A people's Revolution

But he does offer a solution. Let the people of the Middle East decide for themselves.

Which easily translates to suggesting Israel to not even bother about territorial compromise as a means to strike peace deals. After all, these treaties are worthless in case "the people of the Middle East decide for themselves" to walk out on them in the future.

Is Noam suggesting that Israel should keep the Golan Heights and tthe Palestinian territories until Syria, Palestine A and Palestine B are fully fledged democracies?
 
Egypt? A deterrent from Israeli retaliation in Lebanon? Why would Egypt want to risk another defeat in a full-scale war because Israel had fought the PLO in Lebanon?

More that it might have been harder to run an 18-year occupation while fighting regular wars against the Egyptians too.
 
More that it might have been harder to run an 18-year occupation while fighting regular wars against the Egyptians too.

Having the USSR bailing them out when the IDF was on the road to Cairo despite giving them a head start in 1973 pretty much put an end to the Egyptians' war fantasies.

As for the occupation in Lebanon, I wish there was something that could have ended it sooner.
 
Why they came to the table is irrelevant to Chomsky's argument. His point is, it freed Israel from worrying about by far its strongest enemy.

But his point is rather weak, as it was evident that after 1973 Egypt was unlikely to join another conflict. In fact, if it wasn't for post-1967 Israeli arrogance peace could have been achieved before 1000's of people lost their lives for nothing.
 
Tortured youngster becomes rallying point for Syrians
Liz Sly
May 31, 2011

BEIRUT: His head was swollen, purple and disfigured. His body was a mess of welts, cigarette burns and wounds from bullets fired to injure, not kill. His kneecaps had been smashed, his neck broken, his jaw shattered and his penis cut off.

What finally killed him was not clear, but it appeared painfully, shockingly clear that he had suffered terribly during the month he spent in Syrian custody.

And since a video portraying the torture inflicted upon him was broadcast on the al-Jazeera television network on Friday, he has rapidly emerged as the new symbol of the protest movement in Syria. His childish features have put a face to the largely faceless and leaderless opposition to the regime of the President, Bashar al-Assad, a regime that has angered the country for nine weeks, reinvigorating a movement that had seemed in danger of drifting.

It is too early to tell whether the boy's death will trigger the kind of critical mass that brought down the regimes in Egypt and Tunisia and that the Syrian protests have lacked. But it would not be the first time that the suffering of an individual had motivated ordinary people who might not otherwise have taken to the streets to rise against their governments.

The revolt in Tunisia was inspired by a street vendor who set himself on fire after being insulted by a local policewoman. In Egypt the beating death last year of Khaled Said, an Alexandria resident, kindled the opposition movement that eventually led the uprising against the rule of Hosni Mubarak.

Activists believed Hamza will become the Khaled Said of Syria, said Wissam Tarif of the human rights group Insan.

''This boy is already a symbol. It has provoked people, and the protests are increasing.''

Over the weekend, demonstrations erupted in towns and cities across Syria to denounce the torture of Hamza, marking an escalation in a movement that had until now focused its protests around Friday prayers.

In Hama, a city 185 kilometres north of Damascus, the capital, thousands swarmed a central square holding pictures of the boy and chanting ''Hamza, Hamza''. In a neighbourhood of Aleppo, Syria's largest city, which until now had not taken part in protests on any significant scale, people climbed onto rooftops overnight on Saturday, chanting, ''God is great. Hamza, Hamza.'' In Darayya, a suburb of Damascus, children took to the streets on Sunday to denounce his torture.

A Facebook page, ''We are all Hamza Ali al-Khateeb, the Child Martyr'', has drawn more than 40,000 members since it was created on Saturday. ''There is no place left here for the regime after what they did to Hamza,'' one comment said. An English version has more than 3000 followers.

''Torture is usual in Syria,'' said Razan Zeitouneh, a human rights lawyer who is in hiding in Damascus, in an interview conducted on Skype. ''It's not something new or strange. What is special about Hamza is that he was only 13 years old. He really is a child. That's why it shocked all Syrians, even those who haven't decided whether they want to participate or not in the protests.''

