Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

Paphitis:

No such thing has been proven regarding the Saudis.(Admission: I was wrong about the source!) Assad is making accusations. It is our belief that the Sarin Attacks were by Assad Forces in the FSA controlled suburb of Ghouta. This is the assessment of the French, UK and US Governments.

You mean the ‘WE’ ?

Ooooop’s ..................... had it not been for getting a daily update from Global Research, I would never have known this ..... and neither would you.

It seems that the US and its partners got it all wrong about Assad using Sarin gas in Ghouta and eleven other sites in Syria! It WAS the Islamic opposition and that includes the FSA! Do you remember Kerry appearing in the MSM spouting irrefutable evidence proof of Assad’s guilt? His Government never produced it of course, because there was none!

How many like you have just accepted what he said? What can only be referred to as deliberate lies? The claim Saddam had WMD’s has also been disproved and day by day more authoritative reports on what led up to the civil war in Ukraine, are also coming to light and in every instance what we have been led to believe is being proved as (let’s say) rather ‘inaccurate’! The ‘WE’ are either liars or grossly incompetent.

What else have they ‘got wrong’ ? (lied about?) ? How much more is required to show that they got it all wrong and would have attacked Assad using this as an excuse had it not been for the diplomatic skills of President Putin?

I am not surprised it has not been reported at all in the MSM!

Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPWC) Confirms: Rebels Used Chemical Weapons – not Assad

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPWC) has confirmed the traces of the sarin gas used in Syria are not linked with the Syrian government’s former stockpile of chemical weapons. The report corroborates the Syrian government’s assertions that the faction responsible for the chemical attack, as well as 11 other instances of chemical weapons use, was the Syrian opposition.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/organization-for-the-prohibition-of-chemical-weapons-opwc-confirms-rebels-used-chemical-weapons-not-assad/5500017

A respected source: The organisation is based in the Haig and is a recognised international body .......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_for_the_Prohibition_of_Chemical_Weapons

What you don't realize though is that the Status Quo in Syria will change drastically in the coming months if there is a Peace Settlement which we are trying to push.

Oh, but I DO realize! The Staus Quo will change because of the Russian involvement. The coalition are trying to claim it is all their idea .... but I think most people are astute enough to realize that nothing changed UNTIL the Russians took the initiative and the ‘Assad must go!’ claims, as a result have died out.

This is why the result is quite likely NOT to be what the US wants. I posted it before but by your comments, I don’t think you read it? I warned ..... it is a long read, it took me an hour to read through it without claiming that I remembered every word, or checked every link but it convinced me simply because the guy is a specialist, knows far more than I ever will on the subject ........... and I believe is an honest broker.

The paper rubbishes the US claims (The ‘WE’?) that the majority of the Syrian people want to see the back of Assad and is why I believe (once again) that a genuine free vote could well see him back in the driving seat! You won’t read this in the MSM .... as it is far too long and detailed for any normal MSM news outlet.

Quote:

We find little reasonable discussion of either, in western circles, after the Islamist insurrection of 2011. Instead, the wartime discussion descended into caricatures, conditioned by ‘regime-change’ fervour and bloody war, of a bloodthirsty ‘brutal dictator’ mindlessly repressing and slaughtering his own people. None of this helps sensible or principled understandings. Fortunately, there are a range of Syrian and independent sources that allow us to put together a more realistic picture. If we believed most western media reports we would think President Assad had launched repeated and indiscriminate attacks on civilians, including the gassing of children.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-dirty-war-on-syria-bashar-al-assad-and-political-reform/5492661

RH,

I do not consider Global Research as a reliable source under any circumstances. they have a very clearly sckewed world view to say the least. I refuse to read that source, because I will not waste my time with it.

Here is some more information for you from the CBS. It's an American Source I know, but there is nothing wrong with the 60 minutes report. Featured in the report is the same survivor of the Sarin Gas attack I mentioned earlier who now lives in the USA.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-sarin ... 0-minutes/

Suffice to say, I don't think we will ever agree on this issue at all, not even find any middle ground.

To be completely frank RH, I am very disappointed that you would want to defend Assad over these attacks. These types of things should make you very angry and maybe you should put the politics aside for a second because these attacks were so inhumane.

