What's new

The Middle East Crisis

Houla Massacre

Saw no thread on the events of May 25th, some of the images released were heart wrenching and horrific.

I will not be posting the images, but they are readily available on the following link.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/28/world/cnn-shaam-gallery/index.html

110 people killed, a significant number of which were innocent children and women. Sickening is putting it lightly.
 
No thread and then when there is one there are no replies .Just think how many pages there would have been if it had been isreal or the us

Happens every time
 
Things on this planet are just getting worse and worse... Sickening

At this rate Im suprised the Human race has lasted this long

May Allah swt ease the affairs of the oppressed ones and free them from Evil
 
Syria crisis: Most Houla victims 'were executed'

Most of the 108 people killed in Syria's Houla region on Friday were summarily executed, the UN says.

A spokesman for the UN's human rights office says witnesses told investigators that pro-regime militias carried out most of the killings.

Survivors have described gunmen entering homes, firing indiscriminately and slitting the throats of children.

The UN statement comes as UN-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan is meeting President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus.

Rupert Colville, spokesman for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, told journalists in Geneva that initial investigations suggested that fewer than 20 of the victims in the village of Taldou, near Houla, were killed by artillery or tank fire.

"Most of the rest of the victims in Taldou," he added, "were summarily executed in two separate incidents."

Earlier, survivors who spoke to the BBC said that those who carried out the killings were militiamen - shabiha - from nearby Alawite villages.

Mr Annan called the massacre "an appalling moment with profound consequences".

'Murderous folly'

Ahead of his meeting with President Assad on Tuesday, the former UN secretary general said the Syrian government had to take "bold steps" to show it was serious about peace.

The BBC's Jim Muir, in neighbouring Lebanon, says it is make-or-break time for Mr Annan's peace plan, and he has to get something out of his visit to stop the drift towards a vicious sectarian civil war.

Under the plan, both sides were meant to stop fighting on 12 April ahead of the deployment of monitors, and the government was to withdraw tanks and forces from civilian areas.

Western leaders have expressed horror at the killings, and the UK, France and US have all begun moves to raise diplomatic pressure on the Assad government.

The French government said "the murderous folly" of the Damascus regime threatened regional security, and announced it was expelling the Syrian ambassador in Paris.

A meeting of the so-called Friends of Syria group is to meet in France in July, President Francois Hollande's office said on Tuesday.

However Russia, which supplies arms to the Syrian government and has blocked UN resolutions calling for action against Damascus, has blamed both sides for Friday's massacre.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov expressed concern that "certain countries" were beginning to use the Houla massacre "as a pretext for voicing demands relating to the need for military measures to be taken".

Syrian leaders insist that the massacre was the work of hundreds of armed rebels, whom they called "terrorists", who massed in the area and who carried out the killings to derail the peace process and provoke intervention by Western powers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18249413
 
This disgusting Syrian regime has reached a new level. How can they start giving orders to execute children ? Are children a threat to Assad and his cronies ?
 
Tragic.

It's disgraceful that people are prepared to execute children.

But what's more pathetic are those scoundrels prepared to sacrifice their life for a horrible human being, that is Assad.

This Tyrant is making his own father look like an amateur at oppressing his own people.
 
An absolute tragedy and one of the biggest war crimes I have heard of in recent times.

Its also despicable that the Arab countries are incapable and scared to do anything about this. They don't posses the military might and they also do not have any moral authority to step in as they are mostly ruled by dictators and tyrants. Instead they arrange meetings where they self congratulate each other and pretend to do something more than push paper.

Ultimately the West will have to step in, killing civilians in the process, decimating Syrias infrastructure and probably establishing some sort of military bases to get rid of Assad, the muslim world will protest against this but its because of their own lack of actions that the situation will arise.

Well done defenders of the faith and custodians of the Holy cities :)
 
DeadlyVenom said:
An absolute tragedy and one of the biggest war crimes I have heard of in recent times.

Its also despicable that the Arab countries are incapable and scared to do anything about this. They don't posses the military might and they also do not have any moral authority to step in as they are mostly ruled by dictators and tyrants. Instead they arrange meetings where they self congratulate each other and pretend to do something more than push paper.

Ultimately the West will have to step in, killing civilians in the process, decimating Syrias infrastructure and probably establishing some sort of military bases to get rid of Assad, the muslim world will protest against this but its because of their own lack of actions that the situation will arise.

Well done defenders of the faith and custodians of the Holy cities :)
Click to expand...

Arabs are not scared. Their run by Dictators, who will do what Assad has just done if they dare to speak out.

It doesn't help when you have the loud minority prepared to defend these dictators.
 
observer1 said:
Arabs are not scared. Their run by Dictators, who will do what Assad has just done if they dare to speak out.

It doesn't help when you have the loud minority prepared to defend these dictators.
Click to expand...

Scared of their own seats, they cant be seen helping out the people in a neighbouring country as it weakens their already illegitimate rule at home.
 
DeadlyVenom said:
Ultimately the West will have to step in, killing civilians in the process, decimating Syrias infrastructure and probably establishing some sort of military bases to get rid of Assad, the muslim world will protest against this but its because of their own lack of actions that the situation will arise.
Click to expand...

Won't happen. They are all skint, and dismantling Syria's integrated air defence system would prove hugely costly.
 
DeadlyVenom said:
Scared of their own seats, they cant be seen helping out the people in a neighbouring country as it weakens their already illegitimate rule at home.
Click to expand...

Yes i meant the Dictators.

But you cant say the average "Arab is scared". The average Arab is the one being slaughtered because of local dictator.

I genuinely feel sorry for that part of the world. Where these people have lived and died under a vicious dictator in charge for decade after decade.
 
