Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 4
166
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


I doubt many still live who were involved with 9/11. It is 12 years later, and hundreds of thousands of more dead later.


First of all alqueda had nothing to do with 9-11, as it was a nato false flag that successfuly raped the american people of their freedoms, got many thousands killed, and put them into perpetual unpayable debt. It was a lose-lose situation from any angle you look at it. Even if alqueda was involved that day the fact no airplane hit the pentagon tells me the american government at the very least assisted "the terrorists".


Once again, where are all these people coming from if they were a minority?


The religious extremists work for nato, the military industrial complex and the banks. They are the perfect patsy it seems. Create conflict to maintain a big mic, create new job opportunities after the infrastructure is destroyed and needs to be rebuilt. Make russian influence irrellavant. It seems the cold war never ended.



All those people wouldn't be dead if the army didn't fight protesters. Hell the whole war could have been avoided. the most we have here in America is a rubber bullet to the face of a protester. Why can't they do the same?


I guess because the right wingers with their weapons have not declared war on america quite yet, but when they do I suspect their will be many casualties. The left wingers did not get treated well either as evidenced by occupy wall street.


No, they are worthless because they come from leaders. I would no more trust the words of Assad than the words of Obama or Putin.

As has been stated many times, agreeing with a man on one thing does not mean you agree with all the things he said. Should be pretty obvious, actually.
edit on 6-1-2013 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)


So is it the muslim brotherhood that wants to takeover or is it shiite fanatics? Either way it seems only israel cares. Why should america? America gets flack because it supports israel uncondiontally rain or shine which is bad policy. And no I am not exactly a palestinian supporter. I try to be neutral but it is hard to do so when israel uses hamas as an excuse to build more settlements and drops bombs from airplanes like cowards.




posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Cool story bro, keep telling yourself that.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by RightlyCurious
 


Why is this a religious war? Islamic extremists are flocking in from surrounding countries and killing innocent civilians. Whats so religious about that and especially in a country that doesn't really concern them?



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


Hey, want to guess how many Americans would say the same for drones? Sucks to be no different, eh?

Syria has and continues to cut off the internet from time to time.

thinkprogress.org...

Limiting media is a big no no for me.
edit on 6-1-2013 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxzen2004
reply to post by RizeorDie
 


He looks like a fool, sounds like a fool, he is an idiot of lies.


At least he can put forward a coherent sentence.


Just Joking mate


Assad is telling the truth in regards to this situation. Just as in Libya; there are foreign supported terrorists looking to overthrow the government in Syria...
edit on 6-1-2013 by daaskapital because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:45 PM
link   
...
edit on 6-1-2013 by daaskapital because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


The civil war is two different sects. Extremists are flocking there to gain a foothold and instill trust in the rebel side.


Everyone is entitled to heir own view and that is mine. I'm just stating mine. Haha didnt mean to reply to you off back or I would've said your name to let you know. Was a post to all with a similar view to you was just reading yours before I posted. Sorry
edit on 6-1-2013 by RightlyCurious because: (no reason given)



Eta Fine and dandy was meant for op
edit on 6-1-2013 by RightlyCurious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Limiting media? What do you think the western MSM do on a regular basis? I know they don't shut down but they can't even report properly. They have become the most unreliable sources of truth on the planet.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


Dead media is for the dying, but if you cut out the life, what do the people have?
edit on 6-1-2013 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by RightlyCurious
 


I understand that there are different groups in Syria who are likely battling for power but because this extremist element has arisen in Syria, I think the entire concept of the FSA is dead. Not only are they trying to oust Assad, they will be fighting between each other for power afterwards. The Extremists are not going to pack up and simply walk out of Syria. They may turn to Iran, but that will just prove that there is more to this than a dictator.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


Or they will do as they've done in Libya and Egypt, and for that matter, what they did in France and America eons ago.

They will form a transitional government, to be overthrown and replaced with a more stable one that is freer.

Literally every single country to have a revolution in the last 300 years has followed this trend. Even America and France.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


Dead media is for the dying, but if you cut out the life, what do the people have?
edit on 6-1-2013 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)


The media isn't dead and if it is, maybe the FSA attacks on the media outlets caused that.. Remember how they were killing journalists while bombing TV stations earlier on in the conflict? I'd call that a big No No also.
edit on 6-1-2013 by DarknStormy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


The same has occurred in every rebellion, but my question still stands. The internet is not the old media, and they have shut it off at times.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Cool story bro, keep telling yourself that.


What proof exists that the rebels/terrorists are the muslim brotherhood and not shiite fundamentalists?

One iran is not good enough?



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Look, I can jabber on about Libya and show you why that was one big load of crap also, but that is not the topic. As for Egypt, well I wouldn't call sweeping powers for the better of Egyptians. But there is one thing similar about both of those countries - ISLAM. The big bad boogeyman is becoming a revolutionary politic movement...



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


No, Islam is a force among many in the revolutions occurring.

You should study revolutions of the past. The patterns are all the same. And even America and France faced the same potential fall into theocracy as well.

It's the way revolutions work. You don't just kill a guy and his minions and make a government. It's a decades long event that involves the rising and falling of sometime dozens of governments before a stable one is found.

That's the way a revolution works. And it is also why I am not all that up to saying Egypt and Libya are over with. This is a thing that will be happening well into the 2020s.

And if the patterns follow, it's also going to pave the way to secularization.
edit on 6-1-2013 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


Gadaffhi was going to spill the beans on how sarkozy won the elections and the next thing we knew he was attacked by france and the uk joined them. If you talk about some nato leader in bad ways then you get bombs dropped on you OR they allow their patsies alqueda to do the dirty work for them.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


The same has occurred in every rebellion, but my question still stands. The internet is not the old media, and they have shut it off at times.


What do you expect to see from Syria, if you can read their language to start with? Maybe they have blocked the world out and not the people, who knows. It can't be any worse than say north Korea where the elite have access and the people never do.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


Of course it is no North Korea. It reminds me a hell of a lot of the fall of the Shah, however. The only difference here is that there is no centralizing religious figure like in Iran. And as such, it's following a pretty standard pattern.



posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by DarknStormy
 


No, Islam is a force among many in the revolutions occurring.

You should study revolutions of the past. The patterns are all the same. And even America and France faced the same potential fall into theocracy as well.

It's the way revolutions work. You don't just kill a guy and his minions and make a government. It's a decades long event that involves the rising and falling of sometime dozens of governments before a stable one is found.

That's the way a revolution works. And it is also why I am not all that up to saying Egypt and Libya are over with. This is a thing that will be happening well into the 2020s.

And if the patterns follow, it's also going to pave the way to secularization.
edit on 6-1-2013 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)


I would agree with you on the above if the revolutions were coming from within the countries and no outside sources were contributing. Egypt is a perfect example, peaceful and they seem to be heading down the right track for now. Libya may of been legitimate but the west also exercised its power in that conflict. Syria is the same. The so-called "Revolution" has been hijacked and I still cannot see how people can support an opposition who are riddled wih terrorists. Its not a revolution, its a declaration of war on Syria.





new topics

top topics



 
166
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join