Here is another video.



Extremely graphic and disturbing stuff.

here is some general information and the feelings about this source (Global Research) which I too subscribe to. It has ZERO credibility!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1018397347

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky

https://www.metabunk.org/debunking-glob ... -tv.t2314/

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch

Michel Chossudovsky is quite frankly a nut job. That is my view.

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis:

I do not consider Global Research as a reliable source under any circumstances. they have a very clearly skewed world view to say the least. I refuse to read that source, because I will not waste my time with it.

Here is some more information for you from the CBS. It's an American Source I know, but there is nothing wrong with the 60 minutes report. Featured in the report is the same survivor of the Sarin Gas attack I mentioned earlier who now lives in the USA.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-sarin%20...%200-minutes/

Indeed tragic and I have seen various versions of this, often using the same clips, from various sources and whoever is responsible should face execution ..... but it would be wrong to hang an innocent man, irrespective of his other apparent crimes. . But there is not a shred of evidence to suggest it was Assads force’s that were responsible. That does not say he wasn’t responsible any more than saying he was! A lot of questions were asked of the OPCW Inspector as to what he saw and who he thought was responsible. He could not answer the latter and he even queried the accusation that it was Assads forces as it made no sense.

The video was obviously produced before the OPCW report that certainly seems to refute the claims that ‘It was Assad’. That to me that OPCW Report is concrete evidence ..... I would like to see the investigation repeated by another independent authority to prove it was/was not accurate. You can never have too much evidence?

So, yes horrendous scenes ............. but were they authentic?

Suffice to say, I don't think we will ever agree on this issue at all, not even find any middle ground.

If you refuse to consider any sources other than those that agree with the ‘Assad did it’ hypothesis ...... you are most likely correct. Only time will tell.

To be completely frank RH, I am very disappointed that you would want to defend Assad over these attacks. These types of things should make you very angry and maybe you should put the politics aside for a second because these attacks were so inhumane.

I would always defend someone accused of any crime if there was no evidence to support the charge. That is so in this case ..... where is the ‘prosecutions’ evidence ..... that irrefutable evidence Kerry was expounding hours after the attack. Must be in the same filing cabinet as his 'irrefutable evidence' on MH17 that said ‘Putin did it!’. But it does appear that the case for the defence really IS based on refutable evidence in Assad's case.

I don’t think you watched the second video you linked to? Maybe the first minute or so, because most of it was refuting the belief that Assad was responsible. As I said above about authenticity, this video calls it into question because of several observations. Watch the video you posted again, in full this time..... not just the first bit and then tell me I am wrong.

Here is some general information and the feelings about this source (Global Research) which I too subscribe to. It has ZERO credibility!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1018397347
This is a blog site ......... they agree with you about Chossudovsky but don’t say why.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky

His CV, the Organisations he has been involved with and his experience says ...... he knows a bloody site more about what is going on than you, me and the vast majority of people. It is like you or I questioning Einstein on E=MC2!

https://www.metabunk.org/debunking-glob%20...%20-tv.t2314/
]
Again a blog with just one contributor, who uses the ‘conspiracy theory’ card ..... the justification of last resort.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch

You criticise me??? I never watch Global Research TV but, as I keep trying to impress on you, the web site is no more than an clearing outlet for articles. It is the author of an article that is significant not the server. Actually, I disagree with quite a few of Chossudovsky’s personal views. (BTW: I made a mistake – it is Information Clearing House that is the one-man-band, fully independent outlet not GR! So in my personal opinion ICH has more credibility than GR but you will often find the same articles on both sites and some of these are reprints of MSM articles.)

Michel Chossudovsky is quite frankly a nut job. That is my view.

You are fully entitled to your view as I am, but it does not mean either of us is correct on everything we believe, however, I am willing to be convinced I am wrong if you can present credible evidence to support your views! But just rubbishing a web site is not the way to convince anyone.

[Paphitis]

Paphitis:

I do not consider Global Research as a reliable source under any circumstances. they have a very clearly skewed world view to say the least. I refuse to read that source, because I will not waste my time with it.