DeadlyVenom said:
An absolute tragedy and one of the biggest war crimes I have heard of in recent times.

Its also despicable that the Arab countries are incapable and scared to do anything about this. They don't posses the military might and they also do not have any moral authority to step in as they are mostly ruled by dictators and tyrants. Instead they arrange meetings where they self congratulate each other and pretend to do something more than push paper.

Ultimately the West will have to step in, killing civilians in the process, decimating Syrias infrastructure and probably establishing some sort of military bases to get rid of Assad, the muslim world will protest against this but its because of their own lack of actions that the situation will arise.

Well done defenders of the faith and custodians of the Holy cities :)
Click to expand...

Ideally I'd prefer to see regional organisations to be empowered and to step in when these situations arise. Western interventions usually have aims to protect self-interests. The African Union is currently stretched fighting conflicts around Africa, but I'd rather see them given the resources to intervene than have western boots on the ground.

But again, it would be in an ideal world. We all know Arab countries have their own selfish aims and would intervene Syria for geopolitical reasons.

Syria also have one of the most powerful Armies in the Arab world - 220,000 troops.

Anyway an almighty conflict would be created in the Middle East if there is intervention in Syria. Syria have ties with Hezbollah and Iran. They used to have ties with Hamas but they have come out in support of the protesters. And Israel could get involved. So its better for the Kofi Annan Peace Plan to be implemented but the problem is that the plan has no teeth. Russia and China have to exert their influence on the regime.
 
Last edited:
why the pro-regime militia (or anyone) slit defenseless children's throats or cause a massacre like this.....

they prolly know this is very bad press.........so why would anyone do this..

i fail to understand this world
 
Horrific stuff.

Several countries have expelled Syrian diplomats and ambassadors in protest. Russia has also condemed Syria for the massacre.
 
Some of the eyewitness accounts are incredibly saddening.

Accounts of parents seeing all of their children shot from point blank range. Not sure what justification those animals have behind executing innocent children.
 
Derek Randall said:
No thread and then when there is one there are no replies .Just think how many pages there would have been if it had been isreal or the us

Happens every time
Click to expand...

I tend not to get involved in threads vilifying regimes unless I can help it these days. Generally there's an underlying motive for a barrage of negative press whether it's against the US, Libya or as is current flavour of the month, Syria. Generally the underlying motive isn't a noble one.
 
Sickening. Makes for horrific reading and viewing

Hopefully those that are responsible for this suffer the most excruciating of deaths and are punished beyond this world as well
 
BBC News uses 'Iraq photo to illustrate Syrian massacre'
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html

I think the above sums up the Western media's view of this horrible conflict. There is an obvious agenda to topple Assad, such agenda will never provide a neutral balanced view of the conflict.

The massacre is disgusting but no less disgusting than the bombings, attacks, murders by the Free Syrian Army and it's supporters in Saudi/Qatar/Israel/US who have either given military, financial or political support to these 'rebels' to carry out their attacks against Syria.

I'm no supporter of Assad or his tactics but the fact is Assad wasn't killing Syrians in such fashion before the armed insurgency was born. The nations who are supporting the FSA have ulterior motives for regime change. There are two main motives here. The first being an attempt to end support for Hizbollah, a resistance movement against Israel which will help Israel expand without retaliation. The second is to remove the Russian's presence in the region, they have a navy base in Tartus. The problem for them is Russia has had enough, it has drawn a line in the sand at Syria. It will not allow Nato to get a foothold any more after Libya. Because of this sadly the bloodbath in Syria is set to continue for a while.
 
Great article by robert fisk today in the independent

The FLN's corrupt leadership wanted a "democracy", even held elections. But once it was clear that the Islamist opposition – the luckless Islamic Salvation Front – would win, the government declared war on the "terrorists" trying to destroy Algeria. Villages were besieged, towns were shelled – all in the name of fighting "terror" – until the opposition took to slaughtering civilians around Blida, thousands of them, babies with their throats cut, women raped. And then it turned out the Algerian army was also involved in massacres. For Houla, read Bentalha, a place we have all forgotten; as we will forget Houla.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...s-slaughter-now-soon-well-forget-7794149.html


As for why syria won't be 'liberated' as libya was

From wiki- Syria’s oil reserves are being gradually depleted and reached 2.5 billion barrels in January 2009. Experts generally agree that Syria will become a net importer of petroleum by the end of the next decade.
 
KingKhanWC said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/...Iraq-photo-to-illustrate-Syrian-massacre.html

I think the above sums up the Western media's view of this horrible conflict. There is an obvious agenda to topple Assad, such agenda will never provide a neutral balanced view of the conflict.

The massacre is disgusting but no less disgusting than the bombings, attacks, murders by the Free Syrian Army and it's supporters in Saudi/Qatar/Israel/US who have either given military, financial or political support to these 'rebels' to carry out their attacks against Syria.

I'm no supporter of Assad or his tactics but the fact is Assad wasn't killing Syrians in such fashion before the armed insurgency was born. The nations who are supporting the FSA have ulterior motives for regime change. There are two main motives here. The first being an attempt to end support for Hizbollah, a resistance movement against Israel which will help Israel expand without retaliation. The second is to remove the Russian's presence in the region, they have a navy base in Tartus. The problem for them is Russia has had enough, it has drawn a line in the sand at Syria. It will not allow Nato to get a foothold any more after Libya. Because of this sadly the bloodbath in Syria is set to continue for a while.
Click to expand...

being unaware is a shame but willing propaganda is shameful
 
May the animals that did this rot in hell.

Speechless. How can you slaughter anyone let alone children.
 
