Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Syrian Sister

Tens Of Thousands Syrian Pro Govt Protesters.

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Amnesty International has lots of reports from insiders as to what is going on in Syria. Its also has lots of similar reports for Bahrain. UN has asked Assad to allow in a small group to access what is happening. Syria said yes as it has nothing to hide, UN asked at 1st of May, and Syria has been stalling on granting access ever since. Yeah, nothing to hide. This group would be escorted around to where they asked to go, so we can stop all this 'they would be spies, or they would instigate more protests' rubbish.

Are you applying similar rules to all Iranian, Al Manar ( Hezbollah channel ) news etc.. you hear about Bahrain?.. They have much to gain by removal of Sunni monarchy, as the US might have about losing its Naval base there.

I follow what makes sense to me. I'm not willing condemn Assad based on reports by people who can't verify them nor am I willing to blame Assad for anything he can't be held directly and personally responsible for. If security forces are getting out of hand, it has to be proven to me without a shadow of a doubt that they are acting on the will of Assad himself in their atrocities or that Assad approves of their actions. For all I know, Syria could just be straight bedlam in some parts.They can't even get the numbers of dead right, one minute I hear around 400 and the next minute 1000 and these are all on the same days. Which is it? And what about the names and identities of the military and security personnel who've been killed number over 100 that aren't included in that tally? What about them. Not too long ago when this started, I was reading American news speaking of armed gangs running amok and harassing civilians. Now, whenever it's mentioned it is put in quotations as just being "claimed" by the Syrian regime.

Also, terrorist groups are good at creating convincing fabrications themselves (look at how the Salafis slander the Coptic Church with that supposed converted Coptic girl) as are US funded groups, which there are in Syria's protesters. So if there are Muslim Brotherhood members in Syria, fabrication to create friction is possible.

Many immigrants came to the secular USA because they suffered religious persecution in their countries with theocratic rules.But on US money is written "in God we trust" and american presidents usually end their speeches with "God bless America". So even USA could be seen as a theocracy. Right?

Would you be happy if Obama ended a speech with "Allah bless America"?

yes and no. I'm saying that every religion's aspiration is to become the dominate train of thought in society and manage its community based on the laws and principles of its religious and spiritual beliefs. And religion is inherently tied to politics. Thus in essence, every religion promotes theocracy. The difference between some religious groups is that some try to force their religious principles on others and some don't. One group seeks to establish a theocracy regardless of the consensus of the people immediately and the other seeks to establish theocracy gradually over time through people converting of their own will and general consensus turned favoring this one religious body's principles as adequate for governing the society as a whole. Just because Hezbollah wouldn't mind creating an Islamic state, doesn't mean they believe everyone else's religion doesn't matter. And such a goal is long term for them, not the immediate necessary solution.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I follow what makes sense to me. I'm not willing condemn Assad based on reports by people who can't verify them nor am I willing to blame Assad for anything he can't be held directly and personally responsible for.

You applying same criteria here with regard to Bahrain, its King ( well Saudis troops are doing most of the security now ), and you believe all reports have been 100% verified by independent groups with regards to what is 'reportedly' happening in Bahrain?

If security forces are getting out of hand, it has to be proven to me without a shadow of a doubt that they are acting on the will of Assad himself in their atrocities or that Assad approves of their actions.

You apply the same criteria to Bahriani and Saudi troops?. Why you think Assad ( or his brother ) does not have control of the army. If he has not, why keep him in power to make reforms, as he is not the one who holds the power, so why leave him to make changes that he cant make?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You apply the same criteria to Bahriani and Saudi troops?. Why you think Assad ( or his brother ) does not have control of the army. If he has not, why keep him in power to make reforms, as he is not the one who holds the power, so why leave him to make changes that he cant make?

To some extent. I believe that a military can sometimes take authority into its own hands against the will of the elected ruler or official monarch just as much as I believe the monarch or elected ruler can be directly responsible in part for human rights abuses by his or her security forces. And I keep that in mind whether I'm reading on Syria, Libya, Bahrain, Yemen, or Egypt.

Even if Assad does have adequate control over the security forces, the circumstances of events involving clashes with protesters and security need to be examined with both sides of the argument given a fair chance and it still must be examined who was acting on whose, if anyone else's, accord when committing a crime, whether the proven criminal is a terrorist or a police man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 been killed BBC said , i wonder if theer are 2 forces in Syria Gov , one day it say amnesty and the other day theer is a massacer

one day it say the left of emergency law and second day theer is clashes with protestors

i wish Iran and Hizbullah stop supporting this Party honestly , for the greater good of everyone

at least king abdullah before starting bahrain invasion said that we will punish anyone who disturbs the social peace and he did lol , but playin tow cards at one time is so sick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's funny is that Assad has actually met with reformists and organized talks to discuss reforms with Syria's various political parties. This is confirmed. Yet we still have reports of clashes. So, one needs to ask: is Assad lying and supporting a bloody crackdown on innocent civilians? I honestly have trouble seeing that in the face of clear evidence to the contrary.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is politics. It's a high stake game played for keeps. I don't say ideology isn't important, because it is, but interests are also powerful. Hezbollah probably verbally supports Syria but it doesn't really matter what they say, tbh. Unless the military fractures to the point we see a coup like in Egypt, I doubt hot air and rocks will beat T-72s and Kalashnikovs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing has put me on the fence more than what is taking place in Syria. While I find Bashar's Israel stances rare in the Arab and Muslim world, it is unacceptable to massacre Syrian civilians. I do not want to see what happend in Iraq take hold in Syria , because syrians will be the ultimate loser. I also do not want to be a hypocrite and support bashar just because he is a shia. The proper thing to do at this point is to engage in serious talks with the Syrian government. If we have learned one thing in these uprisings, it is that the status quo is unsustainable.

I would urge the army to withdraw and the protesters engage in non-violent methods of protest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

15 been killed BBC said , i wonder if theer are 2 forces in Syria Gov , one day it say amnesty and the other day theer is a massacer

one day it say the left of emergency law and second day theer is clashes with protestors

i wish Iran and Hizbullah stop supporting this Party honestly , for the greater good of everyone

at least king abdullah before starting bahrain invasion said that we will punish anyone who disturbs the social peace and he did lol , but playin tow cards at one time is so sick

Yes sister, I believe that if Hizbullah and Iran stopped supporting the Ba'athists in Syria then it would be much better for both Hizbullah and Iran and certain groups in Syria.

