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.
chneu 1 days ago [-]
They just keep trying. It's not uncommon for people to talk after 3 or so attempts. Humans want to talk.
mingus88 1 days ago [-]
I block numbers at that point. I don’t get how anyone would decide to open up after repeated attempts on their number.
cocoa19 1 days ago [-]
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.
zxexz 1 days ago [-]
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.
mhh__ 1 days ago [-]
I assume it's often parallel construction
duxup 12 hours ago [-]
I don’t know how that relates to what i said.
Sam6late 23 hours ago [-]
[dead]
pseingatl 1 days ago [-]
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.
LAC-Tech 1 days ago [-]
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.
PeterHolzwarth 1 days ago [-]
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?
LAC-Tech 1 days ago [-]
This is a quintessential HN response.
Condescending, emotional, and completely missed the point of what I was saying.
duxup 17 hours ago [-]
What were you saying?
What about that story is propaganda?
SanjayMehta 1 days ago [-]
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.
stevenwoo 24 hours ago [-]
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.
SanjayMehta 23 hours ago [-]
Again: why do you care? Mind your own business, let them prosper or decline. Not my concern, nor yours.
You can point and laugh, as I do, when I watch the invasion of
Europe and the zombie fentanyl apocalypse in the US.
We call it karma, and it's well deserved.
stevenwoo 7 hours ago [-]
I was neutral and responded to your comment. The approach portrayed in the book is pretty clinical and she sticks to things that she can back up in court as factual to the best of her knowledge, it was kind of surprising to come across anything in the book that was remotely topical.
DigiEggz 9 hours ago [-]
Hardships any country faces always affect innocent people. For example, immigrants were affected by the opioid crisis, so how does the flimsy, sad idea of "group karma" hold up here?
Sharing uphelpful, embittered opinions like this only spreads pain that wraps back around and bites you, in the end. Treating the suffering of people as a sport or spectator event, by proverbially pointing your finger and laughing, is repulsive and puts you exactly in the same league as the people you detest.
podocarp 4 hours ago [-]
No, I get their point if you ignore the stuff about karma. It does stoke anger when you say "we know better than you" and try to fix other nations' governments though. This is the same kind of shit where the government says "we know better than you how to live your life", and starts meddling in citizens affairs.
Furthermore, let's be real. All such cases of "help" have never had altruistic goals in mind. I have never heard of a nation stepping into the affairs of another and actually "helped" and left with nothing in return. In ancient times it's mostly just an excuse for invasion. More recently, Osama started out as "help" against the Russian invaders. Saddam Hussein being installed and then toppled was also "help". Iran, was also due to "help" against the monarchy. I can't find a single instance where the help actually worked or was even meant to be true help. We cry for democracy but how many South American democratically elected governments have the leader of the free world toppled? Again, since ancient history the "help" part of the action is always just propaganda and an excuse to go forward to take advantage of some current crisis.
SanjayMehta 2 hours ago [-]
Your comment about "the stuff about karma" is an example of what is annoying about "western culture."
You push your desert cult's evangelism and whine when governments push back on your funding evil missionaries (see the latest brouhaha about FCRA, for example). Senators and even JD Vance are now screeching from their pulpits.
But the US has FARA and that's good? You can push your desert tribalism and that's good?
Learn about karma.
SanjayMehta 3 hours ago [-]
My views are shared by the majority of the "third world" or "the global south" or as I prefer it: the global majority.
Why does this matter? As the formerly colonised catch up and surpass the West, what do you think will happen? Take a look at China?
What you condescendingly call "embittered," is reality.
donotredeem38 22 hours ago [-]
[dead]
aplummer 1 days ago [-]
These are allegations of war crimes / criminals it’s not bias to describe them accurately.
SanjayMehta 1 days ago [-]
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.
yieldcrv 1 days ago [-]
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
LAC-Tech 24 hours ago [-]
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."
yieldcrv 23 hours ago [-]
Okay, sure, maybe I’m blind to it, what is the other perspective in favor of the old regime
I don’t see the new one as being exalted, just present and on a fact finding mission.
LAC-Tech 20 hours ago [-]
I don't know. I would have to compare the regimes side by side. But I am so incredibly skeptical about western interference in the middle east (and I say this as a proud westerner). Gadaffi was overthrown and the end result was too civil wars and open air slave markets. Syria is a different country of course, but my meta point is just because a new government is supported by the west does not mean it's better, as a general rule.
yieldcrv 19 hours ago [-]
I see
The provisional government is not supported by the west, they are experiencing self determination
Specifically because it is not seen as better, just present
duxup 17 hours ago [-]
Those words have meanings, are they untrue?
sulam 1 days ago [-]
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.
shdwslrkr 1 days ago [-]
[dead]
EA-3167 1 days ago [-]
If you don't know much about it then why are you making accusations about what is and isn't true?
LAC-Tech 1 days ago [-]
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.
EA-3167 9 hours ago [-]
So because you deem others to be speaking in ignorance, you decided to follow their example, but with a contrary position? What a waste of everyone's time.
LAC-Tech 5 hours ago [-]
I didn't take a contrary position. I admitted my ignorance, and took a neutral position.
Propaganda is propaganda. I've even seen propaganda I agree with.
shdwslrkr 1 days ago [-]
[dead]
SanjayMehta 1 days ago [-]
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.
Rendered at 04:59:07 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
At least that's what a regular Joe like me would do, I don't know what high in power people do.
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?
Condescending, emotional, and completely missed the point of what I was saying.
What about that story is propaganda?
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 point and laugh, as I do, when I watch the invasion of Europe and the zombie fentanyl apocalypse in the US.
We call it karma, and it's well deserved.
Sharing uphelpful, embittered opinions like this only spreads pain that wraps back around and bites you, in the end. Treating the suffering of people as a sport or spectator event, by proverbially pointing your finger and laughing, is repulsive and puts you exactly in the same league as the people you detest.
Furthermore, let's be real. All such cases of "help" have never had altruistic goals in mind. I have never heard of a nation stepping into the affairs of another and actually "helped" and left with nothing in return. In ancient times it's mostly just an excuse for invasion. More recently, Osama started out as "help" against the Russian invaders. Saddam Hussein being installed and then toppled was also "help". Iran, was also due to "help" against the monarchy. I can't find a single instance where the help actually worked or was even meant to be true help. We cry for democracy but how many South American democratically elected governments have the leader of the free world toppled? Again, since ancient history the "help" part of the action is always just propaganda and an excuse to go forward to take advantage of some current crisis.
You push your desert cult's evangelism and whine when governments push back on your funding evil missionaries (see the latest brouhaha about FCRA, for example). Senators and even JD Vance are now screeching from their pulpits.
But the US has FARA and that's good? You can push your desert tribalism and that's good?
Learn about karma.
Why does this matter? As the formerly colonised catch up and surpass the West, what do you think will happen? Take a look at China?
What you condescendingly call "embittered," is reality.
> 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
- "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 don’t see the new one as being exalted, just present and on a fact finding mission.
The provisional government is not supported by the west, they are experiencing self determination
Specifically because it is not seen as better, just present
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.
Propaganda is propaganda. I've even seen propaganda I agree with.