Here is some more information for you from the CBS. It's an American Source I know, but there is nothing wrong with the 60 minutes report. Featured in the report is the same survivor of the Sarin Gas attack I mentioned earlier who now lives in the USA.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/syria-sarin%20...%200-minutes/

Indeed tragic and I have seen various versions of this, often using the same clips, from various sources and whoever is responsible should face execution ..... but it would be wrong to hang an innocent man, irrespective of his other apparent crimes. . But there is not a shred of evidence to suggest it was Assads force’s that were responsible. That does not say he wasn’t responsible any more than saying he was! A lot of questions were asked of the OPCW Inspector as to what he saw and who he thought was responsible. He could not answer the latter and he even queried the accusation that it was Assads forces as it made no sense.

The video was obviously produced before the OPCW report that certainly seems to refute the claims that ‘It was Assad’. That to me that OPCW Report is concrete evidence ..... I would like to see the investigation repeated by another independent authority to prove it was/was not accurate. You can never have too much evidence?

So, yes horrendous scenes ............. but were they authentic?

Suffice to say, I don't think we will ever agree on this issue at all, not even find any middle ground.

If you refuse to consider any sources other than those that agree with the ‘Assad did it’ hypothesis ...... you are most likely correct. Only time will tell.

To be completely frank RH, I am very disappointed that you would want to defend Assad over these attacks. These types of things should make you very angry and maybe you should put the politics aside for a second because these attacks were so inhumane.

I would always defend someone accused of any crime if there was no evidence to support the charge. That is so in this case ..... where is the ‘prosecutions’ evidence ..... that irrefutable evidence Kerry was expounding hours after the attack. Must be in the same filing cabinet as his 'irrefutable evidence' on MH17 that said ‘Putin did it!’. But it does appear that the case for the defence really IS based on refutable evidence in Assad's case.

I don’t think you watched the second video you linked to? Maybe the first minute or so, because most of it was refuting the belief that Assad was responsible. As I said above about authenticity, this video calls it into question because of several observations. Watch the video you posted again, in full this time..... not just the first bit and then tell me I am wrong.

Here is some general information and the feelings about this source (Global Research) which I too subscribe to. It has ZERO credibility!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1018397347
This is a blog site ......... they agree with you about Chossudovsky but don’t say why.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky

His CV, the Organisations he has been involved with and his experience says ...... he knows a bloody site more about what is going on than you, me and the vast majority of people. It is like you or I questioning Einstein on E=MC2!

https://www.metabunk.org/debunking-glob%20...%20-tv.t2314/
]
Again a blog with just one contributor, who uses the ‘conspiracy theory’ card ..... the justification of last resort.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch

You criticise me??? I never watch Global Research TV but, as I keep trying to impress on you, the web site is no more than an clearing outlet for articles. It is the author of an article that is significant not the server. Actually, I disagree with quite a few of Chossudovsky’s personal views. (BTW: I made a mistake – it is Information Clearing House that is the one-man-band, fully independent outlet not GR! So in my personal opinion ICH has more credibility than GR but you will often find the same articles on both sites and some of these are reprints of MSM articles.)

Michel Chossudovsky is quite frankly a nut job. That is my view.

You are fully entitled to your view as I am, but it does not mean either of us is correct on everything we believe, however, I am willing to be convinced I am wrong if you can present credible evidence to support your views! But just rubbishing a web site is not the way to convince anyone.

Yes I consider these reports (from CBS) very authentic. You probably don't because it is an American source. Michel Cussodovsky doesn't agree because it simply does not comply with his absurd agenda. I can't see myself waiver from that view at all, because there are certain facts and findings which I can't reconcile which point the finger directly towards Assad. He is the only country in the area known to possess these chemicals. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar are not producers of these types of substances, and even if they did, I am sure they won't use them against their own supporters.

Sorry RH, I can't bring myself to take Michel Chossudovsky seriously at all. Global Research as a very long history of ridiculous reporting and propagandist material which is bent and twisted so far towards the extreme Left in order to chip away certain anti Globalisation, anti American, anti West, anti corporate world and Banking System world view. the reporting is absolutely ridiculous. I can point you to dozens of his more insane reports regarding Milosevic, 911 conspiracy theories, holocaust denial, the list goes on and on and it is consistently one sided.

