With the terrorist attack in London, in the underground, ISIS makes a reappearance in the political life and in the media.
Whereas its damages on the ground in Iraq and Syria were largely ignored by the media, the attack in London was in every newspaper.
Same threat, different treatment . Here, IS is the enemy responsible for terrorism, and comes from Syria. All the authors of attacks say they have been in Syria (or Iraq) for training.
In Syria itself, IS is an enemy to fight ,for the Free Syrian Army. This enemy was produced , according to Syrians and supporters of the Syrian Revolution, by the inaction of the West towards the events in Syria since 2011.
Six years of a genocide and the preeminence of Assad led to the reawakening of the terrorist organization : IS is multiple , made of Al Qaeda , of the Hezbollah, and financially supported by Iran.
Who cares of the battles led , in Syria, against IS? Who knows them?
The little group of supporters of the Syrian Revolution , in the West; in Syria, civilians , for the danger they risk.
Two points of view: a tale of two IS.
Its damages in Europe are treated like a maximum danger for the population: it engenders special measures of security .
Its damages in Syria are largely misunderstood, if not ignored: it represents , with Assad/Putin/ Iran, an obstacle to democracy.
And to conclude , victims are victims, humans, everywhere : why two treatments by the media?