Results 1 to 20 of 109
Syrian Children being shot in the knees and detained in woeful conditions
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-midd...66#TWEET116617
Anybody still want to make the case for supporting the dictator Assad and his cronies?
Same old crap from the anti-imps. They play the same game as the Israelis, actually. As long as the intelligence/'proof' window hasn't shut, they play the 'deny, deny, deny' game. Whilst the Israelis attack as soon as the intelligence window shuts (As they'll no doubt do with Iran very soon), when the proof window shuts the "anti-imperialists" go suspiciously silent on defending the latest dictator simply out of anti-western sentiment, and go back to supporting the latest dictatorship that's in vogue with whichever out-of-touch, intellectual elite is pretending to uphold 'true' Marxism-Leninism or whatever it is gets them off.
Just to clarify, this is torture of the highest, most despicable degree. I reckon anybody who, in the face of this evidence, still maintains support for the Syrian bougeoisie, should be restricted or banned outright. Or am I just a liberal for not accepting that shooting children in the kneecaps and detaining them against any manner of human decency is just part of the good anti-US fight?
While I agree 100% I doubt we'll see it, MLs and anti-imps apologize for much more than stuff like this.
bbc news... on syria
bbc as one of most manipulative news agency on earth, I ve been there...
kkkkk
Kind of funny that there is no evidence to prove this, isn't it? The only thing these rebels have going for them is the "confessions" of visibly tortured captured government soldiers.
Though shooting children in the knees is nothing compared to when rebel snipers snipe children in the head.
Maybe you'll post an article from Al Jazeera that tells us how great everything is in Bahrain right now.
I really want to make an arrow to the knee joke, as inappropriate as that is.
and the rebels are not doing the same or even worse? I don't buy a word that comes from "their" sources. Supporting the rebels is supporting a bunch of reactionary Wahhabi. Not that I support Assad or his politics, but these "rebels" are just foreign fighters streaming in over the borders to fight in the name of Islam, not the people.
http://rt.com/news/syria-information-wars-west-553/
+ YouTube Video
I agree that the rebels do not deserve our support, merely the people of Syria. Given that a lot of the fighting has taken place in towns, it's likely to be fact that a lot of civilians have died.
The rebels who want to emulate the NTC in Libya can go fuck themselves, but it's dangerous to then have the following logic: the rebels oppose Assad, the rebels are bastards, therefore all those who oppose Assad right now in Syria are bastards.
It seems clear to me that there is popular discontent in Syria that is being clamped down on. We should not be afraid to oppose Assad; the anti-imperialists seem to have framed the debate in binary terms - that we either support assholes like Qaddafi and Assad or we are somehow for imperialism. We shouldn't be afraid to oppose Assad from a revolutionary standpoint.
The woman reporting on this was formerly a lawyer for anti-apartheid activists in SA, a co-founder of Equality Now and helped to establish rape as an act of genocide post-Rwandan Genocide. I'd probably think that her testimony is quite reliable.
I post an article quoting a fairly reliable source, and you simply shrug it off because 'rebel snipers snipe children in the head', without ANY source/evidence whatsoever, and then make a completely nonsensical remark about Bahrain afterwards.
Sort yourself out. Assad is purporting genocide right now. You may be happy to overlook that for the sake of your petty politics, but such complicity to me is remarkable for a Socialist; we are meant to care about the poor and the needy, not overlook their strife simply because their cause doesn't fit neatly into our worldview.
How in the blazes does the fact that there are Wahabist fighters amongst the Rebels become ALL the Rebels are foreign Wahabists? Anybody who thinks all the rebels are angels is a fool, but it's simplistic and reductionist to think that they are all foreign fighters. It's also simply false ... many of the rebels are defectors from the Syrian army, many are Syrian expats, and many are also young Syrians.
There were foreign Jihadis in Iraq and are in Afghanistan, but most of the people fighting in the various militias were actually Iraqis and Afghans respectively ... the presence of foreign fighters is is no way exclusive with the presence of local fighters. Nor are the two groups necessarily coordinating.
Are there Jihadists there? Yes. Are some foreign? Yes. Are all of them? No.
Socialist Party of Outer Space
So that little girl in the video was not injured by Government forces? Yes is fucked up that they are "coaching her" on what to say... But seriously.. all of the sudden Bashar's regime is the victim of "propaganda" and media bias? give me a break.
we need more revolutions and less "isms"
Oh, well, sorry, I was under the impression that there were vast militias of insurgents totally unrelated to the suicide bombing campaign. I guess the existence of the Baathist militias and Mahdi Army militias were propaganda by the US government? I don't even know what you're trying to prove by saying that.