Let's just agree to disagree because neither you or I will ever see eye to eye in regard to this.

BTW, Global Research is nothing more than a Blog, pushing a very conspiratory agenda. It is a lot less reliable than the links I posted which are the opinions of people who claim like me that it is an unreliable propaganda site. I have not found any saying otherwise or validating its credibility other than other very dubious sites of the same ilk.

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis:

Yes I consider these reports (from CBS) very authentic. You probably don't because it is an American source. Michel Cussodovsky doesn't agree because it simply does not comply with his absurd agenda. I can't see myself waiver from that view at all, because there are certain facts and findings which I can't reconcile which point the finger directly towards Assad. He is the only country in the area known to possess these chemicals. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar are not producers of these types of substances, and even if they did, I am sure they won't use them against their own supporters.

I have no problem with CBS, they are as informative as any MSM TV station. Like ALL the others they also have a bias. I don’t think any of them tell deliberate lies but they all tend to express their opinions as if it were fact. Therefore you need other sources that give greater detail and references to their sources. Then it is up to the individual to come to their own conclusions.

Sorry RH, I can't bring myself to take Michel Chossudovsky seriously at all. Global Research as a very long history of ridiculous reporting and propagandist material which is bent and twisted so far towards the extreme Left in order to chip away certain anti Globalisation, anti American, anti West, anti corporate world and Banking System world view. the reporting is absolutely ridiculous. I can point you to dozens of his more insane reports regarding Milosevic, 911 conspiracy theories, holocaust denial, the list goes on and on and it is consistently one sided.

I’ve said I do not agree with much of what he says. Anything published on an independent news site is going to be ‘leftist’ because it is the other side of the story told by the ‘rightist’. The reporting is only ridiculous if you take it all verbatim. You need to be selective and to check out the authors history and credentials.

‘Conspiracy Theory’ is an overused description for anything the user wishes to refute without actually putting up an argument. It is a dismissive term and is grossly abused.

Let's just agree to disagree because neither you or I will ever see eye to eye in regard to this.

At least we can disagree without abuse or slagging one another off! (Maybe we should have joined the diplomatic corps?)

BTW, Global Research is nothing more than a Blog, pushing a very conspiratory agenda. It is a lot less reliable than the links I posted which are the opinions of people who claim like me that it is an unreliable propaganda site. I have not found any saying otherwise or validating its credibility other than other very dubious sites of the same ilk.

I don’t agree! GR has no input into the articles unless they publish their own article and then it is identified as such. I can give you a long list of authors left/middle/right who publish on GR and also many other sites ...... some even MSM. So I don’t categorise the site itself or its owner, I just check out the original author and the links. If I didn’t do this I would be forever reading just one side of the argument.

As for Syria ........... only time will tell ............... but it has gone very quiet of late, maybe the MSM is too busy chasing stories of robbery, rape and sexual abuse in Germany, to report the successes of the Syrian army against DAESH and the rebels?

BTW: RAF Akrotiri is very quiet also, nothing like the activity of the past few weeks!

[Paphitis]

Yes I consider these reports (from CBS) very authentic. You probably don't because it is an American source. Michel Cussodovsky doesn't agree because it simply does not comply with his absurd agenda. I can't see myself waiver from that view at all, because there are certain facts and findings which I can't reconcile which point the finger directly towards Assad. He is the only country in the area known to possess these chemicals. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar are not producers of these types of substances, and even if they did, I am sure they won't use them against their own supporters.

I have no problem with CBS, they are as informative as any MSM TV station. Like ALL the others they also have a bias. I don’t think any of them tell deliberate lies but they all tend to express their opinions as if it were fact. Therefore you need other sources that give greater detail and references to their sources. Then it is up to the individual to come to their own conclusions.

How a reasonable individual can ever come of with the conclusions you support and those reported by GR is beyond me to be honest.

Sorry RH, I can't bring myself to take Michel Chossudovsky seriously at all. Global Research as a very long history of ridiculous reporting and propagandist material which is bent and twisted so far towards the extreme Left in order to chip away certain anti Globalisation, anti American, anti West, anti corporate world and Banking System world view. the reporting is absolutely ridiculous. I can point you to dozens of his more insane reports regarding Milosevic, 911 conspiracy theories, holocaust denial, the list goes on and on and it is consistently one sided.

