Yassin al-Haj Saleh has lived a life of struggle for his country. Under the Syrian regime of Hafez al-Assad, he was a student activist organizing against the government. In 1980, Saleh and hundreds of others were arrested and accused of membership in a left-wing political group. He was just 19 years old when a closed court found him guilty of crimes against the state. Saleh spent the next 16 years of his life behind bars.
“I have a degree in medicine, but I am a graduate of prison, and I am indebted to this experience,” Saleh said, sitting with us in a restaurant near Istanbul’s Taksim Square. Now in his 50s, with white hair and a dignified, somewhat world-weary demeanor, Saleh, called Syria’s “voice of conscience” by many, has the appearance and bearing of a university professor. But he speaks with passionate indignation about what he calls the Assad dynasty’s “enslavement” of the Syrian people.
Saleh was living in Damascus in 2011 when Syrian civilians rose up to demand political reform. That protest movement soon turned into open revolution after government forces met the protestors with gunfire, bombardment, mass arrests, and torture.
From painful firsthand experience, Saleh knew the cost of challenging the Assad regime. But when the uprising started, he did not hesitate to join it. He left home and spent the next two years in hiding, helping Syrian activists organize their struggle.
By late 2013, Syria had descended into anarchy. The conflict between the government and a range of opposition forces had become increasingly militarized. Like many other activists for the revolution, Saleh was forced to flee across the border to Turkey. That same year, armed groups in the Damascus suburbs kidnapped his wife, along with three other activists. ISIS kidnapped his brother in 2013. Neither has been heard from since.
Saleh is now among the millions of Syrians living in Turkey as refugees. He travels the country helping to train Syrian writers and activists in exile, while writing and speaking about his country’s plight. As a leftist, he has also been a vociferous critic of a growing international consensus that has come to see the Syrian conflict in Bashar al-Assad’s terms — as a fight against terrorism.
Our interview with Saleh is presented below, lightly edited and condensed for clarity.
Please tell us briefly about your own background in Syria.
As a university student in the late 1970s, I was a member of one of two Communist Party organizations actively opposing the regime. At that time, there was an uprising in Syria that involved students, trade unionists, lawyers, and members of other professions who were fighting against the Assad government, as well as a separate conflict between the regime and the Muslim Brotherhood. There were regular worker strikes in Aleppo, where I was living, and I saw with my own eyes security forces breaking down the doors of homes and businesses.
To be arrested in Assad’s Syria, you didn’t need reasons. But in 1980, hundreds of my comrades and I were detained as part of a campaign by the government to break Syrian society.
I was young, and the early years in jail were very difficult. We suffered harsh treatment. In later years, our conditions were not so bad and we were allowed books and dictionaries. I learned English inside prison, and for 13 years, I read maybe 100 books or more per year. In the last year of my imprisonment, I was transferred to Tadmor prison, which is one of the most vicious places on the planet — a concentration camp for torture, humiliation, hunger, and fear. I was then released in 1996.
The experience of prison transformed me and my ideas about the world. In many ways, it was an emancipatory experience. I developed the belief that to protect our fundamental values of justice, freedom, human dignity, and equality, we had to change our concepts and theories. The Soviet Union had fallen and many changes were occurring in the world. My comrades who refused to change, those who adhered to their old methods and tools, found themselves in a position of leaving their values behind. This is one reason why many leftists today are against the Syrian revolution — because they adhere to the dead letter of their beliefs, rather than the living struggle of the people for justice.
What did you expect from the left in its response to the Syrian revolution?
It came to me as a shock, actually, that most of them have sided with Bashar al-Assad. I don’t expect much out of the international left, but I thought they would understand our situation and see us as a people who were struggling against a very despotic, very corrupt, and very sectarian regime. I thought they would see us and side with us. What I found, unfortunately, is that most people on the left know absolutely nothing about Syria. They know nothing of its history, political economy, or contemporary circumstances, and they don’t see us.
In America, the leftists are against the establishment in their own country. In a way, they thought that the U.S. establishment was siding with the Syrian revolution — something that is completely false and an utter lie — and for this reason they have stood against us. And this applies to leftists almost everywhere in the world. They are obsessed with the White House and the establishment powers of their own countries. The majority are also still obsessed with the old Cold War-era struggles against imperialism and capitalism.