What's funny is that Assad has actually met with reformists and organized talks to discuss reforms with Syria's various political parties. This is confirmed. Yet we still have reports of clashes. So, one needs to ask: is Assad lying and supporting a bloody crackdown on innocent civilians? I honestly have trouble seeing that in the face of clear evidence to the contrary.

Two scenarios I can think of:

1. Bashar al-Assad is creating a false persona as a reformer and wishes to kill the protestors to keep power within the Assad family.

2. Bashar al-Assad is a reformer with the people in mind and now he is going against those in the government who were against reforms. The military is also the one attacking the protestors against al-Assad's wishes.

This is politics. It's a high stake game played for keeps. I don't say ideology isn't important, because it is, but interests are also powerful. Hezbollah probably verbally supports Syria but it doesn't really matter what they say, tbh. Unless the military fractures to the point we see a coup like in Egypt, I doubt hot air and rocks will beat T-72s and Kalashnikovs.

The oppressed shall always come up over the oppressor. Might does not make right. Many governments have fallen to people with little or no manpower/weapons as compared to the government's armaments.

Nothing has put me on the fence more than what is taking place in Syria. While I find Bashar's Israel stances rare in the Arab and Muslim world, it is unacceptable to massacre Syrian civilians. I do not want to see what happend in Iraq take hold in Syria , because syrians will be the ultimate loser. I also do not want to be a hypocrite and support bashar just because he is a shia. The proper thing to do at this point is to engage in serious talks with the Syrian government. If we have learned one thing in these uprisings, it is that the status quo is unsustainable.

I would urge the army to withdraw and the protesters engage in non-violent methods of protest.

Bashar al-Assad in a Nusayri (known as Alawi in the US). I see most people supporting the Ba'athist regtime in Syria because he supports the end of Zionist occupation and his nation (along with China, Turkey, DPRK, Russia) is an ally with Iran. Other people support keeping the government to prevent chaos from erupting in the Middle East. I do not believe the US dares go into Syria as it did in Libya due to the Syrian government's close relation with its military.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Yes sister, I believe that if Hizbullah and Iran stopped supporting the Ba'athists in Syria then it would be much better for both Hizbullah and Iran and certain groups in Syria.

Maybe good for their image but Hezbollah sincerely opposes Assad's removal and demands an end to a slander campaign against their ally. Whether you feel they are right or wrong, should they not say what they feel, under the threat of Zionists who are smacking their lips at the opportunity to paint them as promoters of terror and oppression? Also, what is this leading to? The USA is sanctioning Syria and freezing assets, something they have failed to in Bahrain. And what was the other nation that saw our intervention recently? Libya whose leader was very outspoken against long before its protests. Is it not possible that the USA's government wants something similar in Syria? Afterall, we are seeing far more attention by the US to Syria and Libya, who haven't always seen eye to eye with the US government, yet no action whatsoever to our ally of Bahrain. Is it a coincidence that Syria happens to be an ally to Iran and Hezbollah? Is it coincidence that Gaddafi resented business deals with the United States for awhile? I don't like Gaddafi, he's crazy, but we did focus on Libya more than other places. Yemen and Bahrain are hardly a concern, yet Syria and Libya are big deals to us when they've never quite liked us? And also the leader of Syria technically falls under the category of Shi'ism. Bahrain, that just happens to be practically forgotten by the United States despite the fact we have our fleet there, is experiencing protests by mainly Shia and Iran's possible involvement has come up plenty of times in both the regime news of that country and the American news media. Think about it.

Two scenarios I can think of:

1. Bashar al-Assad is creating a false persona as a reformer and wishes to kill the protestors to keep power within the Assad family.

2. Bashar al-Assad is a reformer with the people in mind and now he is going against those in the government who were against reforms. The military is also the one attacking the protestors against al-Assad's wishes.

I think Assad falls under the second category more. The protest movements in Syria, aren't as unified or share the same goals though. It is possible that some areas have police using excessive force, but with over 120 identified security personnel dead, I wouldn't blame some for being angry if that is the case. And with that many officers dead, it's obvious some protest groups are dangerous.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Asad falls the Alawites and Sunnis will fight a civil war. Syria may break up into sectarian / ethnic mini-states

The Alawites had a separate protectorate under the French, they originally resisted becoming part of Syria, the Sunnis forced them to join Syria since they wanted their ports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are Muslims so fond of fighting? Doesn´t your Quran mention anything about peace and tolerance?

Political strife happens all over the world and fighting between people based on sectarian differences or ethnicity is not limited to the Muslim world. It's an unfortunate thing, but a reality faced by every religion or ethnicity on the planet.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why are Muslims so fond of fighting? Doesn´t your Quran mention anything about peace and tolerance?

Its got less to do with religion more to do with a history of bad blood. The Alawites remember the oppression they suffered for centuries under Sunni empires, they dont want to experience that again. The Sunnis now will never forget the oppression they suffered at the hands of the Alawites and will not want to suffer it again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its got less to do with religion more to do with a history of bad blood. The Alawites remember the oppression they suffered for centuries under Sunni empires, they dont want to experience that again. The Sunnis now will never forget the oppression they suffered at the hands of the Alawites and will not want to suffer it again.

So isn´t democracy a better idea than civil war?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are Muslims so fond of fighting? Doesn´t your Quran mention anything about peace and tolerance?

Human history has been full of fighting (regardless of religion). Also you shouldn't blame any religion for the actions of some of their people. Here is a good read on that: http://islamdabest.blogspot.com/2010/09/dont-judge-islam-because-of-muslims.html "Don't Judge Islam Because of Muslims!"

An overview of this article:

Quote-

1. Media maligns Islam

2. Black sheep in every community:

3. Muslims best as a whole:

4. Don’t judge a car by its driver:

5. Judge Islam by its best follower i.e. Prophet Mohammed (pbuh):

end quote.

