Rivero shielding Syria and Islam

Rivero's been completely silent on the Syrian uprisings. Rivero can't bring himself to mention a word of criticism for Syria 'killing their own people', 'trampling on democracy', destroying freedom, all the usual things he usually viciously spits at Israel.

Rivero is pushing the line that the uprising in anti-Western Islamic Syria is illegitimate, just as he claimed the earlier unrest in Iran was illegitimate - he believes that both are the work of American and Jewish interference, part of the grand conspiracy.

It's noticeable how he considers uprisings in the most extreme, Islamic, anti-Western nations to be illegitimate, whereas the uprisings in more pro-Western states are automaticallylegitimate. That's his only criterion, apparently - whether they are pro-western/zionist, or not. How ideological (and monomaniacal) can one get?

Even though Rivero is ignoring the Syrian uprisings, and their seemingly vicious suppression - just so that he doesn't have to condemn it - Rivero nevertheless does tangentially acknowledge the events are happening: Rivero posted a story earlier which says that Russia and China are 'shielding' Syria from UN intervention (even though Rivero hasn't mentioned the actual events that brought about those calls for intervention - lol):
Russia and China......shielding Syria. And Rivero too? The first and greatest defence of Syria is to refuse to acknowledge anything is happening. Rivero suddenly seems wholly disinterested in the 'crushing of liberty' and the killing of 'peaceful protesters'.......and why? Because it's happening in an anti-Western, Islamic state, that's why.

It isn't surprising to find Rivero so much on the side of anti_Israel/anti-semitism, but to end up shielding an Islamic state such as Syria? It is odd, isn't it? What a thing to end up defending - vicious Syrian suppression of domestic protest. Gee.

Also notable is how differently Rivero views Russian and Chinese vetoes over UN resolutions as compared to American ones - Russian veto good, American veto bad. It's that simple, for Rivero.

The bankruptcy of his position is clear and makes itself evident once again now he effectively supports the vicious Syrian suppressions - simply because of his view that Syria is a fellow enemy of his own enemy, Israel/The West.

Only a few weeks ago Rivero was claiming Israel would prevent any intervention to support Libyan protests; Rivero said the world would have to stand by and do nothing whilst Gaddafi and Israel (!) killed freedom and democracy and blah blah blah. 'Bunch of pussies' he said, when he believed Israel would prevent any UN intervention.

Compare and contrast with his treatment of Syria? Now Rivero endorses the supposed Russian and Chinese shielding of Syria against UN intervention! The complete opposite position he'd held just weeks earlier (when he still thought Gaddaffi/Libya were in hoc to the woo-woo of Zion.....)

Events keep overtaking Rivero, and he's being proven wrong again and again. And it doesn't make the slightest bit of difference to his view - it doesn't have the least effect. So, no, he isn't evidence-based. Like we didn't already know.......

I do find it odd how he so easily and repeatedly occupies ground that even extreme Islam could share. I wonder if it's because of a conscious pursuit of the far-right tactic of embracing radical Islam, or whether it's just accidental. Either way, the result is the same.