The typically outspoken Alt-Media Community, usually never short of people willing to condemn “Israel”, is remarkably silent after the Zionists broke several “politically correct” taboos by admitting that they struck Syria over 200 times in the past 18 months.
“Israel” broke with its long-running tradition of neither confirming nor denying its suspected military activities abroad by openly admitting that it carried out over 200 strikes in neighboring Syria over the past 18 months. It likely took this unprecedented step in order to send a signal to rival Iran that it will continue attacking its “advisors” (which President Assad recently acknowledged sometimes fulfill the role of “fighters”) in the Arab Republic at will. While a revelation of this magnitude would ordinarily be expected to dominate conversations within the Alt-Media Community, this corner of the global information space is relatively quiet because of the fact that the Zionists just broke several of its “politically correct” taboos through their admission, thus throwing the entire Community into a conundrum after discrediting some of its main narratives.
The knee-jerk reaction would naturally be to condemn “Israel” for its illegal aggression against a sovereign state’s democratically elected and legitimate government, but doing so in this context would implicitly recognize the reality that these reported 200+ strikes did in fact happen, and therein lays the problem. The immediate question that arises is why Syria didn’t publicize even a tenth of these attacks if they really did occur, which in turn makes one wonder whether the incidences that it did raise global awareness about unfolded exactly like how they were reported. For example, Syria almost always says that it shot down “Israeli” missiles every time that its historical nemesis attacks it, but if one accepts that “Israel” struck Syria 200+ times in 18 months, then either these interceptions were extremely rare (thus casting doubt on the efficiency of the anti-missile technology being wielded) or they might not have even happened at all but were just made up in order to “boost morale” and “save dignity/face”.
Another taboo that’s “uncomfortably” brought to light by “Israel’s” admission is the nature of its strategic relations with Russia, which recently turned it into a de-facto joint protectorate whose security it ensures together with the US, which was detailed by the author in his earlier piece about how “It’s Official, “Israel” Is Now A Joint Russian-American Protectorate”. “Israel” wouldn’t be able to carry out a single strike in Syria, let alone over 200, since Russia’s 2015 anti-terrorist intervention saw Moscow take control of the country’s airspace unless it had its very close partner’s tacit approval. For as obvious as it is that “Israel” at the very least informs Russia in advance of its strikes, if not secretly coordinates some of them as part of Moscow’s “balancing” strategy against Iran, it’s impossible for most members of the Alt-Media Community to admit because it goes against their dogma that would prevent them from “rooting” for Russia if it’s perceived to be a “Zionist enabler”.
All of this probably sounds silly to many of the readers who aren’t indoctrinated with this dogma, but empirical evidence shows that the Alt-Media Community has difficulty accepting that Syria isn’t invincible and that the Russian-“Israeli” Strategic Partnership does in fact exist. One actually proves the other, however, since “Israel’s” admission that it carried out 200+ strikes in Syria suggests that the Syrian Arab Army’s air defenses aren’t anywhere near as “perfect” as they’re oftentimes presented as whenever Damascus reports that it shot down a couple of its adversary’s missiles, which naturally prompts one to consider how these missiles even penetrated Russian-controlled Syrian airspace unless some “gentlemen’s agreement” was reached between Moscow and Tel Aviv. Therefore, because of how devastating “Israel’s” admission is for the Alt-Media Community, the story will probably be ignored or scarcely commented upon.