The details of what happened to Hamza are sketchy and cannot be independently confirmed because most foreign journalists have been denied visas to enter Syria, and the few who are there cannot operate freely.

But according to the accounts of family members, the boy had been among a group of people detained when his father took him to an anti-regime rally on April 29 in their home town of Jiza, a small southern farming community near the protest flashpoint of Daraa.

The family members heard no news of Hamza until Wednesday, when Syrian government officials arrived at their home and asked them to sign a document agreeing to accept the boy's body on the condition that they not show it to anyone or discuss the circumstances of his death. They complied but were shocked by the extent of the injuries and invited an activist to make a video, which was posted on YouTube.

The camera pans over the boy's body, showing bruises, scars and a gaping hole where his penis should be. An unidentified male offers a commentary, describing the injuries and proclaiming, ''Look at the reforms of Bashar the perfidious.''

Since Saturday, amid reports that Hamza's father and possibly his brother had been taken into custody, the family has stopped taking phone calls. Calls to family members went unanswered, and a government spokesman did not answer the phone.

However, there were still no signs that the regime is preparing to give ground and pursue the reforms that are being demanded.

The Washington Post

Read more: Tortured youngster becomes rallying point for Syrians

Alleged youtube video:
 
Syria: Crimes Against Humanity in Daraa | Human Rights Watch

Syria: Crimes Against Humanity in Daraa

(New York) - Systematic killings and torture by Syrian security forces in the city of Daraa since protests began there on March 18, 2011, strongly suggest that these qualify as crimes against humanity, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.

The 54-page report, "‘We've Never Seen Such Horror': Crimes against Humanity in Daraa," is based on more than 50 interviews with victims and witnesses to abuses. The report focuses on violations in Daraa governorate, where some of the worst violence took place after protests seeking greater freedoms began in various parts of the country. The specifics went largely unreported due to the information blockade imposed by the Syrian authorities. Victims and witnesses interviewed by Human Rights Watch described systematic killings, beatings, torture using electroshock devices, and detention of people seeking medical care.

"For more than two months now, Syrian security forces have been killing and torturing their own people with complete impunity," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "They need to stop - and if they don't, it is the Security Council's responsibility to make sure that the people responsible face justice."

The Syrian government should take immediate steps to halt the excessive use of lethal force by security forces, Human Rights Watch said. The United Nations Security Council should impose sanctions and press Syria for accountability and, if it doesn't respond adequately, refer Syria to the International Criminal Court.

The protests first broke out in Daraa in response to the detention and torture of 15 children accused of painting graffiti slogans calling for the government's downfall. In response and since then, security forces have repeatedly and systematically opened fire on overwhelmingly peaceful demonstrators. The security forces have killed at least 418 people in the Daraa governorate alone, and more than 887 across Syria, according to local activists who have been maintaining a list of those killed. Exact numbers are impossible to verify.

Witnesses from Daraa interviewed by Human Rights Watch provided consistent accounts of security forces using lethal force against protesters and bystanders, in most cases without advance warning or any effort to disperse the protesters by nonviolent means. Members of various branches of the mukhabarat (security services) and numerous snipers positioned on rooftops deliberately targeted the protesters, and many of the victims had lethal head, neck, and chest wounds. Human Rights Watch documented a number of cases in which security forces participating in the operations against protesters in Daraa and other cities had received "shoot-to-kill" orders from their commanders.

Some of the deadliest incidents Human Rights Watch documented include:

•An attack on al-Omari mosque, which served as a rallying point for protesters and a makeshift hospital for the wounded protesters, and attacks on ensuing protests from March 23 to 25, killing more than 30 protesters;
•Attacks on demonstrators during two protests on April 8, resulting in at least 25 deaths;
•Attacks during a protest and a funeral procession in the town of Izraa on April 22 and 23, resulting in at least 34 deaths;
•Killings during the blockade of Daraa and neighboring villages beginning on April 25, and during an effort by residents of neighboring towns to break the siege on April 29, which left up to 200 dead.
Nine witnesses from the towns of Tafas, Tseel, and Sahem al-Golan described to Human Rights Watch one of these attacks which happened on April 29, when thousands or people from towns surrounding Daraa attempted to break the blockade on the city. Witnesses said that the security forces stopped the protesters who were trying to approach Daraa at a checkpoint near the Western entrance of Daraa city. One of the witnesses from the town of Tseel who participated in the protest said:

"We stopped there, waiting for more people to arrive. We held olive branches, and posters saying we want to bring food and water to Daraa. We had canisters with water and food parcels with us. Eventually thousands of people gathered on the road - the crowd stretched for some six kilometers.