Recently, an event in Rome that displayed images of those tortured and killed by Assad was attacked by fascists. Just days before, it had also been attacked in a local communist newspaper for promoting “imperialism.” There is a growing convergence between the views of fascists and the far-left about Syria and other issues. The reason for this is that perspectives on the left are outdated. They are interested in high-politics, not grassroots struggles. They are dealing with grand ideologies and historical narratives, but they don’t see people — the Syrian people aren’t represented. They are holding on to depopulated discourses that don’t represent human struggle, life, and death.
Protesters hold flags and placards during an anti-regime demonstration in the rebel-held town of Saqba on March 16, 2016.
Photo: Amer Almohibany/AFP/Getty Images
What should people on the left who have misconceptions know about Syria?
The Assad regime, the junta that rules Syria today, has transformed the country from a republic into a monarchy. As you are aware, Bashar al-Assad inherited the post of president from his father in 2000. I am not aware of a statement from one Western leftist protesting against this transformation of a republic into a monarchy. The state has become the private property of the regime, while the economy has been restructured according to the neoliberal agenda.
In the genes of this regime, it is inscribed that there must be no rights for the Syrian people. We are not citizens. We cannot say “no” to our rulers. We cannot organize, we cannot own the politics of our country, let alone organize in the public space or take part in it actively. They force us to suppress ourselves. We are, under their rule, politically speaking, enslaved.
Many on the left look at Syria and know nothing about the relationship between the Assad regime and the Western powers. The Assad regime was never a power against imperialism in the Middle East. In fact, it always sought a role for itself in the imperial game in the region. But let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that Assad was against imperialism. Even if that were the case, the Syrian people would still be a part of the deal! We as a people are not merely a tool for the narratives of the Western left. This is our country. We are not guests.
Over the past several years, there has been, in effect, a “Palestinization” of the Syrian people. We are being dealt with by the regime, and the world, as a people who will be annihilated politically. Maybe they won’t kill all of us. Many of us are still living. After all, only around half a million or so have been killed so far. But politically, they are annihilating us the same way that the Palestinians are being annihilated.
At the same time, there is a corresponding “Israelization” of the Syrian regime. The same way that Israel relies on the United States for United Nations Security Council vetoes to protect it internationally, the Syrian regime now relies on vetoes from Russia. In Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians, only one side — Israel’s — has air power. The same is true in the conflict between Assad and the opposition.
The Assad regime has become a representative of the internal First World in Syria, the Syrian whites. I think the elites in the West find Bashar al-Assad more palatable than other potential interlocutors. He wears expensive suits and has a necktie, and, ultimately, these elites prefer a fascist with a necktie to a fascist with a beard. Meanwhile, they don’t see us, the Syrian people. Those who are trying to own the politics of their own country have been rendered invisible.
What is your position on the Islamist parties?
Under the umbrella of Islam we have many things. There is the religion of Muslims, which should be respected. Then there is political Islam, which includes parties and groups with which one should negotiate and find compromises — groups such as Ennahda in Tunisia and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Then we have what I call nihilist groups like ISIS, which must be fought. But to be successful in fighting against these groups you must give a chance to politics. You cannot isolate nihilists like al Qaeda and ISIS without giving something to other parties with whom you can negotiate.
I am a secularist and a nonbeliever, an atheist. But I don’t find it democratic to fight against ISIS while being Islamophobic, while hating Muslims and expressing suspicion toward them, and at the same time stating that you don’t want any political role at all for Islamists! This is extremism, it is an extremist position, and it is what reactionary Islamic extremism is built on. When you refuse to accept the moderate groups, practically speaking you are supporting the extremists.
How do you respond to the perception in the West that the Assad regime is a bulwark of secularism in Syria?
I think there is something Islamophobic about this position. The Assad regime is not secular. It is a sectarian regime. You don’t need anything related to progress or the enlightenment to be loyal to one sect and fight against other sects. They employ sectarianism as a strategy of control, as a means to seize power forever. In their own slogans they openly say, “Assad or we burn the country,” and “forever, forever,” in reference to holding absolute power over the country.
