Reporting Lebanon

If one looks to the British Mainstream Media's (MSM) reporting of the current Zionist attacks on Lebanon and Palestine, one would remain forever in ignorance. Whilst it is not possible for the British MSM to sanitise or ignore the Zionist atrocities in Lebanon, as it does so often with Palestine, it still seeks to place them in the context of the quasi-moral justification that "Israel is defending herself"; yet never entertaining the reverse position that Hezbullah is defending Lebanon from Zionist aggression.

The British MSM has consistently placed issues in a pro Zionist context and seeking to counterbalance Zionist aggression, with unfounded assertions of Hezbullah's barbarity. There is nothing new in this racism; the British MSM has always projected a "culture of barbarism" upon the "Other" (in this case Muslims).

This is more than xenophobia: it is a colonial chauvinism. By projecting barbarism upon a people, colonial aggression against them can be justified along the lines that their culture is barbaric so civilising them is benign. Those that resist, must prefer to live as savages and can be regarded as subhuman. Thus their destruction or exploitation is morally equitable.

The Zionist invasion and bombing of Lebanon was presented as an attempt to free the two Israeli soldiers captured by Hezbullah - again with no regard to the fact that Israel has also taken Palestinians and Lebanese hostage. Yet this could not have been the Zionist raison d'être, for they have made no effort to recover these prisoners. Had they have wished to do so the only logical option would be to exchange prisoners. Israel by its own admission cannot rescue these prisoners; it does not know where they are being held. Nor does Israel believe that its onslaught will lead to their recovery. Thus it is demonstrably false to suggest that this is the case.

Moreover, entwined with that deception is another deceit, namely, that the Zionist bombardment of the civilian population and entry and exist routes was aimed at preventing the transportation of the two prisoners out of Lebanon. This is palpable nonsense, bombing the routes in and out of Lebanon has not stopped a mass exodus to Syria. So quite clearly should Hezbollah wish to relocate these prisoners to another country it could and still can do so. Therefore, this Zionist targeting of routes in and out of Lebanon has to be seen as a willful act designed to maximise civillians causalities.

Even were we to regard, this Zionist onslaught as a response to the capture of these two soldiers, it would have to be regarded as collective punishment. Whilst the British MSM has gradually can to accept this, it still persists on the unqualified acceptance that "Israel is defending herself" and maintains the mantra that Hezbullah instigated this conflict.

Yet in reality, the reverse is true. It was the Zionist regime that initially took Lebanese and Palestinians hostage, that prompted Hamas and Hezbullah into a retaliatory response. Therefore, it is a gross distortion to suggest that "Israel is defending itself"; this simple is not the case. Moreover, to suggest that Hezbullah are terrorists and that Zionist militarism is not, is a racist use of the pejorative.

Furthermore, the British media negates to mention that in Iraq under the auspices of the Occupation Force (United States), more civillians are dying in that conflict than in Lebanon and Palestine combined. The three principle players in that occupation are the United States, Britain and Israel, which all have Zionist governments. The attack on Lebanon is an extension of that war - The War on Islam.

It is notable that the Zionist regime wishes to present Hezbollah as a greater threat to its occupation of Palestine than Hamas. The reason for so doing is a clear statement of intent, Hezbullah are Shia (the predominate sect in Lebanon), as are the majority of the population in the Middle East. Moreover, the most powerful state inthe Middle East and only truly independent Islamic state is Iran: a Shia country.

Whilst the United States has installed unrepresntative puppet governments in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt and the emirates states that are willing to acquiesce to Zionist interests, Shia Iran will not. Thus whilst Palestinians through there very existence pose the greater threat to the continuation of the State of Israel, the Shia present the greatest threat to Zionist ambition. Hence the reason that the United States persistently tries to undermine and emasculate the Shia Iraq government and sow discord between Sunni and Shia Muslims.

Yet the British MSM ignore this glaringly obvious fact, and can describe a proposed multinational force, as a peace keeping force; rather than an attempt to escalate the war and inveigle others to do what the Zionist cannot: occupy Lebanon.