Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was talking to a Syrian friend and I heard an interesting perspective on the ongoing conflict in Syria. She told me some of her relatives were among the first to protest last year against Bashar al-Assad. They were never for his removal, as, she says, Assad has done a good job keeping Syria internationally relevant and their economy relevant. But they had several demands that they hoped would be achieved. About a month or so after the protests started, Assad agreed to dialogue, and it looked like the protests were going to subside. However, with full Turkish, Saudi, Qatari, and American backing, the more radical elements of those who weren't fans of Assad began to receive arms. They disliked Assad for being pro-Iranian, anti-Saudi, and leading a secular regime. Her family moved back into supporting Assad wholeheartedly. She comes from a non-practicing Sunni family in Aleppo, a known majority pro-Assad town.
She told me Syria is divided, as Alawites, Christians, Shia, and secular Sunnis support Bashar al-Assad and more conservative, pro-Saudi, pro-Salafist Sunnis favor his removal. She claimed the majority supports the president. Upon hearing this, I did some research.
The Syrian rebels are cleansing Syrian Christians out of their homes:
This shocked me the most. The media is playing a dirty game with most viewers. The opposition crimes are never reported. Arab stations like Al-Jazeera are promoting political agendas. Meanwhile, Western media gets its news from the Syrian National Council, an opposition group, and thus, inevitably, reports a lot of exaggerated news and some flat-out lies.
Finally, she told me that the crimes of the rebels greatly outdo the crimes of Assad's troops. She insisted Syria's troops were not responsible for the vast majority of the crimes the international community claims they are. Recently, the massacre in Houla, which the international community has blamed "at least partially" on "pro-Assad militias" were actually committed by Syrian rebels to frame him. What's the indication? Apparently most of Houla's victims were from known families that support the government. Assad has nothing to gain from killing civilians. He needs all the support he can get.
I concluded I'd stop supporting this "uprising" in Syria. These rebels are using suicide bombings in civilian districts, killing innocents, forcing Christians out of their towns, and threatening a secular society in which no was ever discriminated on based on their beliefs. The alternative to Assad is scary.
Plus, you know something is fishy when Saudi Arabia of all nations is supporting a revolution. Democracy is definitely not the end goal.
So in choosing between the two evils, wouldn't it make more sense to back Assad?
I was talking to a Syrian friend and I heard an interesting perspective on the ongoing conflict in Syria. She told me some of her relatives were among the first to protest last year against Bashar al-Assad. They were never for his removal, as, she says, Assad has done a good job keeping Syria internationally relevant and their economy relevant. But they had several demands that they hoped would be achieved. About a month or so after the protests started, Assad agreed to dialogue, and it looked like the protests were going to subside. However, with full Turkish, Saudi, Qatari, and American backing, the more radical elements of those who weren't fans of Assad began to receive arms. They disliked Assad for being pro-Iranian, anti-Saudi, and leading a secular regime. Her family moved back into supporting Assad wholeheartedly. She comes from a non-practicing Sunni family in Aleppo, a known majority pro-Assad town.
She told me Syria is divided, as Alawites, Christians, Shia, and secular Sunnis support Bashar al-Assad and more conservative, pro-Saudi, pro-Salafist Sunnis favor his removal. She claimed the majority supports the president. Upon hearing this, I did some research.
The Syrian rebels are cleansing Syrian Christians out of their homes:
This shocked me the most. The media is playing a dirty game with most viewers. The opposition crimes are never reported. Arab stations like Al-Jazeera are promoting political agendas. Meanwhile, Western media gets its news from the Syrian National Council, an opposition group, and thus, inevitably, reports a lot of exaggerated news and some flat-out lies.
Finally, she told me that the crimes of the rebels greatly outdo the crimes of Assad's troops. She insisted Syria's troops were not responsible for the vast majority of the crimes the international community claims they are. Recently, the massacre in Houla, which the international community has blamed "at least partially" on "pro-Assad militias" were actually committed by Syrian rebels to frame him. What's the indication? Apparently most of Houla's victims were from known families that support the government. Assad has nothing to gain from killing civilians. He needs all the support he can get.
I concluded I'd stop supporting this "uprising" in Syria. These rebels are using suicide bombings in civilian districts, killing innocents, forcing Christians out of their towns, and threatening a secular society in which no was ever discriminated on based on their beliefs. The alternative to Assad is scary.
Plus, you know something is fishy when Saudi Arabia of all nations is supporting a revolution. Democracy is definitely not the end goal.
So in choosing between the two evils, wouldn't it make more sense to back Assad?
I don't understand Arabic but this demonstration sounds so much like something straight out of an Occupy group. Since I don't know what those people are chanting I have to wonder if soldiers can dress in civilian garb and then begin the shooting. That is what progressives would say about something like this with Occupiers.
I guess I won't take sides especially since your informant seems to have done that already.
Exactly, so what gives with President Obama, Senator McCain, and most western leaders coming out and attacking Assad, while remaining silent on the crimes of the opposition.
In addition, most indications point to the majority of Syrians supporting Assad. So isn't it a disrespectful move on the part of our leaders to call for his removal? It's like saying we don't respect what the Syrians want.
I was talking to a Syrian friend and I heard an interesting perspective on the ongoing conflict in Syria. She told me some of her relatives were among the first to protest last year against Bashar al-Assad. They were never for his removal, as, she says, Assad has done a good job keeping Syria internationally relevant and their economy relevant. But they had several demands that they hoped would be achieved. About a month or so after the protests started, Assad agreed to dialogue, and it looked like the protests were going to subside. However, with full Turkish, Saudi, Qatari, and American backing, the more radical elements of those who weren't fans of Assad began to receive arms. They disliked Assad for being pro-Iranian, anti-Saudi, and leading a secular regime. Her family moved back into supporting Assad wholeheartedly. She comes from a non-practicing Sunni family in Aleppo, a known majority pro-Assad town.
