Wednesday, December 21, 2011

A gun kills people, a camera kills a nation

I am happy to publish the first guest post on this blog. @Amani_Lebanon, my dear friend from Twitter, has exclusively written the following article.

Syria. It's been nine months. Nine months of sanctions, nine months of deaths in vain, nine months of propaganda, nine months of eye witnesses, of riots and rallies, of ''peaceful'' and ''armed'' protestors. Still, we question ourselves, who is speaking the truth? Who spits out the lies? What is really happening in Syria?

Ignore what you have heard so far and take a look at this picture. This is the support of the ''torture machine'', the ''child killer'', ''the evil dictator'', this is the support of a tyrant. It comes as no surprise to me that this support is coming from just ONE Syrian province. 

the masses are us: Bashar al-Assad

We have brains, we can think for ourselves, why should we let the Arab League think for us? Why should we let the media think for us? Al Jazeera specifically, this channel didn't hesitate to air pro-NATO propaganda regarding Libya, it didn't hesitate to air a video of the violence in Lebanon (2005), claiming it was ''Syria’s violent army''. I cannot find a reason why it should be a credible source of information for Syria. The media's intentions are clear. Bahrain is only kilometers away from Al Jazeera's office in Doha, but AJ's covering of the ongoing protests in Bahrain is weak, IF there is and was any. And although Al Jazeera is not allowed in Syria, Syria is always on its headlines. 

Every single day, hundreds of people are dying, we are told, but there is no proof whatsoever. The media has been airing protests in Syria non stop, everyday, blurry, unclear and the camera will not stop shaking, filmed from afar. How do we know these are really Syrians? How do we know this is actually in Syria? Have you never wondered how they show you videos of people being cut up and sliced mercilessly by the Syrian army, yet the camera is less than three meters away? Why doesn't the army attack the camera man? Why would the army be comfortable with showing the world what they were doing if they really were doing that? Common sense plays a large role in challenging the narrative of the media. Why won't any of the foreign media air a pro-Assad rally? MASS rallies these are, but they refuse to show them; you can see the people's faces, clearly, you see the flags, you see the area, and you know that this...This is Syria. Al Jazeera kept reporting that 900'000 people were attending a protest rally; yet experts know that the population in this particular province doesn't exceed 2 millions. 

The intentions of the opposition is clear, according to Burhan Ghalioun's (head of SNC) statement about cutting ties with Iran, Hezbollah AND Hamas in case he gets into power; note that Hamas has not taken a stance with president Bashar al-Assad or the regime, so why vow to cut ties with it? To secure Israel's safety? To weaken the axis of resistance? For what, precisely? If Assad would wake up tomorrow and cut his ties with Hezbollah, Hamas and Iran: Syria's problems would be resolved immediately. The regime is undoubtedly a headache to the Western backed regimes of the Middle East and the West itself. The Arab League preaches human rights for Syria, but fails to see the deaths in Bahrain or Yemen, it fails to meet for Gaza and the West Bank, it fails to condemn Israel over Palestinian deaths, but it is able to meet for Syria every week to discuss how to put a seige on it. But when will they meet to discuss how to pull the siege off Gaza strip? Well, they have no interests there. 

Are the protesters' intentions still 'democracy' and 'freedom of speech'? The Syrian president vowed for reforms, he also held elections; they still opposed and condemned it. The president started his reforms by dismissing his old government and forming a new one. Killing security forces and chopping them up, then claiming the army did it (with no evidence) doesn't serve 'democracy'. Neither does ''el 3alawiyye 3ala el taboot wel masi7iyye 3ala Beirut'' (Alawis to their coffins and Christians to Beirut) serve democracy. Those were chants in anti-government protests, coming from the same people who ask and plead for democracy. Democracy? Yes, as long as you agree with them. There are opposition members preaching for a 'no-fly zone over Syria' when there never was an air force being used in the first place. What and who is exactly flying over Syria then? Or do they mean a ''we-fly zone''?

We keep hearing that the protests are 'peaceful', yet we have children like Sari who are brutally tortured and killed by the same 'peaceful' protestors; Sari's mother and uncle were witnessing his murder. Unless the protestors are unarmed and protesting without being violent, you cannot call their protest 'peaceful'. When they start using weapons, you have to rightfully call them 'armed gangs'. Compare the protests in Tunisia - calling for the fall of the regime, calling for freedom - to a protest calling for the hanging of the president, death to Alawis (an sect of which the president belongs to) and the departure of Christians. This is being provocative, not 'peaceful'.

