The West condemned the Syrian regime for this atrocity, choosing to believe that it was they who killed the 32 civilians which included children.
Yesterday June 6, 2012 more shocking images came out of Syria this time purporting to be from Hama. Again both sides laid the responsibility for deaths at the door of the other. Media sources reported that at least 78 people were killed in Hama, Syria. This time though it was also stated that the credibility of the footage was not verified. It was not possible to accurately date the footage.
Many in the West are angling for intervention in Syria. But for Russia and China playing their UN veto card war may already be a fact of life in Syria. As it is the conflict is something between unrest and civil war.
History appears to show the Assad regime as cracking down hard on protesters although even in the past Assad has always blamed a terrorist group or the like. In 1982 in Hama, according to Wikipedia, "The Syrian army, under the orders of the country's president, Hafez al-Assad, conducted a scorched earth operation against the town of Hama in order to quell a revolt by the Sunni Muslim community against the regime of al-Assad. The Hama massacre, carried out by the Syrian Army under commanding General Rifaat al-Assad, President Assad's younger brother, effectively ended the campaign begun in 1976 by Sunni Islamic groups, including the Muslim Brotherhood, against Assad's regime, whose leaders were disproportionately from president Assad's own Alawite sect.
Initial diplomatic reports from western countries stated that 1,000 were killed. Subsequent estimates vary, with the lower estimates claiming that at least 10,000 Syrian citizens were killed, while others put the number at 20,000 (Robert Fisk), or 40,000 (Syrian Human Rights Committee). About 1,000 Syrian soldiers were killed during the operation and large parts of the old city were destroyed. Alongside such few events as the Black September Massacre in Jordan, the attack has been described as one of "the single deadliest acts by any Arab government against its own people in the modern Middle East". The vast majority of the victims were civilians.
This means that in the past the Syrian Regime, albeit under Bashir Assad's father, has blamed the people. It could mean that lying is convenient for the regime or that there is an underlying protest movement in Syria. They may not speak nor act for the majority of people but without free and fair elections they opt for the violent approach.
In the UK the Coalition does not act for the majority of citizens. However their days in office could be numbered. Assad took over the rule of leader as a divine right of birth, in a way similar to royalty. After all somewhere in the past that is how established royal families began. Removing such dynasties is never easy. The Russian revolution in Russia did just that and was ostracised by the West for many years.
There are claims that the majority of Syrians are happy with the current rulers. That is hard to prove or disprove. With a dictatorship in place it is hard to believe. If that were the case what would Assad have to fear from an election?
A range of people in the West are all for action. They acted the same in Libya. Syria is not Libya though. The people in Syria are divided. There is no firm opposition that could replace Assad should he be ousted. That is unless the West are hoping to transplant him with a Western puppet as they did in Afghanistan.
The latest deaths in Hama, it is claimed, were at the hands of pro Assad militia and the regime's forces. If true the report is shameful. More than 100 people including children burnt and attacked brutally. But a word of caution.
On June 1, 2012 we received an email regarding the Houla massacre. It contained an interesting report. In it the writer claims that opposition forces killed those loyal to Assad. In other words the dead were all loyal Assad supporters. It is doubtful that you will find this angle covered by mainstream western media sources. It is for you to decide which details of events are accurate and which are not.
It does however mean that we must get our facts right before we wade in. Yes the killings are dreadful. Yes they are worng. However making sure that you know who was responsible has to be a first step to meting out justice, doesn't it?