Syria Uprising

Its been going on for nearly a year and i was surprised there was no thread .
How long before Assad goes ?
Why are NATO and the west not helping ? oil ?
We continue see the destruction of yet another Muslim country while the world just watches .
 
pakistanalltheway said:
Its been going on for nearly a year and i was surprised there was no thread .
How long before Assad goes ?
Why are NATO and the west not helping ? oil ?
We continue see the destruction of yet another Muslim country while the world just watches .
Click to expand...

Seriously or is it a wind up

Everyone knows this sort of thing isnt talked about on this forum .Any muslim on muslim warring doesnt actually ever happen its simply a conspiracy .
Thousands are dying? shush and look away

If you want to get a thread going just put the words USA and Isreal
 
There are crazy comments on both sides of this conflict...for some Assad has done nothing wrong and then for others the militants have done nothing wrong...

What is evident is both sides are fighting using indiscriminate force and essentially both are responsible for the escalation of conflict...

I still find the Muslim response to this conflict bizarre...

On the one hand they moan about the lack of intervention and then always moan about intervention when it happens...
 
shaykh1985 said:
There are crazy comments on both sides of this conflict...for some Assad has done nothing wrong and then for others the militants have done nothing wrong...

What is evident is both sides are fighting using indiscriminate force and essentially both are responsible for the escalation of conflict...

I still find the Muslim response to this conflict bizarre...

On the one hand they moan about the lack of intervention and then always moan about intervention when it happens...
Click to expand...

Ideally I'd prefer to see regional organisations to be empowered and to step in when these situations arise. Western interventions usually have aims to protect self-interests. The African Union is currently stretched fighting conflicts around Africa, but I'd rather see them given the resources to intervene than have western boots on the ground in African wars.

But again, it would be in an ideal world. We all know Arab countries have their own selfish aims and would intervene Syria for geopolitical reasons.

Syria also have one of the most powerful Armies in the Arab world - 220,000 troops.

Anyway an almighty conflict would be created in the Middle East if there is intervention in Syria. Syria have ties with Hezbollah and Iran. They used to have ties with Hamas but they have come out in support of the protesters. And Israel could get involved. So its better for the Kofi Annan Peace Plan to be implemented but the problem is that the plan has no teeth. Russia and China have to exert their influence on the regime.
 
Markhor said:
Ideally I'd prefer to see regional organisations to be empowered and to step in when these situations arise. Western interventions usually have aims to protect self-interests. The African Union is currently stretched fighting conflicts around Africa, but I'd rather see them given the resources to intervene than have western boots on the ground in African wars.

But again, it would be in an ideal world. We all know Arab countries have their own selfish aims and would intervene Syria for geopolitical reasons.

Syria also have one of the most powerful Armies in the Arab world - 220,000 troops.

Anyway an almighty conflict would be created in the Middle East if there is intervention in Syria. Syria have ties with Hezbollah and Iran. They used to have ties with Hamas but they have come out in support of the protesters. And Israel could get involved. So its better for the Kofi Annan Peace Plan to be implemented but the problem is that the plan has no teeth. Russia and China have to exert their influence on the regime.
Click to expand...

But Russia and China have an interest in maintaining the current regime...essentially its a stalemate and unlike Libya there are a lot of players here which make this potentially a bloodbath of epic proportions...

Hamas took their sweet time but eventually stepped to the side of the protesters...Israel is loving all of this...the 'Islamists' if they do remove Assad can be turned on Hezbollah and Iran...Assad's kept Muslims happy by housing Hezbollah and Hamas...

And naturally the other players want a weak Syria...a destablised Syria means a weaker Iran and also consequently also means a stronger Israel which of course makes the Gulf States more than happy...

There is no happy ending here...and there wont be an ending for a long time now that this has has turned into a civil conflict...once the Saudis and Turks provided protesters with weapons a bloodbath was a foregone conclusion...

The African Union is also an agenda driven institution but I do agree they have more legitimacy than NATO and the UN...the manner in which their views were treated as irrelevant in regards to Libya shows how little the world thinks of Africans again...
 
Last edited:
With Putin back in officially, Russia have drawn a line in the sand at Syria. Hilbilly Clinton tried to accuse Russia of sending in attack helicopters but backtracked after Russia denied this.

Start of the cold war again but this time it's the SCO v Nato. Both will allow and push Syria into a long term bloody conflict.
 
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/P-6cECO3XMA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
This is an interesting article...the emphasis here is not stating that all the information from this article is correct but the fact that much like the Libya conflict there is only interest in hearing the testimony of one side...and also pointing out how poor some of the opportunistic journalism continues to be...


BBC world news editor: Houla massacre coverage based on opposition propaganda
By Chris Marsden

15 June 2012

As quietly as possible, BBC world news editor Jon Williams has admitted that the coverage of last month’s Houla massacre in Syria by the world’s media and his own employers was a compendium of lies.

Datelined 16:23, June 7, Williams chose a personal blog to make a series of fairly frank statements explaining that there was no evidence whatsoever to identify either the Syrian Army or Alawite militias as the perpetrators of the May 25 massacre of 100 people.

By implication, Williams also suggests strongly that such allegations are the product of the propaganda department of the Sunni insurgents seeking to overthrow Bashar al-Assad.
After preparatory statements of self-justification noting the “complexity of the situation on the ground in Syria, and the need to try to separate fact from fiction,” and Syria’s long “history of rumours passing for fact,”

Williams writes:

“In the aftermath of the massacre at Houla last month, initial reports said some of the 49 children and 34 women killed had their throats cut. In Damascus, Western officials told me the subsequent investigation revealed none of those found dead had been killed in such a brutal manner. Moreover, while Syrian forces had shelled the area shortly before the massacre, the details of exactly who carried out the attacks, how and why were still unclear.”