Does it hit us as a surprise that Israel, the US government, the Arab League and Saudi Arabia support the SNC? The same country that massacres Palestinians on a daily basis. The same government that invaded Iraq, displacing 4 million, leaving 4.5 million orphans, torturing and sucking every last bit out of Iraq’s freedom, God bless America..... The very same league that left Lebanese to die in July 2006, blaming Hezbollah for the relentless assault on Lebanon and basically siding with Israel. The same league that neglected the Gaza strip and again blamed Hamas in 2008 for being bombarded to rubble by Israel. The same Saudi Arabia that oppresses women and has zero freedom of speech, tortures dissidents and is backed by all of the above. All these groups and communities are opposing the same regime that supported Hamas in 2008, that was was one of the few to strongly oppose Israel regardless of how much it would cost them; the same regime that took Lebanese in and gave them homes with no costs, supporting Lebanon with weapons, morally, and socially against Israel. These countries are opposing the same government that sheltered more than 1 million refugees from Iraq by 2008. 

I ask again, why won’t these same people that oppose the Assad regime so strongly, why won't they oppose the al-Khalifas of Bahrain? Are their intentions meant for the love of the Syrian people or do they intend to replace a resistance government with a puppet government by Western mercy? Their mission failed in Iraq, now they have come to Syria to impose their plans. They own the media, but is this news? The Syrians will foil this conspiracy if they raise awareness. 

As George Orwell once said: ''During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act''.

For the true story of Sari Saoud, please follow this link to


  1. Assuming alJazeera is biased; what about BBC? DW? CNN? Or any other credible tv station of the world not present at the scene!!!

    Unfortunately Yorikiri, this post is a failed attempt to continue with your bright insights that we are used to. We could have watched al
    Dunia tv instead of wasting our time reading this ridiculous post.

  2. How about CCTV, Russia Today, NBN, Al Manar, Al Alam. I guess they're not "credible" because they are not run by the vipers who are destroying the earth (the west).

    The flaw in your comment is that you consider the listed sources as being independent of each other. You are sorely mistaken.

    I'm sorry you cannot see that the entire west and their gulf allies are against Syria Mr. Anonymous.

  3. The BBC and CNN Are the same as Al Jazeera, all west backed channels, you cannot call them credible yet the west is mainly against Syria. How do you know they're credible ? They're not even allowed in Syria to begin with, I wonder how they get exclusive videos. Hmmm.

  4. Very good post, written with passion.. Only the blind, the ugly & the criminal will refuse to see the real facts on the ground and insists on the warmongering.. As if we didn't see enough of the credibility of the West & their aligned media till now: from the lie of Pearl Harbor to the biggest crime ever the invasion of Iraq based on lies of WMDs to their shameless lies in Libya just to kill a guy who till 2 months only before their aggression on him was their closest & personal friends, have a nice collection of photos taken at intimate moments between Gaddafi & all the West leaders.. They didn't know then that he was a dictator & that he was ruling for the past 40+ years & suddenly their conscious woke up? What about the confirmations time after the other of the capture of his sons? Even the International Criminal Court affirmed the same then denied, just to weaken the resistance and gain ground.. What will make us believe that the same media forgetting the Famine in Somalia, the 'Darfur's' crisis in Sudan.. Oh wait, Sudan is split from the south and the crisis in the west of it sudden disappeared..!
    Media with one eye, no ears and a long tongue that didn't till now see the terror committed by so called 'peaceful protesters', arms smuggling across the borders, about 2,000 army & security officers killed, such media has no credibility to report on Syria.
    Anyways, their crimes are near ending and the truth will be revealed and it shall prevail. Criminals would be arrested and tried and punished wherever they are, days and it's over.

  5. Good read. I hope people do choose to think with their minds. Pertinent points. In particular, calls by certain segments within the opposition for establishing a no-fly zone. I have not read one confirmed report of the Syrian Air Force being used against the population. Therefore, a humanitarian no-fly zone, boiled down to its essence, must, as the author suggested, be a call for something much more aggressive and biased.

    Amani brings another point to light, which is how Western media has been and is being used to influence public opinion through blatant propaganda to accept US/NATO intervention in Syria as just and humanitarian. I recall the same media reporting lies in both Iraq campaigns, under Bush I and II. First the lie about Iraqi soldiers taking new born babies out of incubators ( Second, the more recent lie of weapons of mass destruction. BBC, CNN so-called, respected media reported lies.

    The media didn't properly investigate either claim and assumed it all true, until it was too late and the damning facts, too obvious. The same in Libya. The same in Syria. I do not discount all claims against Assad, but there have been atrocities on both sides, but the corporate media reports from one angle. The title of the article says it all.

  6. Personally not a large fan of the Syrian regime, nonetheless this article has been well thought out and eloquently expressed. It makes sensible sense to me, good analysis.