27 Jan 2017    5,428 views

Tulsi Gabbard Knows More About Syria Than You Do

article image

The press should be grateful to Gabbard for doing their job in Syria when they were too cowardly and corrupt to go themselves.

Debate 3
Debate 3
Login and Click Agree/Disagree first to Debate.
Why Agree? Write your opinion:
Why Disagree? Write your opinion:

“The first casualty when war comes is truth.”
~ Hiram Johnson

I have had just about enough of weak, sleazy, cowardly male pundits monologuing at war veteran and Hawaiian Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard about war and Syria. The western press has been completely absent from the conflict in Syria, probably as much out of cowardice as a need for plausible deniability when they get caught lying to to their audiences, so since there are no boots on the ground there doing the job that the press used to do, Gabbard went there herself to discover the truth about what's happening. She is being rewarded for her selfless act of courage by being painted as a liar and a traitor by the pro-establishment American media, whose job she was generous enough to do.

In her first major television interview since returning from her fact-finding mission to Syria, Gabbard was subject to a breathtakingly obnoxious spin job on CNN at the hands of the phenomenally despicable Jake Tapper, who peppered her with so many establishment party lines it’d make even the greasiest Fox News pundit blush. In the seconds leading into his interview with Gabbard, Tapper ran an appallingly blatant psy-op featuring “Bana Alabed,” a social media presence whose authenticity is subject to so much doubt from experts that it’s absolutely inexcusable for any purported news source to run any story about it as fact. 

After reporting with a straight face that a cute seven year-old Syrian girl honest to goodness just tweeted the President of the United States imploring him to pwease pwease intervene in the Syrian conflict, Tapper brought on Gabbard and within seconds began grilling her if she’d met with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Not the overall situation in Syria, not the people of Syria, not the factions and sides of the Syrian conflict, just Assad. Tapper spent the majority of his interview with Gabbard questioning her about Assad and trying to spin her meeting with the President of the country she was visiting as a shady and immoral thing. When Gabbard said that Assad was the President of Syria and he'll necessarily need to be involved in peace talks, Tapper blasted her with a jaw-dropping chain of propaganda, lies, and undisguised attacks on her and her position that I’ll just quote here unedited in their entirety:

“So, congressman Adam Kinzinger, a friend of yours, also a military veteran, a Republican, he said on Twitter when he heard about your visit, quote: ‘Fact finding mission? Fact: 50,000+ dead children in Syria. Tulsi Gabbard, I hope you didn't meet with their butcher Assad.’ He has used chemical weapons on his own people. You said it is going to be up to the Syrian people. There really aren't free and fair elections in Syria.”

Kinzinger, while we’re on the subject, is the neocon who introduced the latest Orwellian propaganda act that was quietly slipped into this year’s NDAA legislation last month. 

Gabbard somehow refrained from unleashing the torrent of shrieking, profanity-laced vitriol I definitely would have blasted him with had I been in her shoes, maintained her composure without batting an eye, and patiently explained why Tapper is stupid and wrong about everything. She swatted aside the limp pundit’s feeble protestations as she finally spoke of her findings in Syria, the people’s unbelievable suffering at the hands of the terrorist insurgents, their confusion as to why the United States is backing terrorist factions, and the fact that she did not meet a single person who believed that there were moderate rebels in Syria. It’s definitely worth a watch; here’s a hyperlink if you missed it the first time.

And that was just CNN. The always excellent Rob Cotton has written this solid piece covering the way the establishment media has been focusing on Gabbard’s meeting with Assad in what is clearly an attempt to associate the two names with each other and portray the two as being somehow in cahoots, despite that making no sense whatsoever to anyone with any amount of critical thinking capacity at all. 

Clearly, the pro-establishment media has a big problem with Gabbard doing their job for them and reporting facts that run counter to the narrative they’ve been spinning from the safety of their TV studios. 2016 was the first time in history that American power structures fully lost control of the narrative, and it’s becoming increasingly clear that this is the case with Syria possibly more than anywhere else. Some very powerful people have a lot invested in Assad’s loss of power, and they’re getting angrier and angrier at the people who are standing in the way. Gabbard has placed herself squarely in the crosshairs of that rage, and is currently flipping it the bird for good measure. 

I have a hypothetical question for you, dear reader.

Imagine you knew absolutely nothing about the situation in Syria, that you had heard nothing about it either way; no punditry, no media commentary, no nothing, and you came to this question with fresh eyes and fresh ears. If this was the case for you, what would you think if I told you there was a debate raging about whether we should overthrow the government of a sovereign nation by aiding and abetting terrorist and jihadist factions, or whether we should oppose the terrorists instead? What if I told you that the side who wants to support terrorists against the government also wants to install a no-fly zone that would involve shooting down that government’s military planes, and the military planes of Russia as well? What if I told you that top military officials have attested that this proposed no-fly zone would necessitate a war with a nuclear superpower? What if I told you that every major neocon in Washington was pushing for the interventionist route, just like they did with Iraq?

If I told you all these things, and the question came to you afresh, which side of the debate would you think are the good guys? 

Because make no mistake, those are the dimensions of the Syrian debate. Without the punditry, without the propaganda, without the nonstop barrage of media psy-ops, when you strip it right down and look at the raw data of the matter without any spin or manipulation, that is what’s happening.

Tulsi Gabbard has confirmed this. She flew to Syria in her relentless fight for peace and truth and shared what she found there. Don’t believe her? Go to Syria yourself and find some evidence to the contrary. Or demand that the press start finally doing their job and go there. 

Tell them to send Jake Tapper first.




Thanks for reading! If you enjoyed this, please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following me on Twitter, or even tossing me some money on Patreon so I can keep this gig up.