She told me Syria is divided, as Alawites, Christians, Shia, and secular Sunnis support Bashar al-Assad and more conservative, pro-Saudi, pro-Salafist Sunnis favor his removal. She claimed the majority supports the president. Upon hearing this, I did some research.
The Syrian rebels are cleansing Syrian Christians out of their homes:
This shocked me the most. The media is playing a dirty game with most viewers. The opposition crimes are never reported. Arab stations like Al-Jazeera are promoting political agendas. Meanwhile, Western media gets its news from the Syrian National Council, an opposition group, and thus, inevitably, reports a lot of exaggerated news and some flat-out lies.
Finally, she told me that the crimes of the rebels greatly outdo the crimes of Assad's troops. She insisted Syria's troops were not responsible for the vast majority of the crimes the international community claims they are. Recently, the massacre in Houla, which the international community has blamed "at least partially" on "pro-Assad militias" were actually committed by Syrian rebels to frame him. What's the indication? Apparently most of Houla's victims were from known families that support the government. Assad has nothing to gain from killing civilians. He needs all the support he can get.
I concluded I'd stop supporting this "uprising" in Syria. These rebels are using suicide bombings in civilian districts, killing innocents, forcing Christians out of their towns, and threatening a secular society in which no was ever discriminated on based on their beliefs. The alternative to Assad is scary.
Plus, you know something is fishy when Saudi Arabia of all nations is supporting a revolution. Democracy is definitely not the end goal.
So in choosing between the two evils, wouldn't it make more sense to back Assad?
Thank you for trying to educate the people about what is really going on, we are being fed lies by the propoganda- media.
This is just another regime change on our march to eliminate Iran and control the middle east. I heard Webster G Tarpley talking about the Houla massacre being a fraud. He said some 800 death squads, from various sects killed some of these people elsewhere, kept them on ice, then dumped them at the opportune time.
The US has admitted to arming the rebels, along with help from Quatar, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.
The strategy was simple, clear, tried and tested. It had been used successfully not only against Libya, but also Kosovo (in 1999), and was rapidly underway in Syria. It was to run as follows: train proxies to launch armed provocations; label the state’s response to these provocations as genocide; intimidate the UN Security Council into agreeing that “something must be done”; incinerate the army and any other resistance with fragmentation bombs and Hellfire missiles; and finally install a weak, compliant government to sign off new contracts and alliances drawn up in London, Paris and Washington, whilst the country tore itself apart.
Result: the heart torn out of the “axis of resistance” between Iran, Syria and Hizbullah, leaving Iran isolated and the West with a free hand to attack Iran without fear of regional repercussions.
This was to be Syria’s fate, drawn up years ago in the high- level planning committees of US, British and French defence departments and intelligence services. But this time, unlike in Libya, it has not all gone according to plan.
Check this out. People aren't being told the truth, but last week's Houla massacre, in which the UN first blamed the Syrian army before quickly switching their blame to "pro-Assad militias" even when they had zero evidence, apparently is the work of the Syrian rebels:
What is going on in Syria is so horrible. Similar to the farce that went on in Libya, only much worse with the bombings and starving the people out. That lasted a long 9 months, including a genocide against the blacks. I haven't kept up with Libya now, but I don't imagine things have improved for the people.
Back to Syria, by the way globalresearch is an excellent site! Glad you found it.I also like Mathaba.net, even tho they are a little too sympathetic to the Occupy movement.
Quote:
An honest individual has to ask, “Cui bono” ??? Who benefits from the exact timing of this so-called massacre? Is it to Syria's benefit to destroy the Annan peace plan? Certainly not. The Syrian government had no motive for this act...especially at a time when UN observers are in the country...and by the way, Syria invited them.
Is it to the benefit of the NATO / FUKUS, Zionist and terrorist element? It most certainly is.
It is not only hypocritical and criminal, but the absolute height of moral turpitude, demonic evil, heinous, repulsive lawlessness and arrogance on the part of the NATO / FUKUS and Zionist axis to go around financing, arming and instigating murderers and terrorists and then raising an indignant voice against these, their own crimes, trying to place the blame on the victims of these crimes.
The victims are dealt a double blow, of being the object of murder and violence and then being blamed for these actions as though they were responsible. And the bottom line is that there is no lower form of life than that which murders innocent children for their own benefit and profit.
There have been numerous attempts to create false flag events in Syria, including shipping chemical weapons to the Turkish border to use on civilians and blame the Government – a plan which was picked up and mentioned by me in this column before it happened. And now we have the “massacre of Houla”, a village near Homs.
According to whom? For a start the Syrian authorities deny any involvement in such a massacre and sent a team to investigate, after admitting there was terrorist activity in the area. By terrorist activity read the new Western friends, Al-Qaeda. And after what the FUKUS Axis’ terrorists did in Libya – slicing the breasts off women in the streets, cutting the lips off black African detainees, torturing people to death, raping, torching people and property, and after discovering that a sizeable number of “Syrian” terrorists are in fact Libyan terrorists, who would put such an atrocity past these…people, especially since Al-Qaeda is involved (?) In fact, where does Western complicity end and how deeply are they covertly involved in this incident to drum up another false flag event to sponsor another nice little war? Syria: Another Western false flag event?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