As to your main statement, yes Islam calls for peace and tolerance, but that doesn't mean all people who were born to a Muslim family or even call themselves Muslim follow Islam correctly. Issues like this in Syria, also have a lot of Western imperialist plots behind them (note Western imperialist, supposedly "Christian" nations, have more blood on their hands then anybody else).

http://www.examiner.com/foreign-policy-in-national/wikileaks-cable-reveals-us-funneling-millions-into-syria-opposition-group "Wikileaks cable reveals US funneling millions into Syria opposition group"

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24375 "U.S. secretly backed Syrian opposition groups

Cables released by WikiLeaks show"

http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/2011/05/seige-of-syria.html "The Siege of Syria

Perception management & US-funded unrest used to justify regime change." by Tony Cartalucci

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24591 "SYRIA: Who is Behind The Protest Movement? Fabricating a Pretext for a US-NATO 'Humanitarian Intervention' " by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24016 "Media Disinformation: The Protest Movement in Syria

Western Media Coverage of the Events in Daraa" by Michel Chossudovsky

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/29/world/fg-syria29 Syria has experienced these Western/Zionist colonialist/imperialist plots before this article is from back in late 2008 dealing with an "al-Qaeda" aka al-CIA-duh (meaning "al-Qaeda" is a CIA proxy) bombing in Damascus, Syria: again back in late 2008.

One last interesting link on the Amerikkkan CIA's control of their puppets "al-Qaeda" aka al-CIA-duh (their false flag tool). http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/25/guantanamo-files-al-qaida-assassin-worked-for-mi6 "Guantánamo Bay files: Al-Qaida assassin 'worked for MI6': Leaked Guantánamo papers link UK to Algerian militant"

Also to throw one last thing out there for you, I suggest you read about all the blood soaked history of Christians (and those claiming to follow Christianity) from the genocide of Native Americans, the Atlantic slave trade, all the way through to their current genocides against the occupied people of Iraq and Afghanistan. Just a few examples of the bloodshed medieval Christians carried out on each other (and if you want current times see the fighting in Northern Ireland ostensibly between Catholics and Protestants: but really just IRA fighters who were and some still are trying to free Ireland from colonialist British backed Protestant occupation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Troubles). The "Hundred Years' War" in Europe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_years_war and the Thirty Years War in Europe (1618-1648), one of the bloodiest wars in human history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years_War

I'd say we Shi'a Muslims and Sunni Muslims have "fought" far less than the Christian Catholics and Protestants in history! And recent things like Iraq are the results of imperialist Amerikkkan invasion and divide and rule neo-colonialism under the devil President Bush.

http://catastrophist.wordpress.com/2010/01/17/false-flag-sas-basra-incident-2005/ "SAS Provocateurs / Basra Incident 2005…"

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/sep2005/basr-s28.shtml "What was the British SAS doing in Basra?" By Chris Marsden 28 September 2005

The two British SAS special forces commandos arrested (with a car full of weapons: guns and explosives) in 2005 in Basra, Iraq because they were going around dressed up like "Arabs" shooting and causing problems in Basra! The British imperialist army that was occupying Iraq (back in 2005) later broke these blokes out of an Iraqi police jail and bald faced lied in Western mainstream media and claimed the official Iraqi police station was a "Mahdi Army" post and that it wasn't the official Iraqi security forces/police that were holding these two British SAS terrorist goons under arrest but it was allegedly the "Mahdi Army" holding them "hostage"! See false flag attack: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

ACF32C.jpg

bush_legacy.jpg

The former buddy of the Amerikkkan imperialist Saddam al-Baathi(la), who the imperialist Amerikkkans later turned on see April Glaspie and the Amerikkkan imperialist allowing the invasion of Kuwait (which is historically just a province of Iraq anyway!

http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/middle_east/28789

http://www.rense.com/general69/41.htm "How Bush 41 Tricked Saddam Into Invading Kuwait Gulf War 1 - The April Glaspie interview"

rumsfeld-saddam.jpg

Ottoman Iraq, with the Vilayet of Basra that included today's imperialist Amerikkkan puppet nation and monarchy of Kuwait: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basra_Province,_Ottoman_Empire

OttomanIraq.jpg

The evildoer Richard Cheney(la) with the current US puppet monarch/dictator of Kuwait (which is really in many ways just one large imperialist US military base in the Middle East) "Sheikh" Sabah al-Ahmed al-Jaber al-Sabah

Cheney_meets_with_Sheikh_Sabah_Al-Ahmed_Al-Jaber_Al_Sabah.jpg

Edited by Basra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So isn´t democracy a better idea than civil war?

Then you'll have the Alawite, Druze and Christians fearing the domination of the majority which will always get to make the laws. Lets place you on the spot. Would you as a Jew accept living in a democratic greater Syria with Israel / Palestine as a province in that greater state? There you would be living in a democratic state with a Muslim majority as a religious minority. What would your feelings be about that?

It was fear and mistrust of the majority religion that got the Muslim of India to struggle for Pakistan. And in Pakistan the majority voted for the Ahmadis to be declared non Muslims.

Edited by JimJam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JimJam does an excellent job of summing it up. And his point is a very fair one. Just look at Lebanon or Yugoslavia, or the Indo-Pak wars, or the Malay-Indonesian war or Timor's conflict or any of thousands of cases you could find in every time, age and religion. Muslims would be happy enough for a state called "Israel" if it were a Muslim majority. Which it would be soon if the Palestinian territories were annexed. That's why Israel never made them formally part of Israel. If they are just 'occupied territory' you don't have to grant the people in it any citizenship rights but can still do anything you want with them. They have gone to very great lengths to make sure Jews are the vast majority and the state is run by and for Jews. You can't with logical consistency support a state for the Jews and deny it to the Alawites/Druze/Shia/Palestinians. You can go old-fashioned and justify it with the right of conquest of course, which is fine with me, but don't then you don't get to complain if you get treated the same way if you loose at some point. He who lives by the sword dies by it, and a state founded on force alone can with perfect justice be destroyed the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So isn´t democracy a better idea than civil war?

