Assad historical speech (06/01/2013) The TRUTH speaks

reply to post by DarknStormy


Your view is similar to the Russian view, they too say are suspicious that Iran will be next.

But

Do you accept that the Assad as a Alawite does not represent the majority of the Syrian people and that this is significant in Syrian politics and as such he does not have a mandate to continue as head of the Syrian state.

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
reply to post by DarknStormy

 

Your view is similar to the Russian view, the too say are suspicious that Iran will be next.

Do you accept that the Assad as a Alawite does not represent the majority of the Syrian people and that this is significant in Syrian politics and as such he does not have a mandate to continue as head of the Syrian state.

Let me ask you a question.

The UN has sanctioned Syria, Iran, North Korea knowing that the sanctions will not cripple the dictatorships/governments. Tell me why they starve people or the citizens of countries who do not comply with the international community? With that said, have you ever thought that maybe those sanctions have started the protests in those countries and not the governments? To me, that is a human rights violation.. Should we send Extremists to every country who voted for sanctions against the likes of Syria, Iran and North Korea? Punishing civilians for the actions of their governments doesn't seem to be fixing problems at the moment.

As for your question, It doesn't matter. Assad will become more popular or he will fall with the help of the West. Good luck getting in their though

reply to post by DarknStormy


Fair enough I have asked you a few questions so I suppose it is my turn.

As far as sanctions go, in general the sanctions are the cause of starvation, such as in DPRK there are other socio-economic factors, if DPRK spent less on a nuclear weapons program for example they might have more for food.

I do not think that the sanctions imposed on Syria, most if not all sanctions against Syria came after the events of 2011. If this was about sanctions then we would be looking at American flags burning but we’re not we’re seeing pictures of Assad.

So let me ask you again

Do you accept that the Assad as a Alawite does not represent the majority of the Syrian people and that this is significant in Syrian politics and as such he does not have a mandate to continue as head of the Syrian state.

reply to post by DarknStormy


Lets say you're a secularist - as Assad is, while I'm a religious person, as the majority of Sunni are. Do our interests converge? If they don't, whose interests are advanced - Assads or the Sunni majority? Answer: Assads.

Demographics is just another way of saying "interests". If we want to narrow the microscope, we can look at the religious differences between Sunnis and Shi'ites. Is this an issue? Again, its one of interests. Sunnis and Shi'ite Muslims have different beliefs and different interpretations of Islamic law.. This had led to very deep riffs in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Lebanon, Bahrain and especially Iraq.

Here are the list of sources;

Sectarian violence in Pakistan
Shia Islami in Saudi Arabia
Sectarian violence in Iraq
Sectarian violence in Lebanon
Shia-Sunni relations

Just recently, Saudi Arabia and other gulf states sent a few thousand troops to Bahrain to help prop up the minority Sunni leader Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa against Shia protests, who are the majority there. Do you see? Wherever you look in the Muslim world, religious issues are primary. Wherever Sunni and Shia exist, there are a conflict of interests between them. Why else do you think Saudi Arabia and Iran are such bitter enemies? Why Saudi Arabia would even let Israel use its airspace to attack a co-religionist like Iran? It's because the Saudis know and realize that Iran is competing for political control in the Arab world, in the interest of Shia Islamism. Iran has Syria, and via Syria, Lebanon. In order to challenge this Shia bloc, Sunnis need to use their demographic advantage in Syria to take power from the Shia aligned Al Assad government.

Again, there's Iraq, another arena of Shia-Sunni conflict. The majority of Iraqis are Shia. And Iran is co-opting Shia groups in order to widen their ray of influence there. For example: Saddam Hussein was a Sunni leader whose military and cabinet positions were filled up mostly by people from his hometown of Tikrit. Sunnis are the minority in Iraq - just 35%, while Shia are the majority - 65% source. Throughout his tenure as president, Saddam oppressed the Shia majority, as well as the recalcitrant Kurds in the North.