What, did you poll them? I guess you went into Homs and took a survey of what the people there thought of the government? Do you have any evidence or did you pull that out of your rear end?
And how do you prove that? Perhaps the rebels are just the victims of a vicious propaganda campaign by the government? There is overwhelming evidence that the government, and many of the rebels too, have committed atrocities.
Last edited by Sinister Cultural Marxist; 28th March 2012 at 16:14.
I read an article about Syria some time ago where someone compared the list of killed attributed to the Syrian state and on that list where those killed by the IDF at the Israeli border during a protest weeks earlier.
That the BBC also put this in the articleand makes no further mention of FSA acts against the population tells me enough about the intention behind the article.
You are entering the vicinity of an area adjacent to a location. The kind of place where there might be a monster, or some kind of weird mirror...
I think you are confused as to what I was saying. Valter (? I don't know Cyrillic) said that ALL Syrian Rebels were foreign Jihadists, what I was saying was that the presence of Salafi rebels from abroad is not mutually exclusive with there being homegrown Syrian fighters. Iraq was merely an example of a war where there were both foreign Jihadists and native Iraqi militias both fighting against the US. The comparison with Syria is that there are obviously both Syrian and foreign fighters in Syria right now, fighting the government. It is slandering the Syrians who died at the hands of their regime to accuse them all of being foreign Salafi fundamentalists.
I agree that it's best to get more than just the bbc's view on it, but the fact that it's on the bbc doesn't make it automatically false. Thanks for the blog link though.
It seems the Syrian government started the civil war by shooting down unarmed protesters repeatedly. I can understand why Syrians would want peace or to avoid NATO Intervention, and I can also see them quite legitimately saying that a post-Assad government could even be worse than Assad himself, if certain extremist or sectarian elements take power. But it seems really difficult to establish what the actual majority of Syrians want because the Syrian state is militarizing the society there, and the Syrian regime is really at fault for creating this whole situation.
Babies in incubators, babies in incubators.
Some people really never learn.
The vast majority of these rebels are actually Islamists, Foreign Islamists, Mercenaries and NATO and NATO-puppet troops. Regarding Syrians that died at the hands of the Syrian government, there is literally no evidence that the Syrian government is "killing it's own people", besides Western-funded opposition "news sources" and "witnesses"(who in many cases aren't even real existing people, just made-up names). It's a civil war between the Syrian Government, supported even by the Kurds who despise it, and Western-backed Islamists and NATO troops("advisers").
Regarding the Syrian government starting the Civil War, the first shots were fired by these wonderful rebels who began assassinating security forces and government officials and civilians in order to create unrest and justify NATO intervention, like in Libya(where reports later proven to be false were thrown at Western populaces really fast, to bring them on the side of intervention). It's not a new tactic, look at the motherfuckers in the KLA. Those criminal fucks began massacring Serbs, in order to provoke a Serbian reaction, and when the Serbs retaliated and began massacring Albanians(before this the vast majority of dead were Serbs, btw), this justified a NATO intervention(which naturally accelerated the pace at which Albanians were being massacred, but NATO doesn't give a shit does it) and then after KLA commanders went on bragging about how they tricked the West into intervention.
There are fucks in power and even nastier, much more horrible fucks fighting against them that want to enslave the Syrian people even more under their filthy Islamic laws. The majority of Syrians support the first group. I've got enough friends in Syria to tell me that much(Chechens, distant relatives that left the Caucasus and settled in the Levant when the resistance against Russian conquest was broken).
I'd be surprised if any actually use this logic, it's more that they are simply looking for any opportunistic excuse to justify their support of bourgeois scum like Assad. There is absolutely nothing revolutionary about such a position. No matter how many times you make it abundantly clear that you condemn Western intervention, they're still going to bring up this strawman.
Classic "anti-imperialism" performs a valuable service for capital: it co-opts people who might otherwise be revolutionary into perpetuating the reign of capital. As always, the reformist left and social-democrats are tripping over themselves in defense of a capitalist regime, so long as it is opposed to the United States.
You're pretty much beating your head against a wall with this one comrade..
Borz, the troops aren't shooting protestors? Seriously?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83m0m0tF7hk
I don't want to defend the foreign rebels, but the government is just as bad, if not, worse.
Yeah how many protestors did you see shot in that video? Zero, is it?
I chose that particular video because one can see the flashes of lethal rounds being shot. There's some gross footage out there if you really want it.
Try looking up Syria on liveleak.
Yeah, the Syrian government is the victim here, being oppressed and slandered by the Western imperialists...
Partija Rada (Party of Labour)
