Two years too late, some realistic reporting from Syria

[tangaroa]

The NYT's Ben Hubbard finally broke through the English-language media's curtain of misinformation on Syria. Choice quotes:

Across Syria, rebel-held areas are dotted with Islamic courts staffed by [religious] lawyers and clerics, and by fighting brigades led by extremists ...

Nowhere in rebel-controlled Syria is there a secular fighting force to speak of ...

The Islamist character of the opposition reflects the main constituency of the rebellion ...

... the failure of more mainstream rebel groups to secure regular arms supplies has allowed Islamists to fill the void and win supporters. [NOTE: This means the US, Europe, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have been deliberately arming the Islamists and deliberately not arming the "more mainstream rebel groups".]

Meanwhile every other news source is copying and pasting reports from one guy in England who is simply relaying messages from the Islamists. I've been able to figure out what's going on by reading between the lines of the bad information we've been getting, hearing the rebels announce openly and often that their goal is to exterminate the Alawites and Christians, and discovering that the people "massacred by Assad's forces" often were Assad's forces and pro-Assad civilians. This is the first time I've seen someone in a major media outlet put it all together.

EoZ has the one-line conclusion: "There aren't any pro-Western rebels in Syria. None."