"Then we started moving closer to the checkpoint. We shouted 'peaceful, peaceful,' and in response they opened fire. Security forces were everywhere, in the fields nearby, on a water tank behind the checkpoint, on the roof of a nearby factory, and in the trees, and the fire came from all sides. People started running, falling, trying to carry the wounded away. Nine people from Tseel were wounded there and one of them died."

Another witness, from Tafas, said:

"There was no warning, no firing in the air. It was simply an ambush. There was gunfire from all sides, from automatic guns. Security forces were positioned in the fields along the road, and on the roofs of the buildings. They were deliberately targeting people. Most injuries were in the head and chest.

"Two men from Tafas were killed there: 22-year-old Muhammad Aiman Baradan and 38-year-old Ziad Hreidin. Ziad stood next to me when a sniper bullet hit him in the head. He died on the spot. Altogether, 62 people were killed and more than a hundred wounded, I assisted with their transportation to Tafas hospital."

Syrian authorities repeatedly blamed the protesters in Daraa for initiating the violence and accused them of attacking security forces. All of the testimony collected by Human Rights Watch indicates, however, that the protests were in most cases peaceful.

Human Rights Watch documented several incidents in which, in response to the killings of protesters, Daraa residents resorted to violence, setting cars and buildings on fire, and killing members of the security forces. Human Rights Watch said that such incidents should be further investigated, but that they by no means justify the massive and systematic use of lethal force against the demonstrators.

Syrian authorities also routinely denied wounded protesters access to medical assistance by preventing ambulances from reaching the wounded, and on several occasions opening fire on medical personnel or rescuers who tried to carrying the wounded away. Security forces took control of most of the hospitals in Daraa and detained the wounded who were brought in. As a result, many wounded people avoided the hospitals and were treated in makeshift hospitals with limited facilities. In at least two cases documented by Human Rights Watch, people died because they were denied needed medical care.

Witnesses from Daraa and neighboring towns described to Human Rights Watch large-scale sweep operations by the security forces, who detained hundreds of people daily, as well as the targeted arrests of activists and their family members. The detainees, many of them children, were held in appalling conditions. All ex-detainees interviewed said that they, as well as hundreds of others they saw in detention, had been subjected to torture, including prolonged beatings with sticks, twisted wires, other devices, and electric shocks. Some were tortured on improvised metal and wooden "racks" and, in at least one case documented by Human Rights Watch, a male detainee was raped with a baton.

Two witnesses independently reported to Human Rights Watch the extrajudicial execution of detainees on May 1 at an ad hoc detention facility at a football field in Daraa. One of the detainees said the security forces had executed 26 detainees; the other described a group of "more than 20." Human Rights Watch has not been able to further corroborate these accounts. However, the detailed information provided by two independent witnesses and the fact that other parts of their statements were fully corroborated by other witnesses supports the credibility of the allegations.

On April 25, security forces began a large-scale military operation in Daraa, imposing a blockade that lasted at least 11 days and was then extended to neighboring towns. Under the cover of heavy gunfire, security forces occupied every neighborhood in the city, ordered people to remain indoors, and opened fire on those who defied the ban. Witnesses said that Daraa residents experienced acute shortages of food, water, medicine, and other necessary supplies during the siege. The security forces shot out water tanks. Electricity and all communications were cut off. Unable to bury or properly store the growing number of dead bodies, Daraa residents stored many of them in mobile vegetable refrigerators that could run on diesel fuel.

Syrian authorities also imposed an information blockade on Daraa. They prevented any independent observers from entering the town, and shut down all means of communication. Security forces searched for and confiscated cellphones that contained footage of events in Daraa, and arrested and tortured those whom they suspected of trying to get images or other information out, including some foreign nationals. In some areas, electricity and communications remain cut off.