Yes, but the question is whether Assad and the Baathist party itself is really the problem. Technically, Syria is currently democratic. There's a difference between democratic reform and democratic revolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you'll have the Alawite, Druze and Christians fearing the domination of the majority which will always get to make the laws. Lets place you on the spot. Would you as a Jew accept living in a democratic greater Syria with Israel / Palestine as a province in that greater state? There you would be living in a democratic state with a Muslim majority as a religious minority. What would your feelings be about that?

It was fear and mistrust of the majority religion that got the Muslim of India to struggle for Pakistan. And in Pakistan the majority voted for the Ahmadis to be declared non Muslims.

As I am not a Jew I cannot really answer your question. But OTOH if I were - why not? My country (Sweden) has a christian majority.The few Jews I know say this is no problem. But I suppose Muslims are not as tolerant as christians are.

I had not heard of Ahmadis before. So I had to google. Interesting! But why was it necessary to vote about whether Ahmadis are muslims or not? Isn´t that a religious mattter and not a political one- like most christians do not recognize Mormons as christians. But as far as I know, this has never been a political issue. ´Can we agree that religion and politics should be separated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I am not a Jew I cannot really answer your question. But OTOH if I were - why not? My country (Sweden) has a christian majority.The few Jews I know say this is no problem. But I suppose Muslims are not as tolerant as christians are.

I had not heard of Ahmadis before. So I had to google. Interesting! But why was it necessary to vote about whether Ahmadis are muslims or not? Isn´t that a religious mattter and not a political one- like most christians do not recognize Mormons as christians. But as far as I know, this has never been a political issue. ´Can we agree that religion and politics should be separated?

I don't think they ever can even in the most secular society. Though I think it is wrong for the Ahmadi to not be classified as Muslim in Pakistan, religion can never be truly separated from politics. There can be a difference between clergy and state officials, but state officials religious affiliations always plays some role in the determination of policies. If a government is not gonna monitor certain aspects of the citizen's morality and have a judgement on each particular brand of behavior as either right or wrong, or tolerable and intolerable, then there is no point in having a government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very interesting:

--From Reuters--

Thousands of protesters took to the streets after noon prayers on Friday in defiance of security forces determined to crush an 11-week a revolt against Assad's 11-year rule.

Security forces and snipers fired at tens of thousands of demonstrators gathered in the city of Hama, where 29 years ago President Hafez al-Assad, Bashar's father, crushed an armed Islamist revolt by killing up to 30,000 people and razing parts of the city to the ground.

Activists said at least 34 people were killed and scores wounded.

"The firing began from rooftops on the demonstrators. I saw scores of people falling in Assi square and the streets and alleyways branching out. Blood was everywhere," a witness who gave his name as Omar told Reuters from Hama.

"It looked to me as if hundreds of people have been injured but I was in a panic and wanted to find cover. Funerals for the martyrs have already started," he said.

In the southern city of Deraa, where protests first broke out 11 weeks ago, hundreds defied a military curfew and held protests, chanting "No dialogue with killers," two residents in the city told Reuters. The protest later broke up.

Syrian forces also opened fire on demonstrations in the eastern city of Deir al-Zor and in Damascus' Barzeh district.

"Tens of thousands turned up in Hama and Idlib in the biggest demonstrations since the uprising began. This is a natural reaction to the increased killings and lack of seriousness by the regime for any national reconciliation," said Rami Abdulrahman of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

One person was killed in Idlib, he said.

Activists and residents said thousands of people marched in the northwestern province of Idlib, Kurdish northeast, several Damascus suburbs, the cities of Homs and Hama and the towns of Madaya and Zabadani in the west.

"It is worth noting that Hama and Idlib, where the biggest demonstrations occured, used to be the stronghold of the Muslim Brotherhood," said one activist who declined to be named.

"This could be a message from the (Muslim) Brotherhood to the regime that: "now we are taking part in the revolution in full weight." The regime will not stop now," he added.

INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE

The U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon demanded an immediate end to the "violent repression" and human rights abuses by Syrian forces.

Rights groups say security forces have killed more than 1,000 civilians, provoking international outrage at Assad's ruthless handling of the demonstrators.

Syrian authorities blame the violence on armed groups, backed by Islamists and foreign powers, and say the groups have fired on civilians and security forces alike. Authorities have prevented most international media from operating in Syria, making it impossible to verify accounts of the violence.

Activists say there have been some instances of citizens resisting security forces by using personal weapons, and of security police shooting soldiers for refusing to fire at protesters.

The activist who declined to be named said that before the shooting started protesters burned the Baath Party office in Hama and said it was not clear how the shooting broke out.

Assad has responded to protests by sending tanks to crush demonstrations in certain flashpoints and by making some reformist gestures, such as issuing a general amnesty to political prisoners and launching a national dialogue.

But protesters and opposition figures have dismissed these measures. The cities and towns of Deraa, Tel Kelakh, Banias and Rastan have undergone intense crackdowns by the military.

Western powers have escalated their condemnation of Assad as the unrest spreads and the death toll rises.

The United States, the European Union and Australia have imposed sanctions on Syria, but perhaps because of reluctance to get entangled in another confrontation such as Libya, and wary of provoking more instability in a region still in the midst of an "Arab Spring," their reactions have been less vehement.

But outrage has grown over the death of a 13-year-old boy, Hamza al-Khatib, whom activists say was tortured before his body was given back to his family. The authorities deny he was tortured.

Khatib has emerged as a symbol for protesters and in Dael, a town near Deraa, about 5,000 protesters raised pictures of him as they called for freedom and the downfall of the regime.

Opposition figures meeting in Turkey called on Assad to resign immediately and hand power to the vice president until a council was formed to introduce democracy to the country.

Source LINK

--From Official Syrian News--

HOMS, (SANA) – Covered with the Syrian flag and held on the hands, bodies of 4 martyrs were escorted to their final resting place in solemn processions from the Military Hospital in Homs.

The martyrs were killed at the hands of armed terrorist groups in al-Rastan on Wednesday.

The martyrs are:

- Captain Alaa Ahmed al-Issa from Lattakia.

- Conscript Sultan Khalaf Abu al-Hassan from Deir Ezzor.

- Conscript Mahmoud Abu Rabei from Aleppo.

- Conscript Homam Abdel Kareem from Hasaka.

