Syrians too are now being suppressed by the regime of terror

Discussion in 'Videos' started by حمید, Apr 11, 2011.

  1. حمید Member

  2. lulzgasm Member

    Something tells me the regime of terror's attempt to undermine the Syrian revolution will inevitably fail.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. حمید Member

    No doubt, even if media is silenced to be out of its reach. The chants of demands have given the verdict of suppressed people.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. حمید Member

    • Like Like x 1
  5. حمید Member

    • Like Like x 1
  6. lulzgasm Member

    Those regimes are full of some sick viscious bastards.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. BAAL Member

    alrighty then lets start dispatching tons of g mask that would fuck the regimes day up.
    man that vid of the teenager being torutred is fucking pathic of the regime their just tryin to show that they have a little power and trying to use fear.
    • Like Like x 2
  8. iraniam Member

    The same thing happens in prisons in Iran everyday.
  9. حمید Member

    • Like Like x 1
  10. lulzgasm Member

  11. حمید Member

    They are the same agents spreading terror to remind people of their presense in a terifing manner.

    One of many in shiraze

  12. lulzgasm Member

    That pic makes me want to get some tar and feathers ready.
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Anonymous Member

    If this kind of madness was rampant in my country, I'd be getting ready with more than tar and feathers.

    Atrocities like this can only happen in countries where a government has disarmed the citizens and prohibited their access to firearms.
    • Like Like x 4
  14. lulzgasm Member

    All too true.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Anonymous Member

    If you have the time, I would be grateful for an explanation of why you believe that the Iranian regime's terrorist agenda with the Syrian revolution will fail.

    Thank you in advance for any consideration.
  16. حمید Member

  17. حمید Member

  18. حمید Member

  19. Ogsonofgroo Member

    We heard about the slaughter yesterday, fucking disgusting, and the dictator was offended for getting an invitation canceled?
    Fucking murderers.
  20. حمید Member

    If only you knew how, Iran Regime of terror, used dirty games not to be canceled in the same manner, to a present.
  21. lulzgasm Member

    no real explanation. just a hunch with a sense of general history on how these things eventually end, sooner or later. soimetimes in weeks, other times in years. On some occasions it might taked decades.

    But, fortunately, the Iranian regime's attempt is already failing:

    Edit: I hate my keyboard. It's too damn small for my fingers. :(
    • Like Like x 1
  22. Ogsonofgroo Member

    I don't see any of this ending any time soon. A gang of dictators basing their agendas on fundamentalist fuckery, oil/oilcompany rich and armed sicophants and followers trying to stay on the winning bus, regimes of brutal repression and a whole lot of countries turning blind eyes, hm, been going on for a while and unless the UN gets it's shit together to stop it directly, it'll continue.
    FFS, nearly half a million people have been slaughtered in Africa over the last short while and what does the world do? Sweet fuck all.
    These mulahs and dictators have no respect for the lives of their own people, as long as they can remain in control and rule their various herds the way they want, the common folk will die and suffer.
    Its sure not anything new, and the cowards running our own countries (Canada, Us, European nations etc.) will continue to turn blind eyes as long as the corporate structures can continue to pillage them.
    Its a huge topic, and one I can only look at and shake my head at the utter depravity of it all.
    My opinion, meagre as it is.
    • Like Like x 3
  23. Anonymous Member

    • Like Like x 2
  24. lulzgasm Member

    Why do I get this odd feeling that we've managed to find ourselves smack dab in the middle of World War III? Or is it IV? Damn Cold War, it screwed up our neat and tidy world war numbering system....
    • Like Like x 1
  25. Anonymous Member

    WWII = Atomic Bomb (that was then)

    WWIII = Information Bomb (this is where we came in)

    WWIV = Genetics Bomb (this is too hideous to contemplate)

    (To editorialize a little, it appears to me that WWIII and WWIV are going on simultaneously. Linear narrative was destroyed in WWII.)
    • Like Like x 1
  26. حمید Member

    The power of supported thoughts for such a terrible action is too little to be counted on as even rational.
    • Like Like x 1
  27. lulzgasm Member

    But as far as WWIII goes, I keep remembering what the late, great Marshall McLuhan predicted: "World War III will be an information war where soldiers and civillians alike will equally participate." And this guy predicted it decades before the Internet. Something tells me that ol' McLuhan would not have been surprised in the slightest about Anonymous. He had an uncanny knack in understanding human/media interaction.

    As for a genetic war....
    I write horror fiction and I can't imagine the terror and hideousness of such a war. And that's saying a lot, 'cause I can think some pretty dark thoughts at times.
    • Like Like x 1
  28. Anonymous Member

    Yes, Marshall is astonishing, even after all this time.

    He wrote the statement that you paraphrased above in 1966 or '67. Published in 1968.

    I'm going to look for an example of where he was predicting anonymous, but I doubt I will find the exact term. He was fond of using the term 'tribalism' and wrote of it extensively. It meant many things to him, and leaderless groups was one of the meanings he was fond of.

    Around this same period, he wrote (and published):

    "Computers are the LSD25 of the business & institutional world. Computers will destroy all the business they are brought to serve."

    I think that one is delicious!
    • Like Like x 1
  29. حمید Member

  30. lulzgasm Member

    I don't know the language, but I did catch a word or two that makes me believe this is some major evidence. Is there a version that has an English translation with it? Perhaps a transcript or as subtitles?
  31. حمید Member

  32. حمید Member

    This is about one of the soldiers who joined the people and disobeyed the order of gunfire to the gatherings.
    • Like Like x 1
  33. حمید Member

  34. lulzgasm Member

  35. Anonymous Member

    Why the Gun is Civilization

    Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat – it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

    Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

    When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

    By Marko Kloos

    Reproduced by permission of the author.
    • Like Like x 2
  36. lulzgasm Member

    Someone once asked me what I would do to help achieve world peace. My answer was, "Arm every single adult individual on Earth."

    Naturally, I got called nuts.
    • Like Like x 1
  37. Anonymous Member

    Yes, I believe it was Robert Heinlein who said/wrote "... an armed society is a very polite society..." Having been involved in the firearms community for many years, I can only agree and with some enthusiasm, with Mr. Heinlein.

    I remain astonished, over these many long years, that firearms safety and sanity isn't taught to us in our schools.

    Such is certainly not appropriate in elementary school, but in the upper grades, when our rational faculties are growing and seeking nourishment and values. I believe that there is a place for the subject at that time.

    I'm not trying in any way to derail this thread. The thread is about people who have had their right to resist force with firearms taken away from them.

    In terms of dealing with the anti-gun squad, and people who call you nuts for advocating firearms rights to citizens, check out this marvellous article by a psychiatrist:

    And Dr. Sarah Thompson has given rights to reproduce her article anywhere.
    • Like Like x 1
  38. حمید Member

    A Very Clear Demand. "DOG OF IRAN, GET LOST"
    • Like Like x 1
  39. حمید Member

  40. حمید Member

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins