the civilian population is fleeing from areas where fighting is underway or threatening. Only this is not true in the case of current events. The Islamist mercenaries in the southeast of the province of Idlib can no longer use human shields, because the local inhabitants have long since left the Region. This makes the situation of the “rebels” extremely difficult and it is quite significant how the big howling concert is sung in the leading media whenever the Sharia disciples get into trouble.

The paragraph under consideration has to offer a Minimum of information and a Maximum of emotional messages. We can doubt that Otto normal consumers will become aware of this.

I am happy to admit to the Tagesschau editorial team that it is trying to force itself out of the corset of self-deception. This is an evolutionary, excruciatingly slow process:

Idlib and parts of the adjacent provinces of Hama, Aleppo and Latakia are controlled by the former Al-Qaeda offshoot HTS and other Islamist militias.

With the exception of the" former", This is completely true, even Al-Qaeda is mentioned! Only a few years ago I was accused of lying for this mention, now it has finally arrived in our public media. I would like to acknowledge that! But I wonder if the editors do not notice that this completely collides with the “rebels” and the “Civil War” of which they are swathed further up. Of course, it can also be that you work with “proven” text modules. Because we know: time is money. The reports need to get out quickly. A critical Revision of the report is a waste of time.

Let’s go further in the Text:

Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad is determined to bring the Region back under his control. A ceasefire had already been agreed in Idlib in September 2018 on the mediation of Turkey and Russia, but last April the government forces began a new Offensive there.

The experienced reader immediately realizes that here is once again a little personalized and demonized. The sinister image of the “Syrian ruler”, which has been properly cemented in the audience for years anyway, is now confirmed. After all, the ruler – so power – hungry per se-wants to bring the Region back under his control. Note: his control-simply because he is evil and greedy for power after all. Complete nonsense, but there is no Filter in our brain for nonsense, if our emotions are the target.

If in our country about 30,000 Islamist extremists, armed and equipped by foreign powers – let’s say – would occupy northern Brandenburg and immediately introduce Sharia, what then? Merkel would never be determined to bring the region back under her control. Of course, it can also be laughed.

But what the ARD-Tagesschau now has in store is in principle unrelated to the actual news, namely that a ceasefire in Idlib has been agreed. On the other hand, it warms up an older message, which is well suited to throw a little dirt on Syria and its allies. It starts harmless:

Meanwhile, a UN aid mission for millions of needy people in Syria is threatening to end. The mandate, which for six years has guaranteed cross-border access to war victims in the devastating conflict, ends on Friday evening. So far, the Security Council has not been able to agree on an extension.

What exactly does this mandate contain, should be the resulting question of the interested reader. From what he reads above, he gets the impression that there is no more help for Syria’s people beyond the borders of the country. This is not written one-to-one, but is conveyed as a message. And I mean, there’s intent behind it. Does the ARD Tagesschau perhaps explain to us a little more precisely what this is all about?

“The loss of the cross-border (Resolution) would make it much more difficult for the UN and our humanitarian partners to reach millions of Syrians in need of access to life-saving aid,” said Stéphane Dujarric, spokesman for Secretary-General António Guterres, in New York

Smeared! Instead of more in-depth information that explains the details and background of the mandate, we learn from Stéphane Dujarric that everything is only going to get much worse. Only because the mandate was not renewed. This Stéphane Dujarric deserves a special tribute. After all, the Frenchman, who has lived in the USA for 40 years, is a Propagandist before the Lord, a partisan belligerent in the war in Syria. This does not change by working with the “good” UNO. Let’s let Dujarric have his say again:

“According to the United Nations, the situation in Syrian Aleppo is extremely worrying in the face of intensified fighting. Random aerial bombardment in the eastern part of the city has killed and injured many civilians and displaced thousands, UN spokesman Stéphane Dujarric said on Monday. In eastern Aleppo, 275,000 people were living in” appalling conditions " and needed urgent support, as humanitarian workers had not been able to enter the area since July."