The families of the martyrs expressed pride in the martyrdom of their sons who were ready to sacrifice themselves to protect their homeland.

One of the injured members, Conscript Ali Hussein al-Freeh from Deir Ezzor province, said "I was wounded by shrapnel in different parts of my body as I was targeted by a sniper who shot me in the thigh while I was trying to help my fellow martyr Sultan Khalaf Abu al-Hassan."

The terrorist groups centered at al-Rastan Bridge, laying landmines and barriers, in addition to setting up ambushes for army members, he added.

The injured conscript Ahmad Hassah Hussein said "A sniper shot me in the leg while I was trying to help martyrs Alaa al-Issa and Mahmoud Abu Rabei."

Conscript Imad Salti Zarzar said he was shot by a sniper while he was performing his duty in preserving security at al-Baiada neighborhood in Homs.

Head of General Surgery Department Dr. Nabeeh Salama and Dr. Mohsen Ibrahim said the injuries were mainly in the upper and lower limbs, caused by gunshot and unusual arms. They varied between external injuries, bone injuries, fractures and nerve injuries.

Source LINK

There's some convergence in the two accounts here. About time if you ask me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I am not a Jew I cannot really answer your question. But OTOH if I were - why not? My country (Sweden) has a christian majority.The few Jews I know say this is no problem. But I suppose Muslims are not as tolerant as christians are.

I had not heard of Ahmadis before. So I had to google. Interesting! But why was it necessary to vote about whether Ahmadis are muslims or not? Isn´t that a religious mattter and not a political one- like most christians do not recognize Mormons as christians. But as far as I know, this has never been a political issue. ´Can we agree that religion and politics should be separated?

The Jews of Israel do not think so. They have gone to very great lengths to make sure Israel remains a Jewish majority state. They forbade Palestian refugees from coming back to the their homes, which is against international custom though not any laws I know of. And they have brought in all the Jews they could while keeping out other immigrants. Israel is, avowedly and by very conscious, active design Jewish. That's the whole reason it has caused so much fighting. It was founded by Jews, for Jews at the expense of natives. The analogy I use is that it would be very like if the US native americans took over the Central Valley in California and declared it a native-only state, not allowing any Americans in or compensating them for property. There is no way Americans would ever recognize that. It isn't just fighting because Muslims hate Jews and try to kill them on sight for no reason. I tend to view Israel as being founded by right of conquest, and while I don't necessarily have a problem with that, a lot of states are, I don't give them the moral high ground or really care if somebody else takes them out the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Jews of Israel do not think so. They have gone to very great lengths to make sure Israel remains a Jewish majority state. They forbade Palestian refugees from coming back to the their homes, which is against international custom though not any laws I know of. And they have brought in all the Jews they could while keeping out other immigrants. Israel is, avowedly and by very conscious, active design Jewish. That's the whole reason it has caused so much fighting. It was founded by Jews, for Jews at the expense of natives. The analogy I use is that it would be very like if the US native americans took over the Central Valley in California and declared it a native-only state, not allowing any Americans in or compensating them for property. There is no way Americans would ever recognize that. It isn't just fighting because Muslims hate Jews and try to kill them on sight for no reason. I tend to view Israel as being founded by right of conquest, and while I don't necessarily have a problem with that, a lot of states are, I don't give them the moral high ground or really care if somebody else takes them out the same way.

The establishing of Israel as a state is, as I see it, one of many unfortunate results of WW II. Others are e.g. ethnic cleansing in Kaliningrad, Karelia etc. German or finnish refugees were replaced by russians. It makes me very upset when I think of it. But OTOH I believe it is now too late to do anything about it. It happened a long time ago. And the refugees who can still remember what happened must be at least 70 years old. Another 20 years and there will be no refugees alive.

The israeli authorities have been very chauvinistic to say the least. But there has always existed and still exists a more openminded opposition. I think they should be given a chance. But hostile muslim countries and organisations like Hamas and Hizbollah have not made it easy for them. Their motto seems to be "the only good Jew is a dead one". No wonder most Jews cannot see the possibility of peace with Muslims!

I believe it is too late to do very much about the Palestinian refugees. But the Israeli settlements most be stopped now, before it is too late. Obama has said Israel has to accept the borders before 1967. I understand this is also the position of Abbas. And I believe most Israelis would also accept that, if they did not have to fear aggression from surrounding states. This would also mean that Israel returned Golan to Syria and the Shaaba farms to whichever country they belong. And of course it would help the relations between Jews and Arabs if the dictators in surrounding states were toppled so that Israel could have democratic neighbours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I am not a Jew I cannot really answer your question. But OTOH if I were - why not? My country (Sweden) has a christian majority.The few Jews I know say this is no problem. But I suppose Muslims are not as tolerant as christians are.

I had not heard of Ahmadis before. So I had to google. Interesting! But why was it necessary to vote about whether Ahmadis are muslims or not? Isn´t that a religious mattter and not a political one- like most christians do not recognize Mormons as christians. But as far as I know, this has never been a political issue. ´Can we agree that religion and politics should be separated?

You ask your Jewish acquaintances if the solution of merging Israel along with Lebanon into a democratic Greater Syra is acceptable to them. They dont have problem living anywhere right now since they sleep easy knowing they have their own state. But it was secular Jews living in secular european democracies that started the Zionist movement in the first place, decades before the second world war happened. The religious conservatives of the Jews initially opposed the Zionist, they only jumped on the bandwagon after Israel became a reality.

It is not exclusively a religious problem, its a people problem. Like I said, there is a long history of bad blood between people here. Here in asia people remember well the oppressor they have suffered but remember very little the oppression they have caused, they dont trust their neighboring communities often for good reason. Even in a secular democracy this wont go away.

When you have long histories of bad blood the vendetta bubbles under the surface even in very secular countries like india, where provinces run by Hindu nationalists have mobs killing minorities while the provincial government looks the other way. And in very rich "god-less" countries like China where the Uighur, Mongols and Tibetans seethe under the rule of the Han majority.

The west had this problem until the end of the last century, the largest wars in history were fought in Europe along with the long drawn out cold war. So much blood was shed in the west in the name of ancient hatred that in the end people saw their final destruction and stepped away from the brink.