For this reason, he concludes somewhat belatedly, “In such circumstances, it’s more important than ever that we report what we don’t know, not merely what we do.”

“In Houla, and now in Qubair, the finger has been pointed at the Shabiha, pro-government militia. But tragic death toll aside, the facts are few: it’s not clear who ordered the killings—or why.”

No trace of such a restrained approach can be found at the time on the BBC, or most anywhere else.

Instead the BBC offered itself as a sounding board for the statements of feigned outrage emanating from London, Washington and the United Nations headquarters—all blaming the atrocity on either the Syrian Army or Shabiha militias acting under their protection.

Typical was the May 28 report, “Syria Houla massacre: Survivors recount horror”, in which unidentified “Survivors of the massacre ... have told the BBC of their shock and fear as regime forces entered their homes and killed their families.” Nowhere was the question even posed that in such a conflict these alleged witnesses could be politically aligned with the opposition and acting under its instruction.

Only now does Williams state:

“Given the difficulties of reporting inside Syria, video filed by the opposition on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube may provide some insight into the story on the ground. But stories are never black and white—often shades of grey. Those opposed to President Assad have an agenda. One senior Western official went as far as to describe their YouTube communications strategy as ‘brilliant’. But he also likened it to so-called ‘psy-ops’, brainwashing techniques used by the US and other military to convince people of things that may not necessarily be true.”

Williams is in a position to know of what he speaks.

On May 27, the BBC ran a report on Houla under a photo purporting to show “the bodies of children in Houla awaiting burial.”

In reality this was an example of opposition propaganda that was anything but “brilliant”. The photograph of dozens of shrouded corpses was actually taken by Marco di Lauro in Iraq on March 27, 2003 and was of white body bags containing skeletons found in a desert south of Baghdad.

Di Lauro commented, “What I am really astonished by is that a news organization like the BBC doesn’t check the sources and it’s willing to publish any picture sent it by anyone: activist, citizen journalist or whatever… Someone is using someone else’s picture for propaganda on purpose.”

The BBC again acted as a vehicle for such propaganda, despite knowing that the photo had been supplied by an “activist” and that it could not be independently verified
.
Williams concludes with the advice to his colleagues: “A healthy scepticism is one of the essential qualities of any journalist—never more so than in reporting conflict. The stakes are high—all may not always be as it seems.”

Given its track record, the appeal to exercise a healthy skepticism should more correctly be directed towards the BBC’s readers and viewers—and towards the entire official media apparatus.

It may well be the case that Williams’ mea culpa is motivated by a personal concern at the role he and his colleagues are being asked to play as mouthpieces for the campaign for regime change in Syria. But with his comments buried away on his blog, elsewhere on the BBC everything proceeds according to script.

The BBC’s coverage of the alleged June 6 massacre in the village of Qubair once again features uncritical coverage of allegations by the opposition that it was the work of Shabiha militias that were being protected by Syrian troops. BBC correspondent Paul Danahar, accompanying UN monitors, writes of buildings gutted and burnt and states that it is “unclear” what happened to the bodies of dozens of reported victims. He writes of a house “gutted by fire,” the “smell of burnt flesh,” blood and pieces of flesh. He writes that “butchering the people did not satisfy the blood lust of the attackers. They shot the livestock too.”
This is accompanied by a picture of a dead donkey, but aside from this there is absolutely nothing of substance to indicate what happened in the village.

And at one point, Danahar tweets: “A man called Ahmed has come up from the village who says he witnessed the killings. He has says dozens were killed… He has a badly bruised face but his story is conflicted & the UN say they are not sure he’s honest as they think he followed the convoy” (emphasis added).

This does not stop Danahar from concluding, from tracks supposedly made by military vehicles, that “attempts to cover up the details of the atrocity are calculated & clear.”
So much for healthy scepticism!

It must also be pointed out that the BBC has not written a word regarding the June 7 report by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung that the Free Syrian Army carried out the Houla massacre, according to interviews with local residents by opposition forces opposed to the Western-backed militia.
Click to expand...

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/jun2012/bbcs-j15.shtml
 
Ron Paul's speech on the House floor with regards to the situation in Syria.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rCvfwoRGMg&feature=player_embedded

Text of the Speech:

When Will We Attack Syria? Plans, rumors, and war propaganda for attacking Syria and deposing Assad have been around for many months. This past week however, it was reported that the Pentagon indeed has finalized plans to do just that.

In my opinion, all the evidence to justify this attack is bogus. It is no more credible than the pretext given for the 2003 invasion of Iraq or the 2011 attack on Libya.

The total waste of those wars should cause us to pause before this all-out effort at occupation and regime change is initiated against Syria. There are no national security concerns that require such a foolish escalation of violence in the Middle East. There should be no doubt that our security interests are best served by completely staying out of the internal strife now raging in Syria.

We are already too much involved in supporting the forces within Syria anxious to overthrow the current government. Without outside interference, the strife—now characterized as a civil war—would likely be non-existent. Whether or not we attack yet another country, occupying it and setting up a new regime that we hope we can control poses a serious Constitutional question: From where does a president get such authority? Since World War II the proper authority to go to war has been ignored. It has been replaced by international entities like the United Nations and NATO, or the President himself, while ignoring the Congress. And sadly, the people don't object. Our recent presidents explicitly maintain that the authority to go to war is not the U.S. Congress. This has been the case since 1950 when we were taken into war in Korea under UN Resolution and without Congressional approval.

