It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
The attack on the Syrian city of Tremseh, widely condemned by the West as civilian murder, actually targeted rebels and army defectors, says a UN investigation. The findings contradict opposition claims of civilian killings by Assad forces.
Originally posted by ShadowBase
Tremseh killings targeted rebels – UN monitors
www.rt.com
The attack on the Syrian city of Tremseh, widely condemned by the West as civilian murder, actually targeted rebels and army defectors, says a UN investigation.
Originally posted by stanguilles7
Originally posted by ShadowBase
Tremseh killings targeted rebels – UN monitors
www.rt.com
The attack on the Syrian city of Tremseh, widely condemned by the West as civilian murder, actually targeted rebels and army defectors, says a UN investigation.
Something RT 'news' left out in that paragraph from the UN report was the word 'activists'.
“the attack on Tremseh appeared targeted at specific groups and houses, mainly of army defectors and activists.”
Now, before soemone says I'm defending 'the rebels', I'm not. I'm just pointing out that 'activists' means anyone opposed to Assad. So, they killed people who were opposed to Assad. The UN Report also mentions many of the people killed were villagers defending their town. Not just members of the western-backed "FSA".
Isn't that sort of like how the US labels anyone they kill with drone strike a 'combatant' or 'insurgent' or whatever?
'We killed you, in the process of defending yourself against our attacks, so you are an enemy combatant'.
see what i mean?
The UN recently met in Geneva to divvy up control of Syria over the next few years. They have basically told Russia (and China to a lesser degree) what the plan is, and that they can have till the end of the US elections to try and get Assad to step down 'peacefully' and maintain just the facade of power. A long, drawn out civil war will likely last for years in Syria. US and Russia are on the same side on this one.edit on 15-7-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by TinfoilTP
No, it means Assad forces killed anyone they wished and labeled them activists. The town was targeted because they thought "activists" were there. Activists are anyone not killing for Assad to stay in power.
This UN report confirms all previous reports and findings, Assad forces are butchering the population.
Originally posted by stanguilles7
Originally posted by TinfoilTP
No, it means Assad forces killed anyone they wished and labeled them activists. The town was targeted because they thought "activists" were there. Activists are anyone not killing for Assad to stay in power.
This UN report confirms all previous reports and findings, Assad forces are butchering the population.
No, now you're going to the other extreme and just promoting proWest propaganda. That's not what the UN report states at all. It explicitly points out that while SOME civilians were killed, the vast majority were members of armed opposition groups in a civil war.
Of course, that's not to say I put much stock in the UN report, which was specifically tailored to cater to Russian interests in the UN plan to divvy up Syria over the next few years between key players in the east and west.
But you should at least get what they say straight.
There is a tendency i've observed on ATS to want to believe one 'side' or another in conflicts like this. The reality is all 'sides' (in this case, basically the US and Russia) are working together for a mutually understood goal, and all posturing is just for the value of the spectacle.edit on 15-7-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ShadowBase
reply to post by TinfoilTP
What are you talking about? You are going to fast towards a conclusion based on nothing but speculation. Either that or there is something I've missed. Why don't you add the information which made you come to that conclusion to support your claim and for the sake of a healthy discussion.
Regarding RT being biased, they all are to some extent. That's why we're not only using American, Russian, Middle-Eastern or any other media source exclusively. Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought questioning and being thorough was the main point of this site.
Originally posted by ShadowBase
reply to post by TinfoilTP
Have you noticed that RT are not the only ones sharing that news? I've even included 2 other sources for diversity and quality of material. I don't see how a hoax stamp is justified.
Originally posted by ShadowBase
reply to post by TinfoilTP
Have you noticed that RT are not the only ones sharing that news? I've even included 2 other sources for diversity and quality of material. I don't see how a hoax stamp is justified.
Sharing flawed news does not fix the flaws.
Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by TinfoilTP
Sharing flawed news does not fix the flaws.
You mean like flawed news on CNN,BBC,CBC and all other on the western news outlets aren't they flawed?