The US is actually involved in over two major conflicts. One is on the front page (Ukraine), the other is on the back page (Gaza) and the third, (Yemen) despite hundreds of strikes, is invisible.

Photo: Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs

25 February 2024 | James Porteous | Clipper Media

The Tale of the Twin Conflicts: Good vs. Evil?

After decades of largely refusing to partake in what was once called ‘political discourse,’ we have adopted a 24/7, all-war mandate.

The Twin Conflicts now dominate almost everything in the Collective West media. We are told, repeatedly, that the first one, Ukraine, is a simple black and white morality tale. Good vs. evil. They dismiss out of hand the notion that it might well be something else, even evil vs. evil.

The second ‘war’ is not really a war at all, let alone a case of good vs. evil. It is not a war because the people being murdered are not fighting to do anything other than to survive. So we are told to accept that the ‘evil ones in this case are unarmed civilians. Millions of them. As such, it would probably be logical to call this conflict evil vs. good?

Well, no. Given its new and troubling status in the world of political discourse, our only option is to ignore Conflict #2 so that we can concentrate all our efforts, attention and billions in arms on Conflict #1.

Basically, they are telling us to ignore anything that cannot be summed up in a thirty-second, B&W sound bite. The summations do not have to be true; they just need to be short and emotional. ‘We will stand by Ukraine for as long as it takes‘ sort of thing.

The one-minute summation of Gaza would likely be: ‘We will stand by Israel for as long as it takes until such time that we no longer have any need to talk about the plight of the unarmed civilians being murdered daily in Palestine.’

That summation is far too complex and confusing for the evening news. Even a rudimentary reporter might feel compelled to explain why on earth someone was murdering unarmed civilians.

Millions of individuals are currently experiencing distress, with limited access to basic necessities like food, water, electricity, shelter, and protection. The Western media and, even worse, Western Leaders, can see no evil in Conflict #2. It is a regional issue. It is a right to protect issue, one that must be ignored until it goes the hell away.

But once again, we face the B&W, good vs. evil problem.

You see, we know that the US missiles being fired into Gaza are killing people every day, but we have failed to even acknowledge that the missiles being fired in Ukraine, by both sides, are all landing in Ukraine. Anyone killed, by either side, will likely be Ukrainian.

But we do not see the carnage from Conflict #1 in the evening news, do we? Can you even remember a time when any footage -other than the potentially fabricated reports in the early days-has shown us ANY civilian, let alone miliary, repercussions from Conflict #1? Such footage exists. On Telegram. But not in primetime.

But we do see constant, horrific footage from Conflict #2. Emaciated babies being pulled from rubble, for example. By now, we have grown so accustomed to seeing this that we almost consider it normal. Imagine that?

But that was the point, wasn’t it. Dead Arab babies, or men and women, differ from those on the other team. Dead babies in Conflict #1 are likewise off limits. They look just like the leaders who are ploughing billions of dollars into killing the babies who look just like us. 

So again, this cannot be stated often enough, but we are literally being told to do what our leaders are doing: Ignore everything that is happening in the Israel war against Palestine.

So if you have made it this far, you might wonder why the author is failing to ‘ignore everything concerning Conflict #2’ rule.

In truth, several things happened on this quiet Sunday morning.

The first was quite horrific:

Two-month old Palestinian boy dies of hunger amid Israel’s war on Gaza

Mahmoud Fattouh dies from starvation as UN warns of an ‘explosion’ in child deaths due to a lack of food and water.

There are photos, of course, but the publisher (Al Jazeera English) wisely and decently declined to publish the photos with the articles. We will see how the others react.

Secondly, this absurd headline:

United to win: EU Commission President donates 50 SUVs to law enforcement officers in war-torn zone

During the official visit, the head of the European Commission handed over 50 cars for the needs of the National Police of Ukraine and the Prosecutor General’s Office.

“It is an honor for me to be here in Ukraine at this difficult time for you. We sincerely hope that these vehicles will be useful in your vital work. I know that you are doing a great job providing security and stabilization in the territories liberated from Russian occupation. I really want to thank you and all the Ukrainian people for your courage and for everything you are doing on the way to Victory!” Ursula von der Leyen said.

United to win: EU Commission President donates 50 SUVs to law enforcement officers in war-torn zone

So, let’s state the obvious: While a two-month-old was starving to death, the Queen of the EU, along with several other Western leaders, ventured to Ukraine, offering not only 50 flashy, white SUVs but billions in US arms, in order to #StandBy no matter the cost.

It gets worse: While searching for the SUV story, I noticed the following headlines. (This is just a fraction of items recently published on the website Rubryka in just one day:

24 feb, Rebuilding Ukraine: Canada allocates 130 million dollars for Ukraine’s reconstruction

24 feb, German FM Baerbock makes solidarity visit to Odesa, affirming support for Ukraine

24 feb, United to win: EU to launch innovative defense office in Kyiv

24 feb, Zelensky and Trudeau sign security cooperation agreement in Kyiv

24 feb, Ukraine and Italy solidify partnership with bilateral security agreement

24 feb, EU to deliver nearly 170,000 artillery shells to Ukraine by end of March – FM Kuleba

24 feb, Ukrainian cadets to receive training by US experts at military academies

One day, one site. Can we even begin to imagine how many like-minded articles have been published over the past two years? Or how many Gaza-related items have not been published?

And finally, this piece from Craig Murray, an author, broadcaster and human rights activist. He was British Ambassador to Uzbekistan from August 2002 to October 2004 and Rector of the University of Dundee from 2007 to 2010.

Rethinking Ukraine: Putin and the Mystery of National Identity

The genocide in Gaza – or more precisely the major NATO powers’ active and practical support for the genocide in Gaza – has forced me to re-evaluate my views on Ukraine in a manner more sympathetic to the Russian narrative.

In particular, I was complacent in my dismissive attitude to the argument that the Western powers would back ethnic cleansing and massacre in the Donbass, by forces including some motivated by Nazi ideology. The same powers who are funding and arming Ukraine are funding and arming a genocide by racial supremacist Israeli forces in Gaza. It is beyond argument that my belief in some kind of inherent decency in the Western political Establishment was naive.

I apologise.

This does not mean that I was wrong to call the Russian invasion of the Ukrainian state illegal. I am afraid it was. You see, the law is the law. It has only a tenuous connection to either morality or justice. A thing can be justified and morally right, but still illegal.

The proof of this is that we have an entire legal structure governing transactions which is designed to achieve massive concentration of wealth. In consequence, the world is predicted to have its first trillionaires inside the next five years, while millions of children go hungry. That is plainly immoral. It is plainly unjust. But it is not only legal, it is the purpose of the system of law.

I am, however, content that the “Right to Protect” doctrine has not become accepted in international law, because it is in general application neo-imperialist. It was developed by the Blair government initially to justify NATO bombing of Serbia and the British re-occupation of Sierra Leone, and was used by Hillary Clinton to justify the destruction of Libya on the basis of lies about an imminent massacre in Benghazi. We should be wary of the doctrine.