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.
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.
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.
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.
16 comments:
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.
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.
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.
I assume it's often parallel construction
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.
This is a quintessential HN response.
Condescending, emotional, and completely missed the point of what I was saying.
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'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.
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?