The international law doesn’t miss any opportunity to bring offenders and their supporters to justice, as we witnessed what happened with Hitler’s and Mussolini’s supporters, raising the hand Hitler-style is enough to sentence the greeter to at least three years’ imprisonment. Appreciatively, however, that’s an attempt to put criminals and their supporters behind bars away from the community.
However, Bashar al-Assad’s supporters in the West are free to glorify a criminal, who caused the displacement of millions of people, killed hundreds of thousands, destroyed the infrastructure of Syria, ripped the Syrian society apart, making it incapable of being rehabilitated, and even went further by exporting his terrorism to the neighboring countries through supporting terrorist groups since its inception.
Holding such supporters accountable is as important as holding the criminal himself accountable; It puts an end to community’s propaganda that some people promote by turning criminals into heroes fighting in their own ways.
– Former UK ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, appeared on BBC News in 2017, defending Assad regime and refuting the reports of human rights organizations that confirm the involvement of Assad regime in chemical attacks against Idlib city – north Syria, in which more than 70 people have died. On 28 February 2017, Ford became a director of the controversial British Syrian Society, alongside Assad’s father-in-law Fawaz Akhras, London-based cardiologist. The association is closely linked to the regime and has been accused many times of acting as its spokesman in the West.
– Canadian journalist, Eva Bartlett, writes a blog for Rusiya Al-Yaum (RT Arabic), state-funded Russian media, explicitly supports Assad regime who fights against “Syrian terrorists,” she said. With Russia and Iran support.
Bartlett falsifies facts and spreads false claims. British Channel 4 impugn one of her reports and tried to contact her, but she has never responded, according to the channel.
– British blogger, Vanessa Beeley, laughs at the tragedy of Syrian child victims!
She is one of the extreme promoters of Assad regime. In early 2017, she toured the UK, trying to clean Assad’s blood-smudged reputation. As she gathered few people in small places in Bristol, Birmingham and London to give a speech for an event called “Aleppo: Fall or Liberation”, which is hosted by the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist–Leninist), which publicly supports and glorifies Joseph Stalin. She gave a speech at the Palestinian Museum, where 70 guests attended.
Syria Solidarity UK members also attended Beeley’s meeting and listened to her speaking for two and a half hours. Few minutes of her speech was described as a malicious propaganda, during which she was determined to make targeting and killing Syrian civilians acceptable to who consider themselves “progressive” and “anti-imperialist”. As several websites have attacked her, calling her an extreme promoter of a criminal regime in which torture in prisons is justified.
English journalist and Middle East correspondent for The Independent, Robert Fisk, writes for the newspaper owned by a Saudi investor, Sultan Muhammad Abuljadayel, and Russian, Evgeny Lebedev. Fisk is called a hypocrite by Syrians since he praises the “heroic Syrian Armed Forces”.
“Mr. Fisk assumes a dissident position towards the official and established political and media institutions in the West,” Said Yassin al-Haj Saleh, Syrian writer. “He takes pride in disparaging David Cameron and William Hague, ridiculing Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, and denouncing Angela Merkel … undermining what American and, generally speaking Western, media outlets report – Western policies are selfish and Western media institutions are not independent and do not report the truth. And Mr. Fisk has every reason to differentiate himself from their positions and narratives: he derives his very identity as a journalist from such differentiation. Although Mr. Fisk, the man who has been very familiar with the Middle East for almost forty years, is not naive enough to fall for the propaganda of the Syrian regime et al, it is evident that his interest in deconstructing such propaganda is rather fleeting and trivial. Such deconstruction would be irrelevant to his journalistic reason for existence. It is refuting the Western disclose that takes the ultimate priority for Mr. Fisk, so much more than criticizing that of the Assad regime. What is lost in such a contradictory position? Everything that is important and novel. In Mr. Fisk’s perspective, which is centered around the West and not too dissimilar to the extreme right-wingers in that regards, the Syrian revolution appears as nothing but a Western conspiracy, falling fully in line with what is most suitable for the Syrian regime. What is lost is [the reporting of] the self-coverage of the Syrian revolution by an extensive network of Syrians, the vast majority of whom are citizen journalists, and some of whom reside today in the regime’s detention centers, most probably being subjected to torture and a treatment one would not wish for Mr. Fisk”
Fisk justifies the 1982 Hama massacre, which was committed by Hafez al-Assad in the Syrian city of Hama, and here he is today, justifying and deceiving to make the actions of the son acceptable.
Such journalists, whom are mentioned above and other supporters of the Assad’s family, do not only ignore the representation of the Syrian revolution for itself, but they go further low, making themselves paid writers for Hitler-of-the-era, Bashar Assad, and write what they are dictated, promoting his narration to the point of adopting it globally.