And once again, we are about to engage in military action against Syria and at the same time irresponsibly reactivating the Cold War with Russia. We're now engaged in a game of "chicken" with Russia which presents a much greater threat to our security than does Syria. How would we tolerate Russia in Mexico demanding a humanitarian solution to the violence on the U.S.-Mexican border? We would consider that a legitimate concern for us. But, for us to be engaged in Syria, where the Russian have a legal naval base, is equivalent to the Russians being in our backyard in Mexico. We are hypocritical when we condemn Russian for protecting their neighborhood interests for exactly what we have been doing ourselves, thousands of miles away from our shores.

There's no benefit for us to be picking sides, secretly providing assistance and encouraging civil strife in an effort to effect regime change in Syria. Falsely charging the Russians with supplying military helicopters to Assad is an unnecessary provocation. Falsely blaming the Assad government for a so-called massacre perpetrated by a violent warring rebel faction is nothing more than war propaganda.

Most knowledgeable people now recognize that the planned war against Syria is merely the next step to take on the Iranian government, something the neo-cons openly admit. Controlling Iranian oil, just as we have done in Saudi Arabia and are attempting to do in Iraq, is the real goal of the neo-conservatives who have been in charge of our foreign policy for the past couple of decades. War is inevitable without a significant change in our foreign policy, and soon.

Disagreements between our two political parties are minor. Both agree the sequestration of any war funds must be canceled. Neither side wants to abandon our aggressive and growing presence in the Middle East and South Asia. This crisis building can easily get out of control and become a much bigger war than just another routine occupation and regime change that the American people have grown to accept or ignore.

It's time the United States tried a policy of diplomacy, seeking peace, trade, and friendship. We must abandon our military effort to promote and secure an American empire. Besides, we're broke, we can't afford it, and worst of all, we're fulfilling the strategy laid out by Osama bin Laden whose goal had always been to bog us down in the Middle East and bring on our bankruptcy here at home.

It's time to bring our troops home and establish a non-interventionist foreign policy, which is the only road to peace and prosperity.

This week I am introducing legislation to prohibit the Administration, absent a declaration of war by Congress, from supporting -- directly or indirectly -- any military or paramilitary operations in Syria. I hope my colleagues will join me in this effort.
Click to expand...
 
Just as many people die in africa in countries like mali which coincidentally is a direct consequence of libyan intervention.

Syrian war is only a way of furthering regional politics and secterian discourse.

Us troops respond in a similar way to bashar in occupied countries where they are not pm, citizens or welcome.
 
Floor Speech, Syria June 19 2012

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8rCvfwoRGMg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

my man, Ron Paul calling BS on the war propaganda against Syria
 
Thoroughly agree with Ron Paul there.

This is not USA's battle to fight and only ulterior motives will make them go there. If you aren't there to make things better, just stay out.

What's going on in Syria is horrifying. However, it has to be dealt in other manners than the typical Western intervention. One that usually ends up involving personal interests over collective interest.
 
Syria conflict: 'Suicide bomb' kills defence minister

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18882149

Syrian Defence Minister Daoud Rajiha has been killed in a suspected suicide bombing at the headquarters of the National Security Bureau in the capital Damascus, Syrian state TV says.

Other senior officials are said to be critically hurt. They were meeting inside the building at the time.

The area around the building, in Rawda district, has been sealed off.

The attack comes amid claims of a major rebel offensive on the city. Syrian officials have downplayed the attacks.

"The Minister of Defence was martyred by the terrorist bombing that targeted the national security building," the TV report said.

Security sources say the suspected bomber worked as a bodyguard for members of President Bashar al-Assad's inner circle.

Gen Rajiha has been defence minister for less than a year, serving previously as chief of staff, and is on a US blacklist for his role in the suppression of dissent.

He is believed to be an Orthodox Christian, a rarity in the Alawite-dominated Syrian military and government.
Click to expand...
 
President Assad's brother-in-law is also killed in the attack at national security building in Damascus, reports say.
 
chacha kashmiri said:
syria's 7/7
Click to expand...

Come on Chacha, you should know it's only given a number if done by the Zionist enemy or a false flag.

Today's bombing was nothing but an act of terrorism. It's sad to see many Muslim supporting terrorism just because their Salafi brothers are supposed to be waging a 'resistance'. If you ask the same Muslims if Nato should intervene, the cat suddenly gets their tongues.
 
KingKhanWC said:
Come on Chacha, you should know it's only given a number if done by the Zionist enemy or a false flag.

Today's bombing was nothing but an act of terrorism. It's sad to see many Muslim supporting terrorism just because their Salafi brothers are supposed to be waging a 'resistance'. If you ask the same Muslims if Nato should intervene, the cat suddenly gets their tongues.
Click to expand...

Assad's brother in law was basically murdered without trial for stopping 'terrorists' causing chaos in his country

What a load of bs. the west has gone back to using muslims as weapons rather than fighting against them

Such a coordinated attack, has western prints all over it
 
so when do suicide bombers become hero's? when the west wants them to be!
now lets imagine this bomber had walked into an iraqi office during the the iraq insurgency and done the same..what would have been the headlines? or in kabul?

just like the TTP proxies in pakistan the west is using the same methodology in syria and has also done so in libya..its a new paradigm and a new way of waging war..
 
kingusama92 said:
What's going on in Syria is horrifying. However, it has to be dealt in other manners than the typical Western intervention. One that usually ends up involving personal interests over collective interest.
Click to expand...


I agree with you - the last thing that I think people in the region want is yet another show of Seppo imperialism in the Middle East after the disaster of Iraq. And the last thing the Seppos want is to get embroiled in another unwinnable assymetric war. This isn't the time of Imperial Rome or Genghis Khan's Mongols where fighting was largely man-to-man on a battlefield of sorts - these days war is also waged in the media, via civilian casualties and for hearts and minds. No foreign power can just invade a country and expect to re-colonise/re-make it via brute force.

