Here is another instance of language-politics by the New York Times, a part of the US-UK media which I had criticized in the past for labelling terrorists as freedom fighters:
The forces loyal to Assad occupy a village? Isn't it the army of a state with a government still recognized as legitimate by the US administration? Isn't this village inside the national boundaries of the same state with the borders that are also recognized in the same way?
Let's just forget the fact that Assad is a bloody dictator (or at least a puppet who could only watch while the Syrian establishment keeps massacring his own people)...
And let's get back to the hypocrisy and double standards of the international mass media...
Could the New York Times use the same wording just a few months ago when the US administration was flirting with the Syrian government?
Don't think so.
But I can imagine the probability that a Syrian newspaper close to Assad call the deployment of American troops -if, God forbid, needed against gunmen in the US one day- an "occupation by forces loyal to Obama."
The official newspaper of an autocratic regime, like Pravda, can speak in this tone.
The New York Times shouldn't.
