It is regrettable that the Security Council does not always find a common denominator on the Syrian issue. For example, the biased position held by a number of its Western members prevented it from reaching a consensus on a Russia-proposed draft press statement denouncing the bloody terrorist attack in Damascus on March 11, which claimed 70 lives, according to the latest reports. Implementing their well-known political directives, they attempted to unjustifiably modify the thrust of the document by including provisions reading as accusations of the Syrian authorities and justification of the terrorists’ actions. In consequence, we had to withdraw the draft. Moreover, during the debate on the text, our Western colleagues made it clear that they had a “different [operating] standard” with regard to Syria, which did not imply an unqualified denunciation of terrorism. The consequences of this approach may prove most unfortunate. At the same time, we believe it is crucial that the crime in Damascus was resolutely condemned by the UN Secretary-General.
This anti-Assad BS and open love for terrorists (al Nusra) in Syria really says a lot about the essence of the self-anointed guiding lights of humanity in the NATO west. Any lie goes as long as geopolitical meddling is enabled. Just cover it up with more lies about love for freedom and democracy.
I have yet to see a real case made against Assad. Those pathetic anonymous claims of this and that prove zero. It is obvious that there is a campaign to defame Assad and foist regime change on Syria. The Ghouta chemical weapons attack is a prime example. An attack staged by the NATO sponsored terrorists is used as "evidence" of Assad's "brutality". Come on, guiding lights, show me evidence of his brutality before the jihadi "civil" war.