And I believe most Israelis would also accept that, if they did not have to fear aggression from surrounding states.

Israelis are part of the region now, they will never stop fearing their neighbors, no matter how much concessions they are given, paranoia will always rule their mind. They will always look at the map and feel threatened.

Edited by JimJam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's funny is that Assad has actually met with reformists and organized talks to discuss reforms with Syria's various political parties. This is confirmed. Yet we still have reports of clashes. So, one needs to ask: is Assad lying and supporting a bloody crackdown on innocent civilians? I honestly have trouble seeing that in the face of clear evidence to the contrary.

To be honest, I am extremely anti-Ba'ath and have throughout my life fought against the Ba'ath ideology and whatever pseudo-secularism and atheism it has stood for. The Ba'athist ideology is extremey antagonistic to the Shariah. But at this moment, I wouldn't want Assad to step down since this would weaken Hezbollah. I think Assad should lif the ban on Niqaab and implement some real islamic laws. I think majoroty of the protesters are just pure, pious Muslims who happen to be Sunnis. All they want is greater respect shown to Islam by the avowedly secular and westernised Government of Syria and the Alawi military elite. I think if Assad shows greater respect for the Shariah these protests will automatically die down.

Edited by Yousuf Ahmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You ask your Jewish acquaintances if the solution of merging Israel along with Lebanon into a democratic Greater Syra is acceptable to them.

I like the idea. I can imagine there are secular Jews who might like it too. But it is extremely hypothetic.

Before asking Jews I think we should ask the arabs and other muslims if they would accept the idea. Unfortunately I am afraid most of them would not accept it. Even in this forum there are lots of backward forumites who dislike democracy and who suggests sharia laws forcing women to wear niqab etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but the question is whether Assad and the Baathist party itself is really the problem. Technically, Syria is currently democratic. There's a difference between democratic reform and democratic revolution.

In what sense?

To be honest, I am extremely anti-Ba'ath and have throughout my life fought against the Ba'ath ideology and whatever pseudo-secularism and atheism it has stood for. The Ba'athist ideology is extremey antagonistic to the Shariah. But at this moment, I wouldn't want Assad to step down since this would weaken Hezbollah. I think Assad should lif the ban on Niqaab and implement some real islamic laws. I think majoroty of the protesters are just pure, pious Muslims who happen to be Sunnis. All they want is greater respect shown to Islam by the avowedly secular and westernised Government of Syria and the Alawi military elite. I think if Assad shows greater respect for the Shariah these protests will automatically die down.

Maybe if Assad had done that at the very start, or when Arab spring was kicking off in other countries, it might of stopped the protests starting off in Syria. But his token gesture of closing down one casino was laughable. At this point now, too many protesters have been murdered by security forces, and too many hollow words like 'Emergency laws' lifted, when security forces actions plainly show they have not.

Doubt the protesters are now not going to accept anything less than Ba'ath party being thrown out of power. Protest has nothing to do with Israel, or his or Ba'ath attitude to Israel or Lebanon, its to do with how its treats its own people. That is most important to people, foreign policy does not come before this.

Edited by Irishman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In what sense?

Maybe if Assad had done that at the very start, or when Arab spring was kicking off in other countries, it might of stopped the protests starting off in Syria. But his token gesture of closing down one casino was laughable. At this point now, too many protesters have been murdered by security forces, and too many hollow words like 'Emergency laws' lifted, when security forces actions plainly show they have not.

Doubt the protesters are now not going to accept anything less than Ba'ath party being thrown out of power. Protest has nothing to do with Israel, or his or Ba'ath attitude to Israel or Lebanon, its to do with how its treats its own people. That is most important to people, foreign policy does not come before this.

The protest has everything to do with Islam, and the disrespectful way in which the Ba'ath Party in general and Mr. Assad in particular treats Islam and the Shariah. If Monsieur Assad had shown greater respect for Islam and the Shariah and had respected the sentiments of the Sunni majority, this protest would not have occurred and the people would have rallied behind him. To hell with democracy, Islam and Shariah come first in our priorities, all others, such as Israel, Military, Foreign Affairs, Democracy are just opium of the masses. The Syrian people are very devout, pure and pious Muslims who hate what a Francophile secularist like Monsieur Assad stands for, his anti-Israel stance notwithstanding..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All you are asking for Yusuf is cosmetic changes. Is religion just cosmetic rituals to you? Thats all most Islamists seem to care about. If the people are pure, devout and practicing Muslims then good. No need for the government to do anything. The Syrian Government also has to protect the interest of the Alawites, Druze and Christians, thats a quarter of the country's people. What do you want the government to do. Impose the hijab? Make Islamic education compulsory? Put the word 'Islamic' before the name of the country? These kinds of things are just eyewash. They'll only make the non-Sunnis resentful while giving no real benefit to Sunnis either. You're better off not being educated about religion in government schools. A private education in religion is more free of state interference and is more efficient.The niqab too is not required in the Quran or even the conventional Sunni fiqh, the Syrian government was within in it's right to ban it and it should have stayed banned.

Its not the job of the state to make people good Muslims. All it can do is make sure there is no impediment for people to practice their religion. The rest is upto the people themselves. The government cant ration out tickets to heaven. Thats is something the individual must earn on his own.

Imam Jafar Sadiq (as) has said;

"‘Islam is to protect life, return the trust and make marriages lawful. Reward, however, comes from belief.’”

Edited by JimJam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All you are asking for Yusuf is cosmetic changes. Is religion just cosmetic rituals to you? Thats all most Islamists seem to care about. If the people are pure, devout and practicing Muslims then good. No need for the government to do anything. The Syrian Government also has to protect the interest of the Alawites, Druze and Christians, thats a quarter of the country's people. What do you want the government to do. Impose the hijab? Make Islamic education compulsory? Put the word 'Islamic' before the name of the country? These kinds of things are just eyewash. They'll only make the non-Sunnis resentful while giving no real benefit to Sunnis either. You're better off not being educated about religion in government schools. A private education in religion is more free of state interference and is more efficient.The niqab too is not required in the Quran or even the conventional Sunni fiqh, the Syrian government was within in it's right to ban it and it should have stayed banned.