I’ve said I do not agree with much of what he says. Anything published on an independent news site is going to be ‘leftist’ because it is the other side of the story told by the ‘rightist’. The reporting is only ridiculous if you take it all verbatim. You need to be selective and to check out the authors history and credentials.

‘Conspiracy Theory’ is an overused description for anything the user wishes to refute without actually putting up an argument. It is a dismissive term and is grossly abused.

I categorically reject GR as a viable source for anything political. There conclusions in everything are absolutely absurd at the best of times.

I only enter that site occasionally for a laugh. I think it is beneath me to even try to refute their irresponsible and bogus claims. I won't waste my time.

Let's just agree to disagree because neither you or I will ever see eye to eye in regard to this.

At least we can disagree without abuse or slagging one another off! (Maybe we should have joined the diplomatic corps?)

I agree with that. We can disagree without abusing each other and the conversation has been adult and mature.

BTW, Global Research is nothing more than a Blog, pushing a very conspiratory agenda. It is a lot less reliable than the links I posted which are the opinions of people who claim like me that it is an unreliable propaganda site. I have not found any saying otherwise or validating its credibility other than other very dubious sites of the same ilk.

I don’t agree! GR has no input into the articles unless they publish their own article and then it is identified as such. I can give you a long list of authors left/middle/right who publish on GR and also many other sites ...... some even MSM. So I don’t categorise the site itself or its owner, I just check out the original author and the links. If I didn’t do this I would be forever reading just one side of the argument.

GR is not your typical Leftist publication. It is something completely entirely different and the reporting is unreliable.

I have no issues with reading Left Wing material and often find reports from Left Wing papers and TV just as good as anyone else and I consider them fairly reliable but I just don't and cant regard GR with any seriousness or credibility at all.

As for Syria ........... only time will tell ............... but it has gone very quiet of late, maybe the MSM is too busy chasing stories of robbery, rape and sexual abuse in Germany, to report the successes of the Syrian army against DAESH and the rebels?

It's not quiet at all. Operations are at a very high temp particularly for the RAAF. Each aircraft is flying about 12 hours a day, and the focus at the moment seems to be Iraq and assisting the Iraqis push back the DAESH Rebels. Another focus at the moment seems to be RAQA. We have forces just 20 kms outside of Raqa as I write this, and we are starting to bomb the outskirts whenever we can. We also have our spies inside that town. Which means that RAQA will fall to Kurdish hands and be in our control.

BTW: RAF Akrotiri is very quiet also, nothing like the activity of the past few weeks!

The RAF are also operating out of Al Minhad Air Base and piggy back RAAF Wedgetail Command and Control as do the Americans and French. Yes, Australia is providing a lot of Command and Control along with the Americans and French. The RAF operate very well with the Australians. Almost one military.

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis:
Almost any intelligence regarding Syria in the MSM, and events there, emanates from this single source. When they do not actually refer to SOHR, they reprint Reuters, and Reuters often quotes SOHR in their news releases. You think Global Research is a site to be disregarded and yet THIS is the source of the vast amount of Syrian ‘intelligence’ you are reading every day?

It is hardly what could be regarded as an unbiased source! A lot of the information regarding the Ghouta Sarin gas incident came from SOHR ............. which is a one man band, he is not even a journalist, a firm anti-‘Assadist’, with little education and also a known member of The Muslim Brotherhood, who were the political originators of Syria’s Arab Spring violence!

Is this really what you would consider a reliable source?

From WikiPedia.org

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (also known as SOHR) ; founded in May 2006 is an information office documenting human rights abuses in the Syrian Civil War. The SOHR is frequently quoted by major news media since the beginning of the uprising, such as Voice of America, Reuters, BBC, CNN and National Public Radio, about daily numbers of ISIL/ISIS fighters and civilians killed in airstrikes in Syria.

