Trump probably won’t call media coverage of his Syrian air strikes “fake news”

As always, are on the ball to point out pro-establishment sentiment in the mainstream media.

The headline of the piece by Adam Johnson pretty much says it all – “Five Top Papers Run 18 Opinion Pieces Praising Syria Strikes–Zero Are Critical“…

No need to debate the morality or utility of the strikes, because the scene played out per usual: Dictator commits an alleged human rights violation, the media calls on those in power to “do something” and the ticking time bomb compels immediate action, lest we look “weak” on the “global stage.” Anything that deviates from this narrative is given token attention at best.

One thing the “failing” New York Times does point out, however, is the evolution of President Trump’s opinion on how to deal with Syria since 2013…

Of course the use of chemical weapons was disgusting.

But the failure to note the profound lack of sincerity in the president’s verbal response (which included him clearly forgetting the name of “Sarin” gas) demonstrates that when it comes to military matters at least, very little has changed in mainstream opinion , even with this administration.

Since the airstrike people seem a lot more interested in fawning over their knowledge of the hardware used to carry out the attack than they do remembering exactly what it was supposedly being done for.

It was bombs being dropped on children.  Children.  Never mind the gas for a moment.  Bombs being dropped on children.  If anything appears to be an afterthought in the media, it’s that. JLP