User talk:Lenny Silver

What's the problem? The footnote you were citing from; http://www.unmultimedia.org/radio/english/2012/02/unicef-says-400-children-killed-in-syria/, clearly stated "UNICEF does not have access to the affected areas of Homs and cannot confirm the impact of the attacks there". Moreover, the footnote information comes from interested Syrian opposition positions, and you should know for yourself how credible western media sources are. You have now changed the footnote to http://news.yahoo.com/unicef-says-400-children-killed-syria-unrest-162328551.html, which also states the same information I presented in the original contested changes. I am against all violence in Syria and I agree that "Even one child killed in the violence is one child too many." Your objectivity is questionable and I welcome for you to report me as I'm sure anyone will agree with the objectivity of the changes I've presented.


 * We argue this on the talk page, not here. That quote refer to Homs and Homs alone. 400 children have not died in Homs. if you analyze the article more carefully you will see that quote has nothing to do with the 400 children dead, but rather speculation of further children deaths', that is not included in the 400 death toll. Sopher99 (talk) 18:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)


 * The article clearly states that UNICEF cannot verify the impact of the artillery shelling of Homs. They are not saying they cannot verify the 400 children dead. You have a total lack of objectivity. Sopher99 (talk) 18:24, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Listen, I don't know what is wrong with you and why you have this thing against children, but you better quit it. Sopher99 (talk) 19:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

You know though what the term speculation entails? It's the engagement in transactions involving considerable risk but offering the chance of large gains. I think you are an interested party, though I sense that you yourself are not at risk. I think you would like to believe that the Syrian opposition is completely clinical in its assaults and by the grace of God touches only the guilty in the Assad regime. No Sopher99, the free Syrian army is not the hand of God and does not have such immunity; I don't think that the heavy weapons used by the FSA (and the Syrian Government) are so selective in their choice of victims. How many of the 400+ children killed in this civil war were Alawite and how many were Sunni? Hows that for objectivity? The U.N's qualification of anyone under 18 in a conflict as a child is pretty clear. In the western world when a 17 year old perpetrates a violent crime he is moved into an adult setting. Likewise when you have armies of 16, 17 and 18 year old (largely politically ignorant) militant Zealots encouraged by interested outside parties and given weapons, the last thing you should be bilking is their deaths in combat when it is largely your attitude, when safe and sound in the western world, that propel them into harms way. You are trying to control the information on this very important page biasedly, and I do believe that you are doing it working for some NGO for money. Of course I believe in the protection of children, moreover I believe in the protection of children from other older children carrying automatic weapon. Capiche? Lenny Silver (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

1 - There are no figures for how many of those children are sunni vs how many are alawite

2 - You are clearly biased, thinking that everything is some sort of conspiracy.

3 - I don't believe the FSA is the grace of God, i believe the FSA is a group of defected soldiers trying to bring down the government in retaliation for 11 months of violence against protesters.

4 - You are not protecting children by intentionally downplaying the crimes of the Syrian government.

5- I don't belong to an NGO or any organization for that matter. Sopher99 (talk) 21:40, 10 February 2012 (UTC)