Image is of Assad's presidential palace in 2013. There's more images of it in this article, though the words in it aren't worth reading.
Here is Assad's version of events. I like to imagine he's making one of those Youtuber apology videos where they sigh at the start and talk in a chastised yet somewhat defensive tone of voice.
As terrorism spread across Syria and ultimately reached Damascus on the evening of Saturday 7th December 2024, questions arose about the president's fate and whereabouts. This occurred amidst a flood of misinformation and narratives far removed from the truth, aimed at recasting international terrorism as a liberation revolution for Syria.
At such a critical juncture in the nation’s history, where truth must take precedence, it is essential to address these distortions. Unfortunately, the prevailing circumstances at the time, including a total communication blackout for security reasons, delayed the release of this statement. This does not replace a detailed account of the events that unfolded, which will be provided when the opportunity allows.
First, my departure from Syria was neither planned nor did it occur during the final hours of the battles, as some have claimed. On the contrary, I remained in Damascus, carrying out my duties until the early hours of Sunday 8th December 2024. As terrorist forces infiltrated Damascus, I moved to Latakia in co-ordination with our Russian allies to oversee combat operations. Upon arrival at the Hmeimim airbase that morning, it became clear that our forces had completely withdrawn from all battle lines and that the last army positions had fallen. As the field situation in the area continued to deteriorate, the Russian military base itself came under intensified attack by drone strikes.
With no viable means of leaving the base, Moscow requested that the base’s command arrange an immediate evacuation to Russia on the evening of Sunday 8th December. This took place a day after the fall of Damascus following the collapse of the final military positions and the resulting paralysis of all remaining state institutions.
At no point during these events did I consider stepping down or seeking refuge, nor was such a proposal made by any individual or party. The only course of action was to continue fighting against the terrorist onslaught.
I reaffirm that the person who, from the very first day of the war, refused to barter the salvation of his nation for personal gain, or to compromise his people in exchange for numerous offers and enticements is the same person who stood alongside the officers and soldiers of the army on the front lines, just metres from terrorists in the most dangerous and intense battlefields. He is the same person who, during the darkest years of the war, did not leave but remained with his family alongside his people, confronting terrorism under bombardment and the recurring threats of terrorist incursions into the capital over 14 years of war. Furthermore, the person who has never abandoned the resistance in Palestine and Lebanon, nor betrayed his allies who stood by him, cannot possibly be the same person who would forsake his own people or betray the army and nation to which he belongs.
I have never sought positions for personal gain but have always considered myself as a custodian of a national project, supported by the faith of the Syrian people, who believed in its vision. I have carried an unwavering conviction in their will and ability to protect the state, defend its institutions, and uphold their choices to the very last moment.
When the state falls into the hands of terrorism and the ability to make a meaningful contribution is lost, any position becomes void of purpose, rendering its occupation meaningless. This does not, in any way, diminish my profound sense of belonging to Syria and her people – a bond that remains unshaken by any position or circumstance. It is a belonging filled with hope that Syria will once again be free and independent.
Please check out the HexAtlas!
The bulletins site is here!
The RSS feed is here.
Last week's thread is here.
Israel-Palestine Conflict
If you have evidence of Israeli crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.
Sources on the fighting in Palestine against Israel. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:
UNRWA reports on Israel's destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.
English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.
English-language PalestineResist telegram channel.
More telegram channels here for those interested.
Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Sources:
Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:
Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.
Manhattan DA has indicted Luigi on, among other things, a terrorism charge, alleging that United Healthcare is a part of the government.
he did everything right, and they indicted him!
So we do have state based health care already, who'd of thunk it?
It's just so happens that the state is privatised
To be fair, the only entity (outside of revolution) that can regulate these giant corporations is the government.
honest question: given the definition of terrorism being politically motivated violence (usually on civilians) isn't the act he committed by definition terrorism?
Yeah it is by that definition, but by that definition basically every action taken by the American government overall or by essentially any police force in human history is terrorism.
yea no disagreement there
If I pay someone for something and they don't give it to me, and I shoot them over it, is that terrorism? I would argue no, but terrorism laws are written so broadly that anything can be terrorism.
reminds me of when 'authoritarian raygimes' charge people with terrorism to keep them in jail without trial.
I am stoned AF, so feel free to ignore me, but hear me out.
Which is the worst fate, to burn in fire or drown in ice?
Thinking that you can somehow “trap” the government with legalisms, this is a thirteenth type of liberalism.
A stoned commie can't even spitball impossible, but funny scenarios? Freeze Peach is dead on Hexbear. The sickos are winning.
you can't cast spells against the state
But you can cast Molotovs
I don't think that posters analysis is correct, you can influence government by killing people that aren't necessarily part of that government
wouldnt that only invalidate one of the charges? I don't think he would walk
Fire.
Can someone explain what a grand jury is exactly.
So basically, instead of deciding to prosecute someone for a crime, or declining to prosecute them for a crime, a prosecutor can call for a grand jury. In the grand jury, the prosecutor gets to show basically whatever evidence they want to the jury, and then they ask the jury to decide if the case should be prosecuted.
The standards are supposed to be much lower than a guilty verdict in a traditional jury trial.
There's an old saying that goes something like "A prosecutor could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich."
The purpose is essentially to allow the prosecutor to make whatever decision they want while pretending that they weren't the one that made the decision. They're also not very public affairs so it's pretty easy for the prosecutor to lie about what evidence they did or did not show to the jury.
If you want an example of how they're used for this political purpose, look up articles about the Kentucky grand jury's "decision" not to prosecute the pigs that killed Breonna Taylor, and read some of the jurists statements after the fact.
Also, they're used to terrorize "material witnesses". Chelsea Manning spent years behind bars for refusing to talk to one.
Here's a relavent article: No Right to Remain Silent - A Third Northwest Activist Who Hasn’t Been Accused of a Crime Is Sent to Federal Prison
A grand jury is a legal setting in which like upwards of 40 people are part of a jury that determines whether or not prosecutors have enough evidence to change someone with a felony. The proceedings are secret and only become public if the grand jury determines that the prosecutors have enough evidence to try said person/people in court, also known as issuing an indictment or being indicted. Only the prosecutors are present for a grand jury. The accused don't get to defend themselves, and the prosecution doesn't have to present exculpatory evidence.
The joke in the American legal system is that prosecutors could "indict a ham sandwich" because the grand jury process is very easy to manipulate to make your case look stronger than it is (or weaker, for that matter).
a grand jury decides if there is enough evidence to have a trial.
In addition to the other replies, in most places you can apply to become a "grand juror" cause a jury is just a group of random people off the street anyway (kinda sorta).
If there is a grand jury in your area, you should apply to be on it.
What does "indict" mean? Did they judge that he is guilty?
Did you get the answer you needed?
No it means charge.
it's pronounced like "in-dight". rhymes with bite (I only say this because I remember not recognizing this word the first time I saw it, having only heard it on the news)