Well, that was in the year 2016. The former and current UN spokesman, spoke neither then nor today, in the interest of the United Nations. No, he has to represent certain French interests at the UN, which are also Western values in their entirety, and so the positions are similar. 2016 was about the bad guys of the value West in Aleppo and a good three years later it is about those Proxy warriors in Idlib. This has now arrived in a certain way at the ARD Tagesschau. But today a Dujarric is not at all interested in how the people of Aleppo are doing. Just as one does not worry about aid deliveries for Aleppo. They can get there at any time-if it is actually wanted.

The same was experienced by the attentive observer when the air for the civilian population in eastern Ghouta, including Douma-terrorizing Islamist militias, became increasingly thin as of February 2018. There, too, the Frenchman feigned anxiety to delay the defeat for the jihadists, a constantly repeated, chartered game.

After the recipient has been emotionally attuned, the Tagesschau still approaches with a few backgrounds, of course peppered with the triggers for the" correct " black-and-white identification:

The background to the dispute is a resolution passed in 2014 that allows the United Nations to transfer important aid supplies through four border crossings to parts of the country that are not controlled by Bashar al-Assad. According to the United Nations, three million people depend on goods. According to diplomats, Russia, as an Assad ally, refused to extend the Resolution under the same conditions.

The corrosive, systematic devaluation of the Syrian leader is again referred to in bold. But what about the four border crossings? What prevents ARD editors and journalists from informing us about this?

You just have to read the two draft resolutions yourself. On the one hand, there is the one presented by Germany, among others:

Both resolutions were voted on at the same Security Council meeting and it is clear, of course, that all participants were aware of the content of both drafts.

Both drafts, in principle and superordinate, emphasise right from the outset that the signatories will continue to work consistently for the sovereignty, independence, unity and territorial integrity of Syria, committing themselves to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

Read the German-Belgian-Kuwaiti design on (a1) and you will, mutatis mutandis, begged: “the poor of The people, we must save the poor people”! This is argued with refugee numbers in the millions, but without mentioning the context of which victims have fled where and why. The figures and the abstruse horror picture of an unprecedented catastrophe suffice as justification for a “further as before”. We have all experienced this several times with Syria. We are thinking of Homs, East of Aleppo, East Ghouta and Suwejia.

Why is there no draft signed by Germany calling for the lifting of all sanctions against Syria? Because these sanctions actually and harshly affect"the poor people". The sanctions are the main cause of the catastrophic economic and complicated social Situation and it is only through them that UN aid is needed at all. Well, what is not clearly stated is that it is actually only about UN aid deliveries for Idlib. Idlib is located in northwestern Syria, towards the Turkish border, and there are two UN crossings for these purposes-more on that.

Or, how about a draft that criminalizes the support of Islamist mercenaries? Or a draft that denounces the illegal trade of Syrian resources, such as the theft of its oil? No, we can wait a long time. But in the extremist-infested province of Idlib, where Sharia is currently binding (!), triple moving crocodile tears for “the poor people” – and always just when the Chance is increased that the nightmare of this reign comes to an end.

What is different about the Russian draft resolution?

He justifies the fact that a continuation of the separate border regime for the four border crossings used so far – as the draft provided for by Germany – violates the sovereignty of Syria.

The Russian draft informs us that the Al-Ramtha crossing, located on the border with Jordan, is no longer covered by the resolutions of UN Security Council resolution 2165. It also points out that Syria has regained control and sovereignty over large areas of its border lines in the Southwest and Northeast.

So a Journalist who is holding something on himself should perhaps take a look at UN Security Council resolution 2165, don’t you think? I did it and found these important issues:

This resolution 2165 justified its decisions – put simply-by the fact that the warring parties in Syria were unable or unwilling to ensure the supply of relief supplies to the population. It required a" higher " power and the belief that the United Nations could play a non-partisan role, committed only to the needy. By the way, this is something they had never been able to do – if it was in the context of a political conflict – since their inception. But on this basis, in 2014, the world organization authorized itself to take over the border regime of selected Syrian border crossings, through which supplies were now to reach Syria. They are those in Bab al-Salam, Bab al-Hawa, Al Yarubiyah and Al-Ramtha.