The United Kingdom-based SOHR is run out of a two-bedroom terraced home in Coventry by Rami Abdulrahman, a Syrian Sunni Muslim who also runs a clothes shop. After being imprisoned three times in Syria, Abdulrahman fled to the United Kingdom fearing a fourth jail term. The New York Times in April 2013 described him being on the phone all day every day with contacts in Syria, and checking all information himself. Born Osama Suleiman, he adopted a pseudonym during his years of activism in Syria, and has used it publicly ever since.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Observatory_for_Human_Rights



This is another reason why I never take what I read/see as verbatim! The BBC headline in this report is:

Madaya: UN aid convoy to leave for besieged Syrian town.

.......and the correspondent Lyse Doucet spent the whole report concentrating on this single location, which she dramatically made known in her final remark as ‘.......Madaya .........under siege by Syrian Forces’. That to me is NOT reporting , it is biased hype or more commonly described as 'Propaganda'!

But only as an afterthought are the places under siege by the rebels and Daesh mentioned and they don’t even name them. This is intended to divert the attention of the reader/viewer to the main theme as if it was all down to that evil Assad and obviously shows ‘clearly’ that Assad has been starving his own people.

It will be interesting to see how much of this food aid goes to the civilians and how much is looted by the rebel fighters?

I watched this ........

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35278173

and then I watched this one ......... (I might add that it just happened to be on the TV at the time):

https://www.rt.com/news/328503-syria-madaya-fake-photos/

Tell me ...... which is the believable report? Which report gives the most credible view ?

BTW: I wrote all the above BEFORE I watched the RT Report ......... is it a case of ‘great minds think alike’ or have I just simply been brain washed?

[Tim Drayton]

...The Muslim Brotherhood, who were the political originators of Syria’s Arab Spring violence!

The Syrian revolution started as a genuine popular uprising against the brutal Assad dictatorship. The lesson of history is that, every now and again, revolts break out against oppressive regimes. Many such revolts are defeated, some go on to develop into full-blown revolutions and topple the hated dictator. Sometimes successful revolutions lead to better forms of governance and sometimes the end result is greater tyranny. This is the way history works, and you can't change it.

Syria is a pretty secular sort of place and numbering among the chief reasons why the revolution has been hijacked by jihadists is that Assad released and armed large numbers of radical Islamists from prison and sent them to the right parts of the country, and also that Islamofascist regimes like Saudi Arabia and Erdoğan's Turkey supported and armed the jihadists.

[Paphitis]

Almost any intelligence regarding Syria in the MSM, and events there, emanates from this single source. When they do not actually refer to SOHR, they reprint Reuters, and Reuters often quotes SOHR in their news releases. You think Global Research is a site to be disregarded and yet THIS is the source of the vast amount of Syrian ‘intelligence’ you are reading every day?

It is hardly what could be regarded as an unbiased source! A lot of the information regarding the Ghouta Sarin gas incident came from SOHR ............. which is a one man band, he is not even a journalist, a firm anti-‘Assadist’, with little education and also a known member of The Muslim Brotherhood, who were the political originators of Syria’s Arab Spring violence!

Is this really what you would consider a reliable source?

Yes I consider SOHR a good source of relevant information. Rami is obviously very concerned as a Sunni Syrian of the plight of the Syrian People.

Naturally, he would be an anti Assadist as most Sunnis are.

The MSM only occasionally quote SOHR. They do not rely on SOHR as their only source.

From WikiPedia.org

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (also known as SOHR) ; founded in May 2006 is an information office documenting human rights abuses in the Syrian Civil War. The SOHR is frequently quoted by major news media since the beginning of the uprising, such as Voice of America, Reuters, BBC, CNN and National Public Radio, about daily numbers of ISIL/ISIS fighters and civilians killed in airstrikes in Syria.

The United Kingdom-based SOHR is run out of a two-bedroom terraced home in Coventry by Rami Abdulrahman, a Syrian Sunni Muslim who also runs a clothes shop. After being imprisoned three times in Syria, Abdulrahman fled to the United Kingdom fearing a fourth jail term. The New York Times in April 2013 described him being on the phone all day every day with contacts in Syria, and checking all information himself. Born Osama Suleiman, he adopted a pseudonym during his years of activism in Syria, and has used it publicly ever since.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Observatory_for_Human_Rights

This is another reason why I never take what I read/see as verbatim! The BBC headline in this report is:

Madaya: UN aid convoy to leave for besieged Syrian town.

