Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "Syriana Analysis" channel.

  1. Britain did not have free elections during WW2 either. The moderate opposition right now supports Assad - government of unity (that can be a case of controlled opposition of course). However, more than 75 % of the people in the gov. held area participated in the 2014 elections, he was the only candidate, true - so it was a yes or no - and he got more than 70 % of the votes. In the rebel held areas people were not allowed to vote (as we know they were prevented from leaving the area in general - even if they would need medical help for instance) The rebel held area did not contain the majoritiy of the population, so the majority of Syrian citizens could participate if they wanted. That day the "moderate" rebels intensified their shelling but voter turnout was high nonetheless. In Lebanon Syrian refugees could vote in the embassy, again impressive turnout (they had to prolong it, it seems they caused a traffick jam in Beirut). The Western nations did not offer any possibility for Syrians to vote.
    2
  2. +foxvdie - even regarding Ukraine and Crimea (despite the Russian bias of course) RT is more correct than the MSM. In Germany a lot of the viewers took notice and offense when the publicly funded TV (supposed to be neutral and independent, but their important people are heavily lobbied by U.S. think tanks and they usually do not cross the government or NATO) came up with the crap. The U.S. AND unfortunately also the EU played a shameful role in Ukraine, so the RT view of things happens to be more truthful than most what you get on MSM.
    2
  3. +nightlightabcd how CAN YOU KNOW FOR SURE that the Syrian gov. shot at unarmed ! peaceful ! protesters in 2011?? And BTW the rebels intentionally go into the civilian settlements and they hold the civilians hostage to have them as human shield (as we know from Aleppo). Like mother Agnes Mariam said: We have a lot of desert here in Syria, if they want to fight the gov. why don't they go there to fight ? Why do they go into the villages ? And the rebels/jihadists will NEVER resort to remaining peaceful - even if the sovereign government would let them alone in one area as long as they do not prosecute minorities (which they DO) - but even if the gov. let them alone - the rebels/terrorists/foreign mercenaries sure as hell will NOT LEAVE EVERYBODY ELSE ALONE. The government MUST FIGHT them and since the militants occupy the settlements the dead civilians are unavoidable. I used to belief the story of Daraa (near Jordan boder) - even though I knew the regime change was long before 2011 on the U.S. agenda (7 countries in 5 years General Wesley Clark in 2001, or in 2009 Roland Dumas Former French Foreign Minister). We are supposed to believe that it is a Civil War and that it started out of the blue in 2011 in Arab srping like protests. - Despite that information I also beliefed the stories that the Syrian gov. reacted brutally to protests Then we wer treated to the MSM reporting on the "fall" of Aleppo (meaning the liberation of Aleppo from the reign of terror of the "rebels". Not that I used to "trust" the MSM - but that straw broke the camels backs. At the same time I came across contradicting info - no the protests of 2011 were not peaceful - from the very beginning (or more accurately they were immediately hijacked by mercenaries and armed violent people). And that that is especially true in Daraa and that the mercenaries came over from Jordan (sent by the CIA - which can operate in Jordan as they please). I cannot know if THAT is true - but since they tried to sell so much BS around Aleppoe last year - what else are they lying about.
    1