Human Rights Watch called on the Syrian government to halt immediately the use of excessive and lethal force by security forces against demonstrators and activists, release all arbitrarily arrested detainees, and provide human rights groups and journalists with immediate and unhindered access to Daraa. It also called on the Security Council to adopt targeted financial and travel sanctions on officials responsible for continuing human rights violations, as well as to push for and support efforts to investigate and prosecute the grave, widespread and systemic human rights violations committed in Syria.

"Syrian authorities did everything they could to conceal their bloody repression in Daraa," Whitson said. "But horrendous crimes like these are impossible to hide, and sooner or later those responsible will have to answer for their actions."
 
Meanwhile in Lybia...

Civilian death toll is officially 718 men, women, and children, with more than 4000 wounded... NATO decided on a 90-days extension of bombardment... Zuma's efforts to implement a 'road-map' probably meaningless as NATO clearly has the intention to murder Ghadafi, thus breaching the UN security council 1973... This weeks's UN report states the new, democratic interim government committed war crimes, murdering, torturing, etc.

Thank goodness for Mladic so that British moralist can distract from the 'humanitarian intervention' in Africa.
 
Yemen's currently on tipping edge, it's essentially became an anarchy state.

Supposedly President Saleh has been injured by rebel shelling....the way things are going he could be our first autocratic casualty.
 
It's even more interesting because of the Shiite-Sunni divide there.

Not sure if it was Al Jazeera or CNN, but one of them had a program on how one of the most influential tribes had stopped backing him, and was now actively working with the 'opposition'.

This tribe had a massive reach, in every specter of Yemeni society...
 
Is the G8 supporting or undermining the Arab spring?

Is the G8 supporting or undermining the Arab spring?

The G8 leaders say they will support countries in the region, such as Egypt and Tunisia, as long as they move towards not just democracy but also a 'market economy'


Egyptian anti-military protesters at weekly Muslim Friday prayers in Tahrir Square last month. Photograph: KeystoneUsa-Zuma/Rex Features
Last week's G8 drew seemingly uncritical praise for its supportive actions towards those north African and Middle Eastern countries that have thrown off decades of dictatorship, with much of the press proclaiming "$40bn aid for the Arab spring".

In the lead-up to the annual summit in Deauville, President Obama said: "We do not want a democratic Egypt to be saddled by the debts of its past." The Deauville Partnership was unveiled to international acclaim, enshrining "the common values of freedom and democracy, and founded on the respect for the sovereignty of states and peoples". However sceptical we may be of this kind of language emanating from the very states that have done most to prop up the dictators of the Middle East, surely such sentiments can be applauded by all?

Unfortunately, few commentators thought to read the G8 declaration – or, if they did, they didn't bother to decipher its language.

The G8 statement is littered with demands for Egypt and Tunisia to implement "free market" economic policies. The G8 calls on these countries to "reap the benefits of globalisation" through "integration". It wants to see "investment integration" by improving the "business climate" (in other words, "make it easier for our companies to make and take money out of your countries"). The G8 leaders say they will support countries in the region that move towards not just democracy but also a "market economy".

Ever since Peter Mandelson became trade commissioner for the EU in 2004 (he served until 2008), Europe has been trying to get southern Mediterranean countries such as Egypt, Tunisia (and Libya) to sign free trade agreements. And indeed, the G8 reels off a list of free trade agreements it wants signed, where governments reduce taxes on trade and remove regulations on foreign businesses.

Europe's own 2007 impact assessment found that EU free trade agreements with Egypt and Tunisia would lead to the two north African countries' manufacturing sectors shrinking by two-thirds, with jobs losses of 1.5 million and 100,000 respectively. Furthermore, it found EU free trade agreements in the north Africa region would have negative impacts on progress towards the millennium development goals on poverty, hunger, health and education.

The G8 countries retain significant leverage on these economies, precisely because they supported the previous regimes for so long. Both Tunisia and Egypt have been left with billions of dollars of debts from the Mubarak and Ben Ali regimes. Yet rather than cancelling this unjust debt, the G8 wants to saddle the two countries with even more. Before elections have been held in either country, their future governments are being tied into heavy debt repayments and the restructuring of their economies.