But this is the hard part. What other manners are you thinking about? Talking hasn't worked. Bribing hasn't worked either. End of day, unfortunately, the power brokers in the region just don't care enough. If they did they would have done something rather than just talk.

As for this bit that Ron Paul said:

It's time the United States tried a policy of diplomacy, seeking peace, trade, and friendship. It's time to bring our troops home and establish a non-interventionist foreign policy, which is the only road to peace and prosperity.
Click to expand...

It sounds great in theory and I really wish it worked, but history has shown it hasn't. Because there are evil people in this world who take advantage of other people. There are bullies who pick on the weak, like in any schoolyard. Nobody wants to be weak. Then it becomes the worldwide arms race game - do you let the other guy get more powerful than you, to the point of possibly wiping you out, or do you do something before it happens? Or do you trust in their word, like Chamberlain did Hitler?

I'm not saying violence and aggression is the solution these days, even though the vast majority of the world's famous leaders thought so. Certainly you need to make sure you are strong enough to protect yourself against anyone, even if you are not the aggressor. When you are weak you lose control, put yourself at the mercy of the other person, and rely on their goodwill. But maybe another way is to bind people and countries together through trade. Realistically China and the US will never go to war, because their economies are too interlinked. Both would suffer too much should they come to blows with each other. Maybe we need to make each country so interdependent on the other that war becomes the greater of two evils, rather than the lesser which it is today.
 
Last edited:
It sounds great in theory and I really wish it worked, but history has shown it hasn't. Because there are evil people in this world who take advantage of other people. There are bullies who pick on the weak, like in any schoolyard. Nobody wants to be weak. Then it becomes the worldwide arms race game - do you let the other guy get more powerful than you, to the point of possibly wiping you out, or do you do something before it happens? Or do you trust in their word, like Chamberlain did Hitler?
Click to expand...

The problem here isn't about appeasement, it's about self interest

Chamberlain didn't mind hitler invading east europe but only really got worried when he seen the scale of hitler's ambitions

Just like the usa did not get involved in ww2 until they were hit at pearl harbour

Noone really cares about the 'bullies' until they step up to the bullies like hitler did after the treaty of versailels but then he got a little carried away

In the same way the iran president is seen as a bully and his syrian allies as fellow bullies while noone really cares what goes on in bahrain, yemen or rwanda
 
Can someone please tell me if they do support the FSA then why?...I would be really intrigued to find out...
 
OZGOD said:
I agree with you - the last thing that I think people in the region want is yet another show of Seppo imperialism in the Middle East after the disaster of Iraq. And the last thing the Seppos want is to get embroiled in another unwinnable assymetric war. This isn't the time of Imperial Rome or Genghis Khan's Mongols where fighting was largely man-to-man on a battlefield of sorts - these days war is also waged in the media, via civilian casualties and for hearts and minds. No foreign power can just invade a country and expect to re-colonise/re-make it via brute force.

But this is the hard part. What other manners are you thinking about? Talking hasn't worked. Bribing hasn't worked either. End of day, unfortunately, the power brokers in the region just don't care enough. If they did they would have done something rather than just talk.

As for this bit that Ron Paul said:



It sounds great in theory and I really wish it worked, but history has shown it hasn't. Because there are evil people in this world who take advantage of other people. There are bullies who pick on the weak, like in any schoolyard. Nobody wants to be weak. Then it becomes the worldwide arms race game - do you let the other guy get more powerful than you, to the point of possibly wiping you out, or do you do something before it happens? Or do you trust in their word, like Chamberlain did Hitler?

I'm not saying violence and aggression is the solution these days, even though the vast majority of the world's famous leaders thought so. Certainly you need to make sure you are strong enough to protect yourself against anyone, even if you are not the aggressor. When you are weak you lose control, put yourself at the mercy of the other person, and rely on their goodwill. But maybe another way is to bind people and countries together through trade. Realistically China and the US will never go to war, because their economies are too interlinked. Both would suffer too much should they come to blows with each other. Maybe we need to make each country so interdependent on the other that war becomes the greater of two evils, rather than the lesser which it is today.
Click to expand...

But Syria did have good trade links, only with countries like Russia rather than the US. Similarly Iran but then trade sanctions are used as a tool to bring these countries in line with western policy. So again it comes down to self interest of the dominant superpower at the end of the day. What's good for one isn't necessarily going to be good for others.
 
KingKhanWC said:
Perhaps you would like to have a look at this?

http://forum.mpacuk.org/showthread.php?49980-Al-Qaeda-behind-Syria-attacks-Russia
Click to expand...

Lol yeah its been suggested for a while that Al Qaeda have some involvement on the 'Free Syria' side...they proved quite productive in Libya and have been outstanding at doing the West's work for them wherever they go...

Syria is such a farce its unbelievable but whats worse is how many people are fooled by the rebels nonsense...
 
shaykh1985 said:
Lol yeah its been suggested for a while that Al Qaeda have some involvement on the 'Free Syria' side...they proved quite productive in Libya and have been outstanding at doing the West's work for them wherever they go...

Syria is such a farce its unbelievable but whats worse is how many people are fooled by the rebels nonsense...
Click to expand...

lol, yes it's this new great vision of 'we are muslims who are fighting against dictators' nonsense. I've asked these jokers numerous times should Nato intervene to help these freedom fighters but the cat get's their tongues. :yk
 
Cpt. Rishwat said:
But Syria did have good trade links, only with countries like Russia rather than the US. Similarly Iran but then trade sanctions are used as a tool to bring these countries in line with western policy. So again it comes down to self interest of the dominant superpower at the end of the day. What's good for one isn't necessarily going to be good for others.
Click to expand...

