"Richard-

"It was really a NATO military campaign, the pretence of protecting civilians largely having been long since abandoned and news commentators having generally referred to the NATO/US campaign to oust Gadaffi."

Yes and that is the problem isn't it? How MSM report things, and it has been a problem for quite some time.

1: It was MSM who reported that Iraq was a single issue problem about WMD - it wasn't, it was about compliance with UNSCR 687 and ensuring that Iraq did not have WMD - different thing entirely.

2: It was MSM in the UK who came out with the 45 minute claim that Iraq could strike the UK within 45 minutes. Actually read what was written and presented in the Dossier on Iraq and what it states is perfectly accurate.

3: It was MSM who in their reporting of Afghanistan have consistantly refused to acknowledge or report that Afghanistan is a UN mission, they almost point blank refuse to make any mention of UNAMA, ISAF or the ANSF. Instead they refer to US, UK or NATO leading to support the myth that the US "invaded" Afghanistan.

Pssst - Richard Just because news commentators say something does not necessarily mean they are reporting accurately, factually or truthfully. By the way what is a NATO/US campaign when it's at home? I thought that the USA was a member of NATO and that in this particular case NATO were specifically requested to act by the UN Security Council, the Arab League and the GCC (Again something else your news commentators fail to mention.