Its not the job of the state to make people good Muslims. All it can do is make sure there is no impediment for people to practice their religion. The rest is upto the people themselves. The government cant ration out tickets to heaven. Thats is something the individual must earn on his own.

You are contradicting yourself dear man. You have yourself said that imposing Shariah values would alienate the Alawis, Druzes and Christians, yet you support the Syrian Government's banning of the Niqab. Don't you see it interferes with the religious beliefs of the majority of Sunni Arabs ? And as far as Niqab is required in Sunni fiqh or not, Islam is not based on man-made Sunni fiqh but God-given Qur'an and Sunnah. And do not pretend that the Syrian Government protects all religions equally. Right now all the power is in the hands of the Alawi-Druze military elite and the Christian business elite. The Sunnis of Syria are in general less educated and less privileged than the 25% non-Sunni minority..

Edited by Yousuf Ahmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are contradicting yourself dear man. You have yourself said that imposing Shariah values would alienate the Alawis, Druzes and Christians, yet you support the Syrian Government's banning of the Niqab. Don't you see it interferes with the religious beliefs of the majoroty of Sunni Arabs ? And as far as Niqab is required in Sunni fiqh or not, Islam is not based on man-made Sunni fiqh but God-given Qur'an and Sunnah.

I live in a Sunni majority state and the majority of Sunni women do not wear the Niqab. And Pakistan is a great deal more conservative then Syria. Show me where in the Quran there is a verse telling women to wear the Niqab.

The reason the minorities of Syria work with each other to keep the majority out of power is because they remember all those centuries under Sunni rule in which they were second class citizens. The Sunnis have created their own Frankenstein monsters. The Sunnis need to express tolerance for others.

Edited by JimJam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Syrian City Turns Out to Mourn Dead

By LIAM STACK

Published: June 4, 2011

CAIRO — Thousands of people took to the streets of the Syrian city of Hama on Saturday to mourn the deaths of at least 64 protesters gunned down by security forces the day before, part of a violent government crackdown on a three-month-old popular uprising against the rule of President

Bashar al-Assad.

Funeral processions drew as many as 100,000 mourners, said the activist Razan Zeitouneh, following what has become a pattern of protest, crackdown, mourning and protest that has been repeated hundreds of times across the Middle East since a revolutionary season dawned six months ago in Tunisia, reshaping the region’s political order.

Clouds of tear gas filled the streets of Hama on Friday as gunshots were heard, sending throngs of protesters scrambling for cover. A few stood their ground and hurled stones at attacking security forces, according to YouTube videos provided by the Local Coordinating Committees in Syria, an activist group documenting the protest movement and the government crackdown.

“God is great!” protesters shouted as they pulled one man, who had been shot in the head, into a blood-soaked alley, the constant rattle of gunfire sounding behind them.

Activists called the deaths a new “Hama massacre,” a term intended to evoke memories of the siege of the city in 1982, when President Hafez al-Assad, the current president’s father, responded to a popular uprising there with a bombardment that leveled much of the town and killed at least 10,000 people.

There have been few reports of large demonstrations in Hama since the revolt began in mid-March, suggesting that its residents were cautious about again risking the wrath of the government, which has been led with an iron fist by the Assad family for four decades. Activists say that more than 1,000 people have been killed in the government’s crackdown, and that the brutality appears to increase week by week as government security forces move from city to city.

“It is Hama’s turn,” Ms. Zeitouneh said. “Every week they choose a city to take revenge on.”

The week before, she said, it was Al Rastan, a suburb of the central city of Homs that security forces shelled as part of a weeklong siege of a string of central and southern towns. At least 96 people were killed in those actions, she said, including at least seven children ages 4 to 13. Activists said that at least 70 of those deaths occurred in Al Rastan, where security forces fired on a school bus, killing Hajar al-Khateeb, age 10. The town is the home of both the country’s long-serving former defense minister, Mostafa Tlas, and a large number of army officers.

Syria’s Internet sprang back to life on Saturday morning, after a daylong blackout that disabled two-thirds of the country’s Web connections, severing most Syrians’ links with one another and the outside world. The blackout on Friday, the traditional protest day, seemed designed to strangle the flow of YouTube videos and Twitter and Facebook posts that has fed the revolt. Phone service, water and electricity have also been severely disrupted in many parts of the country, activists said.

The return of Internet service allowed activists to compare notes and tally the death toll from protests the previous day, which organizers on Facebook dedicated to the memory of the children killed in the government crackdown. The most prominent was Hamza Ali al-Khateeb, 13, who became a symbol of the revolt after a YouTube video was posted of his body, which had been mutilated while in the custody of security forces after his arrest on April 29.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in a Sunni majority state and the majority of Sunni women do not wear the Niqab. And Pakistan is a great deal more conservative then Syria. Show me where in the Quran there is a verse telling women to wear the Niqab.

The reason the minorities of Syria work with each other to keep the majority out of power is because they remember all those centuries under Sunni rule in which they were second class citizens. The Sunnis have created their own Frankenstein monsters. The Sunnis need to express tolerance for others.

Well Pakistan is a seriously misguided country where the majority of Muslims are unaware of Islamic values and go by the teachngs of ignorant Mullahs, Pirs and Buzurgs. They do not read the Qur'an in their native language hence their ignorance. If Pakistani Sunni women decide not to wear Niqaab its their choice, but if Arab Sunni women want to wear it its their choice as well, and the goddamn Government must respect it. Pakistan is more conservative than any Arab country, certainly, but it is not more Islamic. Its conservatism is based on feudal and tribal values. There is no verse in Qur'an telling women to wear Niqaab...but there are plenty of accounts in Hadiths like Bukhari, Muslim and Tirmidhi, where the Ummahatul Mu'mineen (ra) are described as covering themselves fully in Niqaab. Niqaab is a very serious matter for orthodox Sunnis and they expect this to be respected at least in a country where they are the majority. the minority Alawis, Druze and Christians might be ultra-secular but this doesn't give them the right to impose their value system on the Sunni Arabs who revere their Sunnah (mainly composd of the Siha sitta). The Sunnis are not reacting with violence rather it is the Military, which is dominated by the Alawis, which is slaughtering people like crazy. And Syria was a flourishing State under the Sunni rulers like Hadhrat Umar (ra) and Khalid bin Waleed (ra) in which all minorities including Jews and Christains had full right as Zimmis and Ahl-ul-Kitab. And today the very people who had built Syria are oppressed and deprived of their basic religious rights. So don't blame them if they are praying for another Khalid ibn Waleed (ra) .