In secularism, there is inherently the idea of not discriminating between people on the basis of their religion or confessional community. Is this the case in Syria now? No, it is not. If you are an Alawite, your chances of getting a job or having real power in society are greater than if you are a Sunni or a member of another group.
After the revolution began, I was in Eastern Ghouta [near Damascus]. My travels also led me to the eastern parts of Homs and Raqqa. When the Salafists came, I never once saw people celebrating. I am not saying that people were angry, but these groups didn’t have real popularity. People are against the regime, and these groups are against the regime. Their presence filled a gap.
What was it that allowed the Salafists and other groups to gain prominence after the revolution?
For 30 years, the Baath Party has made a project of crushing all political life in Syria. So when the uprising came, we had no real political organizations, only individuals here and there. Islam, in our society, is the limit of political poverty. When you don’t have any political life, people will mobilize according to the lowest stratum of an imaginary community. This deeper identity is religion. When you have political and cultural life, you can have trade unions, leftist groups, and people are able to organize along any number of identities. But when you crush politics, when there is no political life, religious identity will prosper.
Let me give you as an example the Syrian Kurds. Over the years of Baath Party rule, they were manipulated, divided, and even denied their very existence as Kurdish people in what was called the “Syrian Arab Republic.” Despite this, Kurds were still allowed to organize politically. Not one of their political parties was exterminated. When I was in prison, many of my friends were from Kurdish political organizations. They would only ever spend a year or two in prison at a time, never 15 or 20 years.
The Baath Party crushed all political life for Syrian Arabs, including the Muslim Brotherhood parties. When they were confronted by the Syrian revolution, they strove to crush that as well, and this has now resulted in ISIS. ISIS is not an expression of the Syrian revolution. It is an expression of the destruction of Syrian society, and of Iraqi society before it.
A pro-Syrian regime protester waves a Syrian flag as he stands in front of portrait of Syrian President Bashar Assad, during a protest against sanctions in Damascus, Syria on Dec. 2, 2011.
Muzaffar Salman/AP
Bashar al-Assad has begun to portray himself as a partner to the West in fighting terrorism. What are the implications of accepting such a claim?
The war on terror narrative that Assad has adopted is one that is based on empowering states and empowering the powerful against the weak. That narrative weakens those who are already weak, which is why he has used it to present himself to the world as a partner in the campaign against terrorism.
I don’t think that there is anything democratic or progressive about this narrative, or about the practices and institutions related to this war on terror framing. The reason the world is now in a crisis is that the major global narrative now is not democracy, justice, socialism, or even liberalism — it is all about security and immigration. This means that Trump is better than Clinton, Marine Le Pen is better than Hollande. It means that a fascist is always better than a democrat, which means that Bashar Assad is better than the opposition.
Accepting this terrorism narrative makes people like us, those who were active in the revolution, in its peaceful stage, and then in the armed struggle, effectively invisible. All those opposing the regime are ISIS — as Bashar al-Assad is always saying — and the only other choice is him. Accepting this war on terror narrative weakens and disempowers people like us. It disempowers leftist, democratic, and feminist Syrian organizations and activists, while empowering the regime and the extremists.
Now that many people have become alienated from Islamists after witnessing their terrible practices in many areas, is there a chance for secular forces to win people back?
Yes, we have a chance. But only provided that Bashar al-Assad is not there. For us to be a real alternative in the country, Bashar and this junta regime that has killed hundreds and thousands of our people cannot be there. I am a leftist and I am an atheist, but I will not fight against ISIS if, behind my back, you put your hand in the hand of Bashar al-Assad.
If the proposal is, “Let’s focus on defeating ISIS and then afterward, maybe he will still be around,” I will not do it. The one who tortured, humiliated, killed, and despised my people — Bashar al-Assad — is a criminal who must be held accountable. This accountability will furnish a basis for secularists, nationalists, and democrats to compete against mainstream Islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood, and to fight against nihilist groups like ISIS. Both ISIS and Bashar al-Assad are the extremist powers that must be eradicated in order to build an inclusive Syria.
