U.S. and Russia still back Syria settlement: UN envoy

Warnings:

1) All Reuters information about Syria comes from Islamist militants.

2) Reuters has not reported a single civillian death in over 20 months of fighting as having been caused by it’s so called ‘rebels’.

3) Reuters in this very article admits that all the major posts were given to “Islamists”, though continues to call the hardcore Islamist fighters “rebels”.

4) The ‘Syrian Observatory for Human Rights’ is not a registered or official organization of an kind. It is an Islamist militant website, and all information it publishes is created by Islamist militant fighters.

5) Reuters repeatedly states that “events on the ground are impossible to verify” but does not report its stories in this context.
Reuters cuts and pastes its stories from Islamist websites like the ‘observatory’ and presents them as legitimate sources, then occasionally provides this quick disclaimer buried further down its articles.

6) Reuters is the only news agency in the world that has created its own terminology to describe the Syrian arme forces, they call them “forces loyal to Assad”. No one else in the media world, who does not buy their stories from reuters, describes the Syrian Forces this way.

7) Reuters constantly ignores follow up stories where it is proven that old stories were false, or the facts have changed in favor of the Syrian government. The most notable case was the Houla massacre. As soon as it was discovered that all the victims were Allawite and the massacre carried out by reuters ‘rebels’ reporting on Houla was cancelled.

8) Reuters refuses to write stories on the character of their ‘rebels’, because reuters fears that by exposing how fanatical and Islamist in nature these ‘rebels’ are they will undermine US imperial interests.

9) Reuters refuses to condemn the many attacks on journalists by the Islamist militants.

10) Reuters refuses to provide links to Islamist militant videos it quotes from, because they are worried that the audience will identify with the ‘rebels’ as Islamist militants or even terrorists if they actually watched them.

11) Reuters routinely refuses to publish well known technical information on critical issues and other critical information on certain events, even when they have become common knowledge. eg.

- When Turkey was hit by several mortars reuters did not mention that the mortar was one of the key weapons used by Islamist militants in that area.

- Patriot missiles can not destroy incoming mortars.

- Several of the military bases reportedly captured by the Islamists in the last few weeks were either; Not the types of bases described, not in the right location, or; reported captured many months before the story was written.

- Reuters continually reports that the Islamist militants have only light weapons up to more than a year after it was clear the Islamists had in their posession:

– Tanks

– Armoured vehicles

– Artillary

– Anti-Tank weapons

– Anti-Aircraft cannons

– Anti-Aircraft rockets

– Anti-personell rockets (car and shoulder mounted)

– The widespread use of massive car bombs

– A wide array of Heavy calibre machine guns

Reuters are simply a propaganda network supporting the foreign backed coup, nothing more.

wacha gonna do mr. president, mrs. clinton, when it’s all over, and al-queida rules syria? uh? whacha gonna do?

@pendingapproval

Same post as yesterday huh? In those list of weapons you post, how many were made in the USA? I think none. Please complain to Russia, China and the Syrian Regime for allowing the insurgents to obtain these weapons in the first place.
Also in the news, a large sector of Sheikh Suleiman base was captured. Yeah, that’s right, these armed gangs captured another military base containing the best weapons the regime has. A standing national army should not be having this much trouble defending its home turf from a few armed gangs, even if they have the weapons you claim. The Syrian army is just pathetic, huh?

As an American who has spent time in Syria I have been disgusted by the cowardice of President Obama .. it is he who has denied the Syrian people aid in their struggle against Hitler in Damascus .. it is his decision that has kept Hitlerites in power there .. the Syrian people accepted aid from jihadists only after being denied by President Obama .. he has turned his back to the mass murder for 637 days .. he could have shot back with his flying robots 637 days ago .. he could have had his agents take anti aircraft and anti tank weapons to guarded them for use against Hitler ..

People of Syria know this .. it is not America that abandoned you .. it is one man who is president .. Barack Obama ..

@carlloeber

I agree with you in that I think the US should have done more to help the uprising, but I find the reasons for staying on the side lines understandable given the region and dynamics of the region. i think the US not directly interfering gives more credibility to the next government. It will be harder, never impossible, for people to say the next authority is a US puppet when the US has done nothing to help install them. What is funny is that even though the US is still sitting on the side lines we still get blamed for doing too much to help the opposition. Cannot win either way.

I have been posting all year that while I think no-fly zone would be helpful I believe it is unnecessary in the long run. That the insurgents will eventually win this without air cover but it will cost more lives. Looks like I am being proved right.

@Pendingapproval, have you noticed that my predictions come true more than yours?

Go Insurgents and Roll Tide Roll!

@pendingapproval
The rebels have acquired a SA-8 Gecko http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYDTJpPBWRI&feature=youtu.be

A pretty good AA machine for shooting down helicopters and planes. And made in Russia! If the regime, or the Russians, would stop the insurgents from acquiring these their air force might last longer, ya know?

Dictators around the world are mixing sarin gas and confiscating the antedote, marijuana.

pendingapproval, They don’t care about truth. It’s very dull subject to tell truth, however they can tell about ‘rebels’, fighters for freedom, figters against tyranny but, in my opinion, it’s not correct word as ‘rebels’ for murders of civilians, deserters, islamist fanatics and mercenaries. But nobody cares, like nobody cared when the same events were in Libya. Why Reuters doesn’t show how things are going on in Libya now? Where are articles about everyday killings of civilians during fightings between domestic groups tearing country apart? It’s dull subject, Reuters and other western news agancies rahter will be telling us the horrifiс beyond the truth stories about ‘tyranny and dictators’. Go right ahead!