Humiliation replaces fear for the women kidnapped by Isis

[irosie91]

I don't think anyone here has ever seen Aris cheer for the Islamists. Just because she doesn't agree with you about Assad certainly doesn't mean she is for the Islamists. There are others who write articles about Assad. Would you insinuate that because they write articles about Assad they are cheering the Islamists?

News from The Associated Press[/QUOTE]
Calling the Islamists "secular democrats" doesn´t change that they are Islamists...[/QUOTE]

Just because you don't like what Aris has said about Assad doesn't make whatever she says a champion for the actual Islamists. You are only making a fool out of yourself trying to get back at her for saying anything negative about your hero.[/QUOTE]
Talking about Islamist terrorist as "secular democrats" isn´t talking about Assad.[/QUOTE]

I think the viewers can figure out why you chimed in on what Aris said. Maybe we should take a poll here and ask the viewers if they think Aris is cheering on the Islamists?[/QUOTE]


----sally----captain blei------is an advocate for BAATHISM-----
Assad is a Baathist------as was Gamel Abdul Nasser (the
hero who dropped nitrogen mustard gas on kids in yemen and murdered his own army) and as was SADAAM HUSSEIN---that other hero who poisoned an or electrocuted
kurds and Shiites for the glory of ARABISM How can
you dispute his excellent "taste"?

 

[Two Thumbs]

wow slave trading

but America, a hundred years ago, so so,,,,,,,,


This is why islam will not rule the world, unless the "moderates" let the islamist kill the rest of us off.

 

[Bleipriester]

I lived under the oppression of Haf.Ass. Nothing free democratic or secular about that period except the syrian forces leaving finally. Shadow of syria's suzerain authority still lurks.

I heard of that time. Not very democratic but it is the first time someone disputes the countrie´s secularity. Today, with Bashar Assad, the political situation has improved and is the maximum of freedom someone can grant to minorities that are persistently threatened by a majority that tends to develop religious and thus also political extremism. If you would have to live under the oppression of those extremists, Hafiz Assad´s Syria would appear as paradise in your recollection. Isn´t this thread evidence enough for that?

He talk about reform and modernization. He talked a goo game but turned out to be worse that his father.

That´s what you say.

Of course, I listened or read what he promised and seen what happened after the first few years. IronPriest, you refuse to understand because you were not there and you are not in syria living with those who were struggling against The regime for freedom of speech, release or access to those taken by the regime or some information on those who the regime killed. They want free elections where opposition candidates can run and get equal access to voters. They want open internet to the rest of the world, not "big brother" Mukhabarat controlling what they can and cannot what they can access or using what they read and say to arrest (torture, kill) them.

Who wants that? The Islamists?
You´d wonder how the Syrian law has changed. People can now access the internet with less restrictions. They have free elections (western controlled puppets or terrorists may not run, though).
Apparently, you have been reared in an anti-government environment. That´s badluck, you are unable to see the benefits of a stable secular government. Without that government, you would either have a poor and exploited country ran by a western controlled puppet, a poor and exploited country ran by Islamists or even both. You can have one single election, of course. But don´t complain of the Caliphate, then. How lucky the Syrians are that no parties basing on religion are allowed.

 

[aris2chat]

I lived under the oppression of Haf.Ass. Nothing free democratic or secular about that period except the syrian forces leaving finally. Shadow of syria's suzerain authority still lurks.

I heard of that time. Not very democratic but it is the first time someone disputes the countrie´s secularity. Today, with Bashar Assad, the political situation has improved and is the maximum of freedom someone can grant to minorities that are persistently threatened by a majority that tends to develop religious and thus also political extremism. If you would have to live under the oppression of those extremists, Hafiz Assad´s Syria would appear as paradise in your recollection. Isn´t this thread evidence enough for that?

He talk about reform and modernization. He talked a goo game but turned out to be worse that his father.

That´s what you say.

Of course, I listened or read what he promised and seen what happened after the first few years. IronPriest, you refuse to understand because you were not there and you are not in syria living with those who were struggling against The regime for freedom of speech, release or access to those taken by the regime or some information on those who the regime killed. They want free elections where opposition candidates can run and get equal access to voters. They want open internet to the rest of the world, not "big brother" Mukhabarat controlling what they can and cannot what they can access or using what they read and say to arrest (torture, kill) them.

Who wants that? The Islamists?
You´d wonder how the Syrian law has changed. People can now access the internet with less restrictions. They have free elections (western controlled puppets or terrorists may not run, though).
Apparently, you have been reared in an anti-government environment. That´s badluck, you are unable to see the benefits of a stable secular government. Without that government, you would either have a poor and exploited country ran by a western controlled puppet, a poor and exploited country ran by Islamists or even both. You can have one single election, of course. But don´t complain of the Caliphate, then. How lucky the Syrians are that no parties basing on religion are allowed.

but they don't have free access, it is limited and often terminated at government whim.
Free elections? A government chosen candidate? Opposition was not allowed to become candidates. Other groups could not submit a name for a candidate.

Minority Rights United for a Free Syria
BBC News - Guide Syria s diverse minorities
http://fsi.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Laila_Alodaat_English.pdf

 

[Bleipriester]

I heard of that time. Not very democratic but it is the first time someone disputes the countrie´s secularity. Today, with Bashar Assad, the political situation has improved and is the maximum of freedom someone can grant to minorities that are persistently threatened by a majority that tends to develop religious and thus also political extremism. If you would have to live under the oppression of those extremists, Hafiz Assad´s Syria would appear as paradise in your recollection. Isn´t this thread evidence enough for that?

He talk about reform and modernization. He talked a goo game but turned out to be worse that his father.

That´s what you say.