I am not saying that things will be OK when these groups are gone. There will be huge problems to deal with in Syrian society. But right now, we don’t have problems in Syria. We have tragedies, we have massacres, we have a horrific human condition. We have a destroyed country and a destroyed society. When Bashar is gone and ISIS is gone, we can hope for a dynamic of rebuilding and reconciliation, in which Syrians can start to put their country back together. But as long as he remains, this will never be possible.
What do you say to those who concede that Bashar al-Assad is a tyrant but argue that he is a lesser evil than ISIS and should be kept in power to preserve stability?
For us, as Syrians, let me be frank: ISIS is the lesser evil. They have killed maybe 10,000 people, whereas Bashar al-Assad has killed hundreds of thousands. Ask yourself how anyone could tolerate such a situation. Could you imagine that in 10 or 15 years, after crushing all opposition, perhaps the son of Bashar al-Assad will proceed to rule the country after him? How horrible. How criminal. If Bashar al-Assad survives, after killing hundreds of thousands of people, expatriating 5 million more, displacing 6 million within the country, inviting the Iranians and the Russians and Shia militias from around the world to invade Syria, if such an abhorrent criminal survives and maintains his political power, the world will be a much worse place for everyone.
What is your opinion on the possibility of Western intervention in Syria?
First, it is a fable that Western countries did not intervene in Syria. The reality is that they intervened in a very specific way that prevented Assad from falling but guaranteed that the country would be destroyed. The United States pressured Turkey and other countries very early on to prevent them from providing decisive assistance to the Syrian opposition. In doing so, these countries vetoed Assad’s being toppled by the Syrian people by force. Meanwhile, as we can see, they have no problem watching the Syrian revolution be crushed by force.
The United States also negotiated the sordid chemical weapons deal with Russia in 2013 — a deal that solved a big problem for America, Russia, Israel, and for the Assad regime, but did nothing for the Syrian people. The United States also led the “Friends of the Syrian People” group, which it then sidelined and destroyed. Leftists in the West should know this: In many important ways, the Americans have been supporting Bashar al-Assad. The United States helped create a situation in which Syria would be plunged into chaos, but the regime would remain in power.
So if there were a military intervention to depose Assad today, would you support that?
I want Assad to be hanged now, not tomorrow. But there needs to be a vision, the cornerstone of which is to change the political environment of Syria substantially — to build a new Syria on an inclusive basis, with a new majority in the country. For such a majority to be built, you must both overthrow Bashar al-Assad and fight ISIS. This will help Alawites to be independent from the Assad regime and will isolate the extremists among the Sunnis. It will be good for the Christians and Druze and other minorities and will help unite them around issues that transcend sectarian divisions. We have people who are Sunnis who still refuse to be identified by their sect. There are many people like me and others who want real change and want to be part of this new Syrian majority. Only such a solution could be sustainable, and it will be the beginning of solving this crisis that is aggravating the entire world now.
Ultimately, it is not a matter of intervention against Assad. It is a matter of helping Syrians to regain ownership of their country and to hold the criminals accountable. ISIS is not that big of a monster. It can be easily defeated. Many of us are people from Raqqa [ISIS’s capital], scattered around the world, and we are all ready to go and fight them. But we are not ready to go back to slavery under Bashar al-Assad. This is a clique and junta that killed and tortured on an industrial scale. Under international law, it is meant to be held accountable. This is not something that we are inventing. We don’t ask Obama or Hollande to come solve our problems. International law was breached several times, and those who did this should be held accountable. We have a special tribunal at The Hague and Bashar al-Assad should be referred there.
Do you have hope for the future of Syria?
We are resilient people. We still believe in human dignity and in a better future for ourselves and others. We have a cause, and it is a just cause. I think that the Syrian revolution liberated us from an inferiority complex we had toward the other people of the world. We don’t wait for others to solve our problems now, or to define for us what is just and what is fair. We are struggling for our emancipation, without illusions. We are hopeful that more people will join us in this struggle. It is not just about Syria any longer. It is about the world.
Top photo: Syrian writer and political dissident Yassin al-Haj Saleