I always wonder how reporters get folks who have these tangential connections to powerful / terrible people to talk after they refuse. It's an impressive skill.
Not relevant at all, but I find that interesting and funny. As a rule of thumb I tend to accept unknown callers after 3 missed calls in rapid succession. Everybody I know closely knows this, and its come in useful. Though tbh I’d it’s a recognizable localish area code I usually pick up on the 2nd call in rapid succession.
The story is: they find the guy, call him and he doesn't talk. All they've discovered is that he, like many in the Assad regime, are now in Russia. Duh.
This is a non-story.
Is anyone just overwhelmed by the propaganda and partisanship as you read this? I have no great opinion on this Syrian regime or the previous - like basically everyone on HN when it comes to geopolitical topics, I do not know much about it - but the bias in the article is almost comically ham-fisted.
It is distressing to hear someone on hacker news describe this, and the history of Syria over the last couple decades, as something that might be "propaganda" and "partisanship."
My god, man - do you even slightly follow the news? Are you really that unaware such that you feel there is some degree of question over just how horrific the Assad regime was for Syrians?
Why do you care? It's their country, let them mess it up as much as they want.
That's the problem with you Westerners, you stole and genocided people around the entire world, and when you were finally thrown out, you come back to pass judgement and impose your own dubious morals on other people.
Was reading book by Sue Black on forensic anthropology , Written in Bone, and she recalled incident where she was an expert witness for commission in Qatar, she confirmed the veracity of eyewitness and photo evidence of Assad Syrian regime of torture - for Arab instigated investigation. Not just Western values.
You can't "both-sides" atrocities of the sort the Assad regime practiced, which are well-documented. Even if you want to grant an individual associated with Assad the benefit of the doubt, this is the the point of a trial, in international court, the same sorts of trials that were given to Hitler's associates post WW2.
I know as much about it as every geopolitics expert who's responded to me - in that I have seen news stories. What of it? Do you take every news story you read at face value? I don't. Hence - no opinion; unlike all the experts on modern Syrian history we have here who have no doubt great amounts of knowledge on the civil war, finer points of ideologies, accurate death counts from third party sources, et.
Also, do you know how to read? I said it was propaganda and laughably biased. Weasel words. Can you not see them? Never accused them of fabricating anything.
I’m actually not overwhelmed or see it as partisan
> There are widespread calls across Syrian society on social media for former senior officials to be held accountable
> Syria's Attorney General, Hassan al-Turba, told the BBC the government had launched a lawsuit against Luka, accusing him of "premeditated murder, torture, and death resulting from torture".
Syrian administration is using the court system and these aren’t leanings of BBC
I understand your general sentiment regarding being involved in other countries, I just don’t think it applies here
Regarding the term “partisan”, Syria is under a single party system, for now… ostensibly. They have grievances with the prior regime and are seeking information which is now irrelevant and has no possibility of being restored. I don't think it is possible for that to be considered partisan
Partisan in the sense of - there is a clear bias for the new regime, and against the old one. Not the literal sense. Note the weasel words from the first few paragraphs:
- "dictator"
- "henchmen"
- "conducted from the shadows"
- "regime"
- "brutal crushing"
- "pro-democracy uprising"
- "rebels"
One paragraph is almost entirely weasel words:
"But his most egregious action in the city, many argue, was his alleged involvement in the so-called Eid Massacre, known by some as the Children's Massacre, which the US noted when sanctioning him."
I always wonder how reporters get folks who have these tangential connections to powerful / terrible people to talk after they refuse. It's an impressive skill.
I assume it's often parallel construction
They just keep trying. It's not uncommon for people to talk after 3 or so attempts. Humans want to talk.
I block numbers at that point. I don’t get how anyone would decide to open up after repeated attempts on their number.
Emergencies. If you are responsible for children or needy adults, and they are not with you, you better respond after multiple tries.
At least that's what a regular Joe like me would do, I don't know what high in power people do.
Not relevant at all, but I find that interesting and funny. As a rule of thumb I tend to accept unknown callers after 3 missed calls in rapid succession. Everybody I know closely knows this, and its come in useful. Though tbh I’d it’s a recognizable localish area code I usually pick up on the 2nd call in rapid succession.
The story is: they find the guy, call him and he doesn't talk. All they've discovered is that he, like many in the Assad regime, are now in Russia. Duh. This is a non-story.
Is anyone just overwhelmed by the propaganda and partisanship as you read this? I have no great opinion on this Syrian regime or the previous - like basically everyone on HN when it comes to geopolitical topics, I do not know much about it - but the bias in the article is almost comically ham-fisted.
These are allegations of war crimes / criminals it’s not bias to describe them accurately.
Every US president has been a war criminal. Deal with them first. The entire western world is based on crimes against humanity. Punish your own first.
It is distressing to hear someone on hacker news describe this, and the history of Syria over the last couple decades, as something that might be "propaganda" and "partisanship."
My god, man - do you even slightly follow the news? Are you really that unaware such that you feel there is some degree of question over just how horrific the Assad regime was for Syrians?
Why do you care? It's their country, let them mess it up as much as they want.
That's the problem with you Westerners, you stole and genocided people around the entire world, and when you were finally thrown out, you come back to pass judgement and impose your own dubious morals on other people.
Was reading book by Sue Black on forensic anthropology , Written in Bone, and she recalled incident where she was an expert witness for commission in Qatar, she confirmed the veracity of eyewitness and photo evidence of Assad Syrian regime of torture - for Arab instigated investigation. Not just Western values.
This is a quintessential HN response.
Condescending, emotional, and completely missed the point of what I was saying.
You can't "both-sides" atrocities of the sort the Assad regime practiced, which are well-documented. Even if you want to grant an individual associated with Assad the benefit of the doubt, this is the the point of a trial, in international court, the same sorts of trials that were given to Hitler's associates post WW2.
If you don't know much about it then why are you making accusations about what is and isn't true?
I know as much about it as every geopolitics expert who's responded to me - in that I have seen news stories. What of it? Do you take every news story you read at face value? I don't. Hence - no opinion; unlike all the experts on modern Syrian history we have here who have no doubt great amounts of knowledge on the civil war, finer points of ideologies, accurate death counts from third party sources, et.
Also, do you know how to read? I said it was propaganda and laughably biased. Weasel words. Can you not see them? Never accused them of fabricating anything.
It's the BBC. This is what they do. Just because they speak or write in a fancy tone doesn't change the fact that they are 100% lies and propaganda.
I’m actually not overwhelmed or see it as partisan
> There are widespread calls across Syrian society on social media for former senior officials to be held accountable
> Syria's Attorney General, Hassan al-Turba, told the BBC the government had launched a lawsuit against Luka, accusing him of "premeditated murder, torture, and death resulting from torture".
Syrian administration is using the court system and these aren’t leanings of BBC
I understand your general sentiment regarding being involved in other countries, I just don’t think it applies here
Regarding the term “partisan”, Syria is under a single party system, for now… ostensibly. They have grievances with the prior regime and are seeking information which is now irrelevant and has no possibility of being restored. I don't think it is possible for that to be considered partisan
Partisan in the sense of - there is a clear bias for the new regime, and against the old one. Not the literal sense. Note the weasel words from the first few paragraphs:
- "dictator"
- "henchmen"
- "conducted from the shadows"
- "regime"
- "brutal crushing"
- "pro-democracy uprising"
- "rebels"
One paragraph is almost entirely weasel words:
"But his most egregious action in the city, many argue, was his alleged involvement in the so-called Eid Massacre, known by some as the Children's Massacre, which the US noted when sanctioning him."