This is the "shock doctrine" at work again – as is evidenced from the first line of the G8 statement, which says the Arab spring has "the potential to open the door to the kind of transformation that occurred in central and eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall". This is the same economic transformation that has left Latvia with the worst depression since that experienced by the US in the 1930s, while in Russia a recent study has found that the richest 20% of society may have doubled their wealth in the past two decades while the poorest 20% are only half as well off as they were. Central and eastern European economies contracted by an average of 5% a year from 1991 to 1995.

The trick, as always, is that foreign governments decide how a country's economy should be run before elections can be held. Heaven forbid the people of that country start controlling their economy. Thus the G8 promises to the region are conditional on the implementation of these "free market" demands; and indeed this money will take the form of new loans that the Egyptian and Tunisian people will be paying back for decades, even though democratic governments have had no say in contracting those loans.

The World Bank is being lined-up to give loans worth $6bn over the coming years to Tunisia and Egypt, and further loans are expected from the IMF. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is also being primed to expand its mandate given its experience of "transition" in central and eastern Europe.

Before the G8 summit the US announced it would cancel $1bn of Egypt's debt, in return for the money being used for US-agreed investment in jobs. Despite US urging, there were no further announcements on debt by the G8. The UK's claimed £100m owed by Egypt remains – much of it suspected as coming from loans to buy British weapons – just part of Cairo's $30bn total debt. Egypt has been spending $3bn a year on debt repayments, the same as the government spends on healthcare.

If the G8 genuinely wants to help the people of Egypt and Tunisia, it could have started by declaring a moratorium on debt repayments, supporting an audit of the Mubarak and Ben Ali debts, cancelling those that are found to be unjust, and giving any immediate money as grants, not loans. Instead, the G8 has begun the process of undermining genuine democracy in Egypt before a democratic government has even been elected.
 
Is the G8 supporting or undermining the Arab spring?

Is the G8 supporting or undermining the Arab spring?

The G8 leaders say they will support countries in the region, such as Egypt and Tunisia, as long as they move towards not just democracy but also a 'market economy'


Egyptian anti-military protesters at weekly Muslim Friday prayers in Tahrir Square last month. Photograph: KeystoneUsa-Zuma/Rex Features
Last week's G8 drew seemingly uncritical praise for its supportive actions towards those north African and Middle Eastern countries that have thrown off decades of dictatorship, with much of the press proclaiming "$40bn aid for the Arab spring".

In the lead-up to the annual summit in Deauville, President Obama said: "We do not want a democratic Egypt to be saddled by the debts of its past." The Deauville Partnership was unveiled to international acclaim, enshrining "the common values of freedom and democracy, and founded on the respect for the sovereignty of states and peoples". However sceptical we may be of this kind of language emanating from the very states that have done most to prop up the dictators of the Middle East, surely such sentiments can be applauded by all?

Unfortunately, few commentators thought to read the G8 declaration – or, if they did, they didn't bother to decipher its language.

The G8 statement is littered with demands for Egypt and Tunisia to implement "free market" economic policies. The G8 calls on these countries to "reap the benefits of globalisation" through "integration". It wants to see "investment integration" by improving the "business climate" (in other words, "make it easier for our companies to make and take money out of your countries"). The G8 leaders say they will support countries in the region that move towards not just democracy but also a "market economy".

Ever since Peter Mandelson became trade commissioner for the EU in 2004 (he served until 2008), Europe has been trying to get southern Mediterranean countries such as Egypt, Tunisia (and Libya) to sign free trade agreements. And indeed, the G8 reels off a list of free trade agreements it wants signed, where governments reduce taxes on trade and remove regulations on foreign businesses.

Europe's own 2007 impact assessment found that EU free trade agreements with Egypt and Tunisia would lead to the two north African countries' manufacturing sectors shrinking by two-thirds, with jobs losses of 1.5 million and 100,000 respectively. Furthermore, it found EU free trade agreements in the north Africa region would have negative impacts on progress towards the millennium development goals on poverty, hunger, health and education.