Gotta make yourself economically indispensable to the other country then. To the point where trade sanctions would not be in the other country's best interest. Just like China with the US.
 
shaykh1985 said:
There are crazy comments on both sides of this conflict...for some Assad has done nothing wrong and then for others the militants have done nothing wrong...

What is evident is both sides are fighting using indiscriminate force and essentially both are responsible for the escalation of conflict...

I still find the Muslim response to this conflict bizarre...

On the one hand they moan about the lack of intervention and then always moan about intervention when it happens...
Click to expand...

the Assad regime is not muslim. Alawites ascribe divine attributes to Hazrat Ali therefore they arent muslim. this is a battle between muslim majority and a secular nonmuslim dictatorship
 
amateurdentist said:
the Assad regime is not muslim. Alawites ascribe divine attributes to Hazrat Ali therefore they arent muslim. this is a battle between muslim majority and a secular nonmuslim dictatorship
Click to expand...

That is a red herring,

lets say Assad commited atrocities, it should not matter whether he is Muslim or Alawi.

Trying to take argument to his religion makes it seem like its ok to kill your people if you are Muslim, but not if you are non-Muslim
 
Turkish Threat Of Invading Syria Interview Sheikh Imran Hosein

[utube]wJEp9Ekxseo[/utube]
 
LongHorn said:
That is a red herring,

lets say Assad commited atrocities, it should not matter whether he is Muslim or Alawi.

Trying to take argument to his religion makes it seem like its ok to kill your people if you are Muslim, but not if you are non-Muslim
Click to expand...

my arguement was that it is not muslim fighting muslim in syria but a secular dictatorship vs muslims
ofcourse i didnot mean what you wrote in your last sentence. murder commited by muslim or nonmuslim is equally bad
 
Turkey's parliament authorises military action in Syria

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19830928

Turkey's parliament has authorised troops to launch cross-border action against Syria, following Syria's deadly shelling of a Turkish town.

The bill, passed by 320 to 129, also permits strikes against Syrian targets.

But Deputy Prime Minister Besir Atalay insisted this was a deterrent and not a mandate for war.

Turkey has been firing at targets inside Syria since Wednesday's shelling of the town of Akcakale, which killed two women and three children.

Ankara's military response marks the first time it has fired into Syria during the 18-month-long unrest there.

Several Syrian troops were killed by Turkish fire, a UK-based Syrian activist group said. Damascus has not confirmed any casualties.

The Turkish parliament passed the bill in a closed-doors emergency session.

It permits military action, if required by the government, for the period of one year.

However, Mr Atalay insisted the priority was to act in co-ordination with international bodies.

He told Turkish television: "This mandate is not a war mandate but it is in our hands to be used when need be in order to protect Turkey's own interests."

He said Syria had accepted responsibility for the deaths.

"The Syrian side has admitted what it did and apologised," Mr Atalay said.

Zeliha Timucin, her three daughters and her sister died in Akcakale when a shell fell in their courtyard as they prepared the evening meal.

They were buried in a local cemetery on Thursday.

Turkey had called for the UN Security Council to meet and take "necessary action" to stop Syrian "aggression".

However, Mr Atalay said that UN and Syrian representatives had spoken on Wednesday evening.

He said: "Syria... said nothing like this will happen again. That's good. The UN mediated and spoke to Syria."

The UN Security Council drafted a resolution on Thursday condemning the Syrian shelling "in the strongest terms", calling it a "violation of international law".

However, Russia, Syria's main ally, has blocked the text and instead proposed one that does not refer to international law, and which calls on all parties to "exercise restraint".

Nato has held an urgent meeting to support Turkey, demanding "the immediate cessation of such aggressive acts against an ally".

The US, the UK, France and the European Union have already condemned Syria's actions.

The BBC's Jim Muir in Beirut says neither Turkey nor Syria wants this to develop into a war. He says there is no appetite in Nato or the West for military conflict and that it is noticeable how conciliatory Syria has been since the news of the shelling broke.

Many social media users in Turkey have been reacting strongly against the possibility of war with Syria.

Hashtags such as #notowar drew a lot of attention.

One user, coymak, tweeted: "There is no victory in war, only victory is the happiness in the eye of the children when it is ended!"

There were many tweets referring to the call for an anti-war rally in central Istanbul on Thursday evening.

In Syria itself as many as 21 members of Syria's elite Republican Guards have been killed in an explosion and firefight in the Qudsaya district of Damascus, the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) told the BBC.

The SOHR is one of the most prominent organisations documenting and reporting incidents and casualties in the Syrian conflict. The group says its reports are impartial, though its information cannot be independently verified.
Click to expand...
 
Hopefully this isn't the first step on the road to war between Turkey and Syria. Troubling times in the Middle East.
 
Imran N Hosein Articles - Islam and Politics

URGENT STATEMENT
Articles - Islam and Politics
Thursday, 08 Sha'ban 1433 (28th June 2012)

We are about to witness what we long anticipated, to wit: a Turkish-led NATO attack on Syria to remove the present Syrian regime and replace it, Libyan-style, with another so-called Islamic regime. How else will Israel be able to claim that a ‘rising Islam’ now menaces that country, and that Israel is being surrounded by that menacing Islam and must wage pre-emptive war in order to survive? How else will Israel be able to replace USA as the next ruling State in the world unless she wages great wars – particularly against her Arab neighbors who surround the Zionist State?

Turkey’s pro-NATO and hence pro-Zionist Government seems about to commit the ultimate act of foolishness in claiming the shooting-down of a Turkish warplane by Syria as causus bellum that justifies a Turkish military invasion of Syria. Such a Turkish military invasion of Syria would of course, have nothing to do with avenging the loss of an airplane and two pilots. Rather, it would have nothing less than Syrian regime-change as its primary objective.

