Why do western media and governments react to human rights abuses only when they happen outside western countries?

Why do western media and governments react to human rights abuses only when they happen outside western countries?

    8:58 AM   No comments

When human rights abuses take place in Muslim-majority countries, Western governments impose sanctions and Western media provide extensive coverage of instances of abuse. But when similar or even more egregious or persistent human rights abuses take place in a Western country, Western governments and media outlets ignore the event or treated it like an isolated secondary event. Why?

The "double standard" of the British media... This is how London's lies were promoted before the invasion of Iraq

The "double standard" of the British media... This is how London's lies were promoted before the invasion of Iraq

    7:40 AM   No comments

 The British "Declassified" website talked about the role of the British media in promoting the lies of the British government before the invasion of Iraq.

The site said that the British media repeated the government's lies and fabrications without scrutiny, and became part of the government's propaganda machine, before the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

He pointed out that the former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, provided the British public with false information twenty years ago about the late Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's possession of weapons of mass destruction, in order to prove the case of the illegal invasion of Iraq.

He added that Blair was not tried yet, but was honored and given the "Rabat" medal, which is the highest honor in the British Kingdom, pointing out that the journalists who repeated his lies were not tried either, but rather climbed the ladder of the profession to its highest levels.

On the other hand, those who dared to expose the lies of the war, such as the Australian journalist Julian Assange, are now in prison.

According to the site, there were serious investigations into false reports about Iraq in the United States, while this was not the case in Britain, where the press and broadcast media became an advanced part of the government propaganda machine.

Likewise, senior British journalists reported uncritical lies about the British government, often adding new fabrications of their own, according to the site.

He added that the Guardian newspaper, for example, "swallowed" the Blair government's bogus claim that Saddam Hussein's agents were looking for uranium in Africa to buy a nuclear bomb.

Under the headline: "Iraq file: African gangs offer a path to uranium - the nuclear suspicion lies with the Congo and South Africa," the newspaper claimed that it had seen secret documents proving contacts between African militias and Baghdad.

The Observer was "more intelligent and creative on the pro-war case," looking for more interesting angles to prove actual or alleged Saddam Hussein's malevolence, such as a 1,560-word interview with a woman claiming to be a former lover of Saddam Hussein, whom she claimed was With Osama bin Laden as a guest in one of Saddam's palaces, and that Saddam was financing Osama.

In turn, the "Sunday Telegraph" newspaper pumped a huge amount of government propaganda, as it published sensational reports that fueled public anxiety on the eve of the war, according to the site.

On January 19, 2003, the newspaper claimed that UN weapons inspectors "discovered evidence that Saddam Hussein is trying to develop an arsenal of nuclear weapons." Indeed, when the weapons inspectors issued their verdict a few days later, they concluded no such thing.

Meanwhile, critics of the war were marginalized or vilified. The site pointed out that Scott Ritter, the United Nations weapons inspector, has repeatedly questioned the allegations of Britain and the United States about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, stressing that the importance of his words were downplayed, while the narratives of the attack were reinforced.