Of course, I listened or read what he promised and seen what happened after the first few years. IronPriest, you refuse to understand because you were not there and you are not in syria living with those who were struggling against The regime for freedom of speech, release or access to those taken by the regime or some information on those who the regime killed. They want free elections where opposition candidates can run and get equal access to voters. They want open internet to the rest of the world, not "big brother" Mukhabarat controlling what they can and cannot what they can access or using what they read and say to arrest (torture, kill) them.

Who wants that? The Islamists?
You´d wonder how the Syrian law has changed. People can now access the internet with less restrictions. They have free elections (western controlled puppets or terrorists may not run, though).
Apparently, you have been reared in an anti-government environment. That´s badluck, you are unable to see the benefits of a stable secular government. Without that government, you would either have a poor and exploited country ran by a western controlled puppet, a poor and exploited country ran by Islamists or even both. You can have one single election, of course. But don´t complain of the Caliphate, then. How lucky the Syrians are that no parties basing on religion are allowed.

but they don't have free access, it is limited and often terminated at government whim.
Free elections? A government chosen candidate? Opposition was not allowed to become candidates. Other groups could not submit a name for a candidate.

Minority Rights United for a Free Syria
BBC News - Guide Syria s diverse minorities
http://fsi.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Laila_Alodaat_English.pdf

Candidates need the support of at least a part of the people´s assembly. Half of the people´s assembly is occupied by citizens.
"Half of the members of the People's Assembly at least shall be of the workers and farmers, and the law shall state the definition of the worker and the farmer."
http://www.voltairenet.org/article173033.html

Apparently, the "opposition" lacks of this support. This is really close to direct democracy.

 

[aris2chat]

He talk about reform and modernization. He talked a goo game but turned out to be worse that his father.

That´s what you say.

Of course, I listened or read what he promised and seen what happened after the first few years. IronPriest, you refuse to understand because you were not there and you are not in syria living with those who were struggling against The regime for freedom of speech, release or access to those taken by the regime or some information on those who the regime killed. They want free elections where opposition candidates can run and get equal access to voters. They want open internet to the rest of the world, not "big brother" Mukhabarat controlling what they can and cannot what they can access or using what they read and say to arrest (torture, kill) them.

Who wants that? The Islamists?
You´d wonder how the Syrian law has changed. People can now access the internet with less restrictions. They have free elections (western controlled puppets or terrorists may not run, though).
Apparently, you have been reared in an anti-government environment. That´s badluck, you are unable to see the benefits of a stable secular government. Without that government, you would either have a poor and exploited country ran by a western controlled puppet, a poor and exploited country ran by Islamists or even both. You can have one single election, of course. But don´t complain of the Caliphate, then. How lucky the Syrians are that no parties basing on religion are allowed.

but they don't have free access, it is limited and often terminated at government whim.
Free elections? A government chosen candidate? Opposition was not allowed to become candidates. Other groups could not submit a name for a candidate.

Minority Rights United for a Free Syria
BBC News - Guide Syria s diverse minorities
http://fsi.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Laila_Alodaat_English.pdf

Candidates need the support of at least a part of the people´s assembly. Half of the people´s assembly is occupied by citizens.
"Half of the members of the People's Assembly at least shall be of the workers and farmers, and the law shall state the definition of the worker and the farmer."
Constitution of the Syrian Arab Republic - 2012

Apparently, the "opposition" lacks of this support. This is really close to direct democracy.

Approved in 2012 by a baathist/assad parliament.
even the political pluralism is a joke. A candidate approved by parliament as a token on the ballot. A vote by default with no option for decent. Fear of the maktab.
It was hardly a step forward. It was a sham that did nothing to improve the situation in syria.

 

[Bleipriester]

That´s what you say.

Of course, I listened or read what he promised and seen what happened after the first few years. IronPriest, you refuse to understand because you were not there and you are not in syria living with those who were struggling against The regime for freedom of speech, release or access to those taken by the regime or some information on those who the regime killed. They want free elections where opposition candidates can run and get equal access to voters. They want open internet to the rest of the world, not "big brother" Mukhabarat controlling what they can and cannot what they can access or using what they read and say to arrest (torture, kill) them.

Who wants that? The Islamists?
You´d wonder how the Syrian law has changed. People can now access the internet with less restrictions. They have free elections (western controlled puppets or terrorists may not run, though).
Apparently, you have been reared in an anti-government environment. That´s badluck, you are unable to see the benefits of a stable secular government. Without that government, you would either have a poor and exploited country ran by a western controlled puppet, a poor and exploited country ran by Islamists or even both. You can have one single election, of course. But don´t complain of the Caliphate, then. How lucky the Syrians are that no parties basing on religion are allowed.

but they don't have free access, it is limited and often terminated at government whim.
Free elections? A government chosen candidate? Opposition was not allowed to become candidates. Other groups could not submit a name for a candidate.

Minority Rights United for a Free Syria
BBC News - Guide Syria s diverse minorities
http://fsi.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Laila_Alodaat_English.pdf

Candidates need the support of at least a part of the people´s assembly. Half of the people´s assembly is occupied by citizens.
"Half of the members of the People's Assembly at least shall be of the workers and farmers, and the law shall state the definition of the worker and the farmer."
Constitution of the Syrian Arab Republic - 2012

Apparently, the "opposition" lacks of this support. This is really close to direct democracy.

Approved in 2012 by a baathist/assad parliament.
even the political pluralism is a joke. A candidate approved by parliament as a token on the ballot. A vote by default with no option for decent. Fear of the maktab.
It was hardly a step forward. It was a sham that did nothing to improve the situation in syria.

That´s not so different from other countries´ systems.