The G8 countries retain significant leverage on these economies, precisely because they supported the previous regimes for so long. Both Tunisia and Egypt have been left with billions of dollars of debts from the Mubarak and Ben Ali regimes. Yet rather than cancelling this unjust debt, the G8 wants to saddle the two countries with even more. Before elections have been held in either country, their future governments are being tied into heavy debt repayments and the restructuring of their economies.

This is the "shock doctrine" at work again – as is evidenced from the first line of the G8 statement, which says the Arab spring has "the potential to open the door to the kind of transformation that occurred in central and eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall". This is the same economic transformation that has left Latvia with the worst depression since that experienced by the US in the 1930s, while in Russia a recent study has found that the richest 20% of society may have doubled their wealth in the past two decades while the poorest 20% are only half as well off as they were. Central and eastern European economies contracted by an average of 5% a year from 1991 to 1995.

The trick, as always, is that foreign governments decide how a country's economy should be run before elections can be held. Heaven forbid the people of that country start controlling their economy. Thus the G8 promises to the region are conditional on the implementation of these "free market" demands; and indeed this money will take the form of new loans that the Egyptian and Tunisian people will be paying back for decades, even though democratic governments have had no say in contracting those loans.

The World Bank is being lined-up to give loans worth $6bn over the coming years to Tunisia and Egypt, and further loans are expected from the IMF. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is also being primed to expand its mandate given its experience of "transition" in central and eastern Europe.

Before the G8 summit the US announced it would cancel $1bn of Egypt's debt, in return for the money being used for US-agreed investment in jobs. Despite US urging, there were no further announcements on debt by the G8. The UK's claimed £100m owed by Egypt remains – much of it suspected as coming from loans to buy British weapons – just part of Cairo's $30bn total debt. Egypt has been spending $3bn a year on debt repayments, the same as the government spends on healthcare.

If the G8 genuinely wants to help the people of Egypt and Tunisia, it could have started by declaring a moratorium on debt repayments, supporting an audit of the Mubarak and Ben Ali debts, cancelling those that are found to be unjust, and giving any immediate money as grants, not loans. Instead, the G8 has begun the process of undermining genuine democracy in Egypt before a democratic government has even been elected.

Egypt's debts could serve to be problematic for its sovereignty, unfortunately the G8 have them exactly where they want them.

No wonder you had that sneaky swine Cameron rushing in a few last minute arms deals.
 
RK, you've been quiet regarding events in Syria. What are your thoughts. There have been reports of clashes in Eastern parts too. What do you know about the involvement of Kurds? To what extent have they joined in the protests given their delicate situation?
 
RK, you've been quiet regarding events in Syria. What are your thoughts. There have been reports of clashes in Eastern parts too. What do you know about the involvement of Kurds? To what extent have they joined in the protests given their delicate situation?

I've been quiet but not out of choice :p

As for Syria, well I think its shown Assad up to be just as ruthlessly murderous as his father despite his deceptive charming rhetoric. Though if there's anything positive to come out from this onslaught its that the Kurdish protests in the East seem to have merged with their non-Kurdish counterparts, and from what I understand the demands have been mutual too - they're protesting for an end to Assad's tyranny as opposed to independence...so far that is.
 
I've been quiet but not out of choice :p

As for Syria, well I think its shown Assad up to be just as ruthlessly murderous as his father despite his deceptive charming rhetoric. Though if there's anything positive to come out from this onslaught its that the Kurdish protests in the East seem to have merged with their non-Kurdish counterparts, and from what I understand the demands have been mutual too - they're protesting for an end to Assad's tyranny as opposed to independence...so far that is.

Would they fair better in a Syria under Sunni-rule?
 
Would they fair better in a Syria under Sunni-rule?

Depends what you mean by 'Sunni-rule'. If it was a theocracy then ironically I think they'd be more sympathetically catered too, Baathi secularism hasn't exactly been kind to the Kurds in the region.

Either way I suspect that should Assad fall, then their protests would morph into one of independence, which I would imagine wouldn't go down too well with whoever inherits the mess.
 
Depends what you mean by 'Sunni-rule'. If it was a theocracy then ironically I think they'd be more sympathetically catered too, Baathi secularism hasn't exactly been kind to the Kurds in the region.