.......and the correspondent Lyse Doucet spent the whole report concentrating on this single location, which she dramatically made known in her final remark as ‘.......Madaya .........under siege by Syrian Forces’. That to me is NOT reporting , it is biased hype or more commonly described as 'Propaganda'!

I don't see any problem with this reporting. Many Syrian towns have been placed under siege by Syrian Armed Forces to the point of near starvation. This seems to be Assad's tactic.

But only as an afterthought are the places under siege by the rebels and Daesh mentioned and they don’t even name them. This is intended to divert the attention of the reader/viewer to the main theme as if it was all down to that evil Assad and obviously shows ‘clearly’ that Assad has been starving his own people.

Yes he has been starving his own people. He did the same to Ghouta for several months before he lost the plot and attacked his people with Sarin Gas.

It will be interesting to see how much of this food aid goes to the civilians and how much is looted by the rebel fighters?

the coalition also does regular Air Drops wherever it can of food, medicine, sanitation and supplies. Whatever gets to the people is better than nothing.

I watched this ........

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35278173

and then I watched this one ......... (I might add that it just happened to be on the TV at the time):

https://www.rt.com/news/328503-syria-madaya-fake-photos/

Tell me ...... which is the believable report? Which report gives the most credible view ?

BBC!

BTW: I wrote all the above BEFORE I watched the RT Report ......... is it a case of ‘great minds think alike’ or have I just simply been brain washed?

You've been conned by one of world's finest - Pootin.

Your loyalty is clearly misplaced.

[Robin Hood]

TD: Robin Hood wrote:

...The Muslim Brotherhood, who were the political originators of Syria’s Arab Spring violence!

Note that I said specifically Syrian Arab Spring VIOLENCE. There is no argument that Assad’s people were heavy handed unfortunately this happens when you give power to thugs with guns then people die, but surely it was the MBH that initially took up arms against the State?

The Syrian revolution started as a genuine popular uprising against the brutal Assad dictatorship. The lesson of history is that, every now and again, revolts break out against oppressive regimes. Many such revolts are defeated, some go on to develop into full-blown revolutions and topple the hated dictator. Sometimes successful revolutions lead to better forms of governance and sometimes the end result is greater tyranny.

I have no problem with what you say .......... it is factually correct and there are many examples.

This is the way history works, and you can't change it.

Correct , you cannot change historic truth ....... but you can learn from it and that is where the human race has failed. Our leaders never do learn.

Syria is a pretty secular sort of place and numbering among the chief reasons why the revolution has been hijacked by jihadists is that Assad released and armed large numbers of radical Islamists from prison and sent them to the right parts of the country, and also that Islamofascist regimes like Saudi Arabia and Erdoğan's Turkey supported and armed the jihadists.

I read ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/syrias-assad-moves-to-allay-fury-after-security-forces-fire-on-protesters/2011/03/26/AFFoZDdB_story.html ) that Assad released these Islamists/jihadists as a sup to the rebels, because their imprisonment was one of their gripes. He did not arm them! Assad was obviously wrong in releasing them and in doing so unleashed the fuel for a civil war. It was a mutiny (FSA) by a relatively small number of Sunni military Officers and they joined forces. This revolution was then encouraged, supported, funded and latterly armed by Western interests. By UN Charter, supporting the overthrow of an elected government by supplying the means to do so and is against International Law.


Paphitis:

I am obviously more difficult to convince than you! I need at least two sources to draw even an hypothesis otherwise all I am doing is repeating someone else’s opinion. I repeat, ..... only time will tell?

[repulsewarrior]

...indeed, the first casualty was the Rule of Law.

...a Greek Orthodox Bishop as i recall was one of the first casualties in the lawlessness that followed. I remember, because it was hard to believe, not Assad's forces that killed him, but by the armed forces against him. And in the melee what became apparent was that there was no "side", one good and one bad; more a state of those who lost their Humanity, and those who didn't.

...still, we are not organised to provide capacity building, the coalition is based on a military fight as though the hearts and minds of people can be bought, or mostly ignored.

Boots on the ground means Butter, as much as Guns. Spending Billions, and Trillions, is a choice, so are the choices.