The authorization included special rights that actually violate the sovereign rights of the respective state. Concealing the fact that the same states that brought in this Resolution had only made sure that Syria’s sovereignty was ever further damaged, the UN, acting as a servant, created a pretext for advancing the dismantling of Syria. At this point, it is worth recalling once again the downright vicious media campaign in 2016, in which Syria was insinuated with baseless claims to besiege cities and villages in order to starve their inhabitants. On the basis of these slanders, it was argued that the Syrian authorities should be deprived of any control of borders and traffic imposed by their state. You know: because of “the poor people”.

The Russian draft specifically referred to Al-Ramtha (also Ar-Ramtha), the Jordanian-Syrian border crossing, and stressed that since 2018 Syria has restored complete territorial and administrative control in this Region. There is no reason to cede sovereignty rights for the border crossing there. But that is exactly what the draft co-signed by Germany demands in point 6: Syria should “return"sovereignty over Al-Ramtha to the UN.

That is what it is all about: the draft resolution submitted by Germany, among others, sought a further violation of Syrian sovereignty and covered it up with the demand that this was necessary because otherwise no aid could reach the needy. This is unfair, because the Syrian government has always cooperated constructively with all UN organizations since the beginning.

This is the striking difference in the two drafts: Russia fills point one, which we find in both texts, with life. The German draft thus only conceals an intention that does not have the help as its content.

Therefore, the Russian draft proposes to continue the relevant resolutions in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Resolution 2165, but to exclude the border crossings of Al Yarubiyah and Al-Ramtha. This is precisely because, for them, the situation as it presented itself in 2014 has not existed since 2018 (Al-Ramtha) or 2019 (Al Yarubiyah) (a3).

It would have been the most normal thing in the world if the UN Security Council members had agreed to the Russian proposal. But the world is not so normal. It and thus also the world organization is unfortunately dominated and exploited by very selfish interests.

We can now think about where the problem lies for the Western states in the concrete case. What’s so bad about Syrian border guards in UN aid transports checking to see if it really contains what it says? You make yourself a rhyme.

Last night, however, it was decided to extend the UN aid programme in the UN Security Council. But even this fact is falsified by the ARD-Tagesschau and thus operates Propaganda. In this she turns things completely according to her, respectively the required Gustus:

The agreement on the compromise worked out by Germany and Belgium was reached at the last minute. Otherwise, the program would have expired at midnight. In December, Russia and China had only voted against the extension.

No, this is wrong! Russia and China had voted against an extension, so it is implemented under the requirements, as proposed by Germany, Belgium and Kuwait in your design. Russia has clearly argued in its own proposal for the continuation; but precisely with respect for Syrian sovereignty. What Germany co-signed is just not the compromise. In the Tagesschau article there is also the truth, but we as readers must of course also know about the background in order to be able to classify this – hence the present article in the Blog. Now we also know who was striving for what and what was ultimately enforced. Compare the two proposals, it is ultimately the Russian design!

The supply of around four million Syrians is becoming more complicated after pressure from Moscow. Russia agreed to the original Resolution only in a slimmed-down Version: according to it, the supply of food, drinking water and medicines can in future only take place via two Turkish border crossings into Syria

Of course, nothing gets more complicated, but you just can’t hold back a little. With respect to the Syrian border regime, aid can also reach Syria via any other route, including Idlib.

Even the next passage comes out with the truth, but wants to make us believe, shot through the chest in the eye, that something has been made worse here by Russia:

So far, the UN has been allowed to deliver essential supplies through four border crossings to parts of the country that are not controlled by Syrian leader Assad. At Russia’s insistence, the measures will only apply for a further six months.

This is clearly tendentious and supports the Spin that one must not trust the” ruler". Of course, Otto normal consumer does not know that the regulation of a six-month extension of the mandate since 2014 has been so valid and is now being manipulated into believing that “only for another six months” would be a worse regulation. Here for the editors of the ARD-Tagesschau to write down point 5 of Resolution 2165:

Furthermore, the commission decides that the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 of this resolution to be implemented shall end 180 days after the adoption of this Resolution and shall be subject to further review by the Security Council.

No, it is the exact same regulation. Would you, dear readers, have been able to classify this last news of the ARD-Tagesschau sensibly?

It is the damned duty and obligation of a public broadcaster to present background information to his viewers and readers. But there he fails permanently and why? Because he, too, is driven by interests and not by the values he holds so much high.