Edited by Yousuf Ahmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Pakistan is a seriously misguided country where the majoroty of people are unaware of Islamic values and go by the teachngs of ignorant Mullahs, Pirs and Buzurgs. They do not read the Qur'an in their native language hence their ignorance. If Pakistani Sunni women decide not to wear Niqaab its their choice, but if Arab Sunni women want to wear it its their choice as well, and the goddamn Givern,ent must respect it. Pakistan is more conservative than any Arab country, certainly, but it is not more Islamic. Its conservatism is based on feudal and tribal values. There is no verse in Qur'an telling women to wear Niqaab...but there are plenty of accounts in Hadiths of Sunnis like Bukhari, Muslim and Tirmidhi, where the Ummahatul Mu'mineen (ra) are described as covering themselves fully in niqaab. Niqaab is a very serious matter for orthodox Sunnis and they expect this to be respected at least in a country where they are the majority. the minoroty Alawis, Druze and Cjristians might be ultra-secular but this doesn't give them the right to impose their value system on the Sunni Arabs who revere their Sunnah (mainly composd of the Siha sitta). And Syria was a flourishing State under the Sunni rulers like Hadhrat Umar (ra) and Khalid bin Waleed (ra) in which all minorities including Jews and Christains had full right as Zimmis and Ahl-ul-Kitab.

Pakistan Sunnis are generally all right, they're more knowledgeable than you seem to think they are. The people that cause all the violence in this country are these Arab funded deobandis and wahabis. The people can read translations of the Quran which are available everywhere. I dont see why you make a big deal about reading the Quran in it's native language. I was once arguing with my brother about whether Arabic should be taught to kids in schools. I said it was necessary since people are confused about what is and is not Islam He said that the Arabs themselves despite their understanding the Quranic language still suffered from the same confusions,despite reading the Quran in Arabic they still did not become a better nation

Just look around the region yusuf. Do the majority of Sunni women in the Arab world, even in Syria wear the niqab? The Niqab is a tribal arab tradition. It is optional, the Quran does not support it. It was only compulsory on the Ummul Momineen just like they were not allowed to remarry, unlike common women.

The minorities in the Muslim world are less concerned with what Sunnis claim was the ideal past and more concerned with what life was like under the Mamlukes and the Ottomans. In Mameluke times Ibn Taymiyya got the Alawites and Druze massacred.

Edited by JimJam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reports from Syria are all the same. No variation or in depth reports of what happened, just death tolls and saying it's Assad's fault. Why is American media not reporting on these incidents.

IDLEB, (SANA) – Armed criminal groups on Friday night attacked police stations and popular army centers in Jesr al-Shoghour region in the northern province of Idleb and opened fire on them, killing a military member and injuring a policeman. An armed member was killed in the attack.

Ministry of Interior said in a statement that groups of armed criminal members attacked the highway service center in al-Z'einiyeh in Jesr al-Shoghour and exchanged fire with the center's members, pointing out to the injury of Policeman Yousef Qasoum during the attack.

The statement added that another criminal group attacked Bdama and al-Yousfiyeh police stations, took hold of the weapons and seized a policeman and his family in al-Yousfiyeh area.

Another armed group attacked a popular army center in al-Huseinyeh village in Jesr al-Shogour. A military member was martyred and an armed man was killed in an exchange of fire between both sides.

Pursuit operations are still underway to arrest and prosecute the armed members.

Source Link

DAMASUS, (SANA)-Cultural figures and academics take an optimistic view of setting up a committee for national dialogue among the Syrian people of all stripes, considering it an advanced step forward to forge visions for dealing with issues and topics as to ensure equal rights and duties for all.

Walid Ikhlassi, Member of the Committee, says that President Bashar al-Assad has exceeded expectations in the proposals he made during his meeting with the Committee's members, adding that the President ''showed that he could sense the problems of society which are on the table to be discussed by the Committee before being referred to final discussion.''

Ikhlassi saw that national dialogue is based on the idea that citizens work in sync to materialize joint visions, which necessitates that everyone shows awareness and rationality.

Ikhlassi said that the dialogue's focal point is the Elections' Law as a key point which is directly linked to laws and reforms.

Member of the People's Assembly Mohammad Habash said the committee was formed at the right time after the general amnesty decree was issued, adding the Committee has a major responsibility and should leave the door open for an open national dialogue.

General Coordinator of the Syrian Network for Human Rights Ahmad Khazem said forming the committee would help tackle national issues through laying out programs and mechanisms to get past the current stage.

He pointed out that laying the bases for a national dialogue should take into consideration political, social and religious variety and focus on reform programs proposed by President al-Assad and the citizens' needs.

Vice-Dean of the Journalism Faculty Nahla Issa described forming the committee as a highly significant step, which proves the seriousness of launching endurable changes and reforms.

Darraji: National Dialogue, Opportunity to Share Views and Reach Stronger Syria

The national dialogue committee member, Ibrahim Darraji, said "we have to benefit from this historical opportunity to reach a stronger Syria," adding that the committee is open to share the Syrian people's views serving national interests.

Interviewed by the Syrian TV on Thursday, Darraji said that a few months separate us from the elections, calling on the Syrian people to have their word and participate in making Syria's future.

"We face a great challenge which requires us to consult, think and listen to the Syrian masses with the aim of meeting the Syrian people's aspirations," he added.

Source Link

WHERE IS THIS VIDEO ON AMERICAN NEWS AND AL-JAZEERA? How come nobody is investigating this stuff? They make it sound like there's no proof to the claim of armed groups.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IDRNSM5xJ4

The news coverage on this situation in Syria is not impartial but has a certain goal in mind. Sure, some of the protesters may be peaceful and calling for reform, but others are violent and getting innocent people caught in the cross fire or targeting them directly. Stop the lies.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...