Either way I suspect that should Assad fall, then their protests would morph into one of independence, which I would imagine wouldn't go down too well with whoever inherits the mess.

Or with neighbours across the border.
 
So apparently Saleh is out of Yemen now; in KSA being treated for injuries
 
The Syrian thing is strange...it is not getting much traction in the media, and it doesn't look like Assad is giving them much breathing space on the ground either.

The incidents in the Golan...are they spontaneous and genuine protests or are they as Israel says...a tactic to distract the world/nation from the troubles within Syria by focusing on clashes with Israel, and the inevitable casualties.
 
The Syrian thing is strange...it is not getting much traction in the media, and it doesn't look like Assad is giving them much breathing space on the ground either.

The incidents in the Golan...are they spontaneous and genuine protests or are they as Israel says...a tactic to distract the world/nation from the troubles within Syria by focusing on clashes with Israel, and the inevitable casualties.

I guess the answers to your question would correlate with opinions on the Arab-Israeli conflict.
 
hehe....

I am genuinely unsure, I know they've had a couple of anniversaries recently of different events, but I can't remember anything like this in the last 10+ years, so I am very skeptical of these protests in the Golan.

Not unlike politicians to look for relief by changing the dialogue.
 
hehe....

I am genuinely unsure, I know they've had a couple of anniversaries recently of different events, but I can't remember anything like this in the last 10+ years, so I am very skeptical of these protests in the Golan.

Not unlike politicians to look for relief by changing the dialogue.

The border has been virtually quiet for 38 years.
 
The fact that Obama's administration had chosen to veil their meetings and praises of the Bahraini regime speaks volumes...

 
The Syrian thing is strange...it is not getting much traction in the media, and it doesn't look like Assad is giving them much breathing space on the ground either.

Syria news, all the latest and breaking Syria news - Telegraph

Judging by (lack of) reaction here I am not surprised at the limited coverage. We know enough about shit going on there for people to show interest, but no one cares. I'm surprised really, because I have gotten used to international outrage when there's news of Arab casualties. Syria didn't even get it's own thread here, whereas last year's flotilla debacle kept people busy (here, in major European squares and at the UN human rights committee) for months.
 
Syria news, all the latest and breaking Syria news - Telegraph

Judging by (lack of) reaction here I am not surprised at the limited coverage. We know enough about shit going on there for people to show interest, but no one cares. I'm surprised really, because I have gotten used to international outrage when there's news of Arab casualties. Syria didn't even get it's own thread here, whereas last year's flotilla debacle kept people busy (here, in major European squares and at the UN human rights committee) for months.

In fairness, Syria and Bahrain banned foreign journalists from covering the events. People are left to speculate on random youtube clips taken on cell phones.
 
Arabs killing other Arabs isn't as big a story as Jews killing Arabs. That's just the way it is.

Also, civil wars generally get less attention than disputes between nations.
 
Arabs killing other Arabs isn't as big a story as Jews killing Arabs. That's just the way it is.

Excellent observation. Really speaks volumes for what "human rights" organizations are really after.

Also, civil wars generally get less attention than disputes between nations.

Yugoslavia and Lybia are notable exceptions.
 
kinell Frosty. I'm too busy to look this one up...;)

Here you go:

The frequency of human rights violations in a country is an inverse function of the number of complaints about human rights violations heard from that country. The greater the number of complaints being aired, the better protected are human rights in that country.
 
Arabs killing other Arabs isn't as big a story as Jews killing Arabs. That's just the way it is.

Because the Libyan conflict isn't reported at all right?

The West seems rather keen to report atrocious Arab-on-Arab violence when it allows them to justify a military excursion. Naturally the West isn't going to want to get involved in Bahrain and in Syria for different reasons, hence the latent coverage of violence in those respective states.
 
:confused:

Does the law indicate whether good human rights record invites international focus and complaints, or that the former is a result of that disproportionate focus?
 
Because the Libyan conflict isn't reported at all right?

The West seems rather keen to report atrocious Arab-on-Arab violence when it allows them to justify a military excursion. Naturally the West isn't going to want to get involved in Bahrain and in Syria for different reasons, hence the latent coverage of violence in those respective states.

Sums up my take on these latest events.