That military adventure would be an act of supreme foolishness for the following reasons:

  • Syria has been on a high alert for some time now expecting external intervention (Libyan-style) in support of a Zionist-engineered armed insurrection that has so far failed to take-over the country. A Turkish warplane that enters into Syrian airspace cannot expect, in such circumstances, to be treated as an innocent intruder.
  • If Russia and China respond to a Turkish military invasion of Syria by coming to the support of that country, that will eventually provoke the Malhama (great war) prophesied by Prophet Muhammad (sallalahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). That Malhama will be so great that it will make the first and second world-wars look like a fight over peanuts.
  • The Turkish government should remember that the Prophet (sallalahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) also prophesied that the Malhama or great war will lead to the conquest of Constantinople. It should not take Turkish Muslims long to realize that the 1453 conquest of Constantinople by Sultan Muhammad Fatih had nothing to do with the prophecy. Turkish Muslims will then wake up to the monstrous betrayal of their pro-Zionist government and prepare for the civil war that will fulfill the prophecy.
  • Thus a Turkish military invasion of Syria will eventually lead to Turkish civil war and to the liberation of the city of Constantinople from NATO’s venomous control.
  • Since Russia will inevitably enter in the war in defense of Syria, the Turkish military invasion of that country will lead to yet another prophecy of Prophet Muhammad (sallalahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) being fulfilled, to wit: “that you (Muslims) will make an alliance with Rum (pronounced as ‘room’).” Rum in the Qur’an referred to the Eastern Christian Byzantine Empire. But after Constantinople was conquered in 1453, the capital city of Rum eventually became Moscow.

This statement is issued to so guide Muslims that they may not be brainwashed by Protestant Islam’s Zionist Jihad, and by the inevitable CNN/Al-Jazeerah-led propaganda barrage that will now inundate mankind.

http://www.imranhosein.org/articles/islam-and-politics.html
 
first all the grand standing of turkey against israel and now leading so called zionist jihad. something is wrong somewhere.
 
youboy said:
We are about to witness what we long anticipated, to wit: a Turkish-led NATO attack on Syria to remove the present Syrian regime
Click to expand...


No we won't. The Syrians have already apologised.
 
munda_khi said:
first all the grand standing of turkey against israel and now leading so called zionist jihad. something is wrong somewhere.
Click to expand...

Turkey stands for its own rights nd aspirations. I don't believe they care two hoots for Ummah and fair play to them. They are one of fastest developing countries in the world.
 
Wow only took five posts for someone to post a conspiracy theory.

Western terrorists, war criminals etc etc. Oh hang on its Turkey! This is confusing. I know it must be a Zionist plot!
 
Robert said:
No we won't. The Syrians have already apologised.
Click to expand...

Notice the sort of characters that always share and promote such links. Sad thing is that there are probably plenty of crackheads out there who would love NATO to attack Syria and for a bunch of civilians to die pour le plus grand bien, because in their view it would accelerate the fall of the West and be the advent of the next Muslim empire etc.
 
James said:
Notice the sort of characters that always share and promote such links. Sad thing is that there are probably plenty of crackheads out there who would love NATO to attack Syria and for a bunch of civilians to die pour le plus grand bien, because in their view it would accelerate the fall of the West and be the advent of the next Muslim empire etc.
Click to expand...

Aye. Beware those who think that ideas such as democracy and religion are more important than people.

There will be no new Muslim empire until they

- start looking into themselves for the solutions instead of blaming others
- start asking questions instead of slavishly following the rules
- eradicate their susceptibility to crackpot conspiracy theory
- remember how to apply the science which they themselves developed, instead of choosing that evidence which confirms their beliefs and disregarding that which does not
- stop allowing themselves to be ruled by despots

Then their glory days of scientific and cultural achievement and peaceful rule might return.
 
Robert said:
Aye. Beware those who think that ideas such as democracy and religion are more important than people.

There will be no new Muslim empire until they

- start looking into themselves for the solutions instead of blaming others
- start asking questions instead of slavishly following the rules
- eradicate their susceptibility to crackpot conspiracy theory
- remember how to apply the science which they themselves developed, instead of choosing that evidence which confirms their beliefs and disregarding that which does not
- stop allowing themselves to be ruled by despots

Then their glory days of scientific and cultural achievement and peaceful rule might return.
Click to expand...

Good post. Hopefully it will spark some discussion.

:)
 
Shouldnt Nato help Turkey? Whats the point if countries like Syria can get away from attcking Nato member second time in couple of months?
 
Poll of the week: What do you think is more likely to happen in the future:
1. Matrix
2. Terminator
3. Planet of the Apes
4. Independence Day/District 9
or
5: The Prophetic post #5
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Bald Eagle
Pot calling the kettle black? BJP leader likens Mamata Banerjee to Kim Jong Un: 'Can't tolerate opposition'
Replies
45
Views
419
Hitman
Hitman
S
[VIDEOS] Right-wing thugs turn on immigrant populations in UK in the aftermath of Southport killings
7 8 9
Replies
648
Views
10K
FearlessRoar
FearlessRoar
R
Is America really to be blamed for all the issues in Middle East and rising Islamophobia?
Replies
7
Views
185
Cricket Warrior
C
B
[VIDEOS] India, Pakistan ask students to 'stay indoors' amid mob violence in Kyrgyzstan
2
Replies
81
Views
1K
PakLFC
P
B
  • Poll
What will it take to start a revolution of the kind we have seen in Bangladesh?
Replies
38
Views
607
anikrc1
A
Back
Top