In Lebanon, sectarian issues are so rife and so entrehcned in the fabric of political institutions, that the positions of president, prime minister, and speaker of the house, are allotted by sect: a Shia president, a maronite (christian) prime minister, and a Sunni speaker of the house.

reply to post by dontreally


Hey, some Syrians want to say hi







But I guess this is just video trickery or something and the people in these gatherings have since renounced their support for Bashar Al Assad? You can't argue with 11 Million protesters nationwide waving Syrians flags and holding pictures of Assad. BTW, this was the real Syrian revolution.

Jeez, yall still at it?
Listen, its all irrelevant, Assads only ally Vlad Putin has even stated that Assads days are numbered. Without help, he will fall and he better have a good escape plan worked out, not the same one Gadaffi used either.

How about the Houla massacre? It would seem a bit stupid Assad killing his own followers.

Originally posted by Juggernog
Jeez, yall still at it?
Listen, its all irrelevant, Assads only ally Vlad Putin has even stated that Assads days are numbered. Without help, he will fall and he better have a good escape plan worked out, not the same one Gadaffi used either.

It depends what side you wish to choose.

NEW DELHI– The Indo-Arab Solidarity Council voiced its support for Syria's leadership and people in their battle against terrorism, lauding the honorable stances of Russia and China and their efforts to prevent interference in Syria's internal affairs.

This came during a special meeting of the Council held in the Indian capital New Delhi on Saturday, attended by representatives of Indian political parties, international organizations, law organizations and academics, in addition to Syria's ambassador in India Riyad Abbas as a guest of honor.

Now that was only 3 months ago. They may not be as isolated as we think.

reply to post by DarknStormy


Thank you for demonstrating such textbook cognitive dissonance.

Here's a question: why do you trust the STATE RUN Syrian media?

This should really go without saying. Those crowds are big. But can you count them? A crowd of 10,000 people could be mammothly exaggerated as "millions". This isn't new. Plenty of governments have done it before. Saul Alinsky advocates just this type of stretching the truth whenever the situation allows you to: as politics goes, PERCEPTION is what matters, not truth.

But again, you would rather dispute an indisputable fact like demographics than peel apart the cunning trickery of the falling Syrian regime.

Every time something happens, they'll have a ready-made plausible explanation that takes into account popular political ideas; for example: Qaddafi made the faux pas of saying he would destroy his opposition. This bellicose tone towards protests within his country justified western condemnation. Assad, by contrast, was far more crafty; instead of legitimizing his opposition by saying he would destroy them, he's claimed that the popular uprisings in the country were actually terrorists. This fed right into the popular narrative of the "war on terrorism". Assad made clever use of the idea. However, the claim clashes with the demographic facts. As much as he would like the world to believe otherwise, there is simply no basis for believing Assad's claims so long as, 1) he never holds free elections and 2) he represents the interests of a minority of Syrians, and not the vastly larger 75% Sunni majority.

It also should go without saying that free elections in Syria would be as free as they were in Iran i.e. they would be rigged to reelect the ruling power.

reply to post by dontreally

SYDNEY, (SANA) – More than 7000 Syrian, Arab and Australian people participated in the mass rally organized by “Australians for Syria” group in cooperation with other youth groups and figures from the Syrian and Arab communities in Australia.

Syria’s Honorary Consul to Sydney, Maher Dabbagh, said that the participants wanted to stress to the whole world that Syria is strong in the face of the most severe attack launched by the West and the oil monarchies.

The gathering crowds reiterated solidarity with Syria and their standing by its leadership, people and army, expressing thanks to the friendly countries over their stances towards Syria.

Its not just Syrians, people around the world are showing their support for Assad and his government. Now being from Australia and this coming from a minority of supporters (like the protesters in Syria), I would expect this to be major news..

This report came from SANA, can it be confirmed? Yes it can.. Syrians telling the world how they feel about whats happening in their country. And how they feel about what the West has caused in Syria.



Do the demographics affect these people? Or are they united under the one flag regardless of what ethnic background they originate from? How can people who have apparently left/fled Syria still back what we call an oppressive regime?

Originally posted by dontreally

Look at the demographics. 75% are Sunni. Alawi make up a mere 12%.

How is it that you find it reasonable that with, according to those numbers, what should be about 75% of the populations support, a constant and substantial supply of arms, funding and mercenaries from outside states, an unabashed campaign of lying and misrepresentation from the world media and the UN, that in two years of fighting, with all this on their side, that they have still not managed to overthrow Assad?




And anyone who finds this hard to believe is stupid?

(Not to mention the absurdity of the country's who are supporting it, and providing arms, funds and mercenaries, yammering on about democracy and human rights...)

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


Wow! This is exactly what I was looking for! You hit the nail on the head. I just instantly gained a large amount of respect for you from this. You seem to know your stuff. I am trying to awaken my american christian family to the REALITY of what is going on over there. They are not buying it. All they watch is Fox News, so they are buying into the LIE that our govt is selling them! Obama is in major cahoots with the MB, and Assad is NOT what everyone thinks he is. That war is going on because there was some political revolutional sparks flying, and MB stole the stage and is waging terror on Syria. They want JIHAD. My parents said Im crazy for saying that we are arming and funding al-qeada in one country, but fighting them in another. BUT WE ARE. Can you help me? I would like to learn more from you. I am an endtimes prophecy truther, so i recognize the hour at hand, but my parents are strong christians and even they are asleep to this one. I need help awakening them!

Originally posted by RizeorDie

I listened to the full speech and urge you all to do the same, Al Assad is an educated man, he is a popular leader, he is loved by the Syrian nation regardless what Clinton says.

Thank you for posting this. Clearly someone is pulling the strings of the Western media to present a picture of Al Assad as a monster and the FSA as freedom fighters. In truth, the people of Syria back Al Assad and reject the terrorist and assorted foreign jihadist extremists who make up the FSA.

It is interesting that, judging by on-line comments in UK newspapers ranging from the political left to the political right, the British public do not accept the line repeatedly fed to them by the media that Al Assad is a dangerous tyrant while the FSA are freedom fighters.

The British public, including myself, have come to the opposite conclusion.

Originally posted by ausername

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
it is much easier to support russia and china for their better track record....and of course their proxies by default. Not saying i love russia or china either. They are simply the underdog and people normally route for underdogs.

Extremely high probability you are going to deeply regret saying that soon.

Another Sock Puppet? i have being lately seeing these comments from the Pro Free Syrian Army terrorist supporters quite a well now.

I have a interesting one tell me are you going to regret when the terrorists lose? i am pretty much at shamed at ATS here to see a few good people here supporting the terrorists

History recreates itself.

Originally posted by CalibratedZeus

Originally posted by RizeorDie
This conflict could have ended months ago saving thousands of lives and maintaining the countries infrastructure, but this is not what the US/NATO/GCC want, and they do NOT want democracy or freedom for Syria either, they want complete and utter destruction of the Syrian nation and its people.

As part of operation 'Pax Judaica'. From the Nile to the Euphrates.

Pax Judaica to replace Pax Americana

I was, for the most, part with you until I clicked your link ans saw this:

Obviously, Israel did 911. Their Crime Network also blew up the Oklahoma City Federal building on 4-19-1995 killing 168 people including 19 children in the daycare center. The Zionist media covered up their crimes in both cases making them guilty of murdering more than 3,000 Americans in addition to treason and war crimes for misleading NATO nations into invading Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan

Anyway, I would pose you a question about all of this: When you see the difference between the way the past two years played out in Egypt and Libya. How one ruler chose to step down, creating a (mostly) peaceful transition, while another held on creating a civil war. How do you place no blame whatsoever on Assad for this war or any of the deaths in hand? How do you put it all on a foreign enemy?

Libya, in the same way as Syria, started internally. Only after the protests were being suppressed did outside help come. Whether you believe that help to have been a terrorist group or foreign government, they have no borders and came to the aid of the people. With Assad's choice to hang on, and suppress violently, he invited these borderless invaders in the first place.

it did not start in syria internally!

if you study what is publicised on pentagon discussions you'd know that syria has been on the US hitlist for a number of years. along with iraq, lebanon, and iran which will be the last domino to fall.
educate yourself at these sites

deadlinelive.info...

and listen to general wesley clark say that america will invade 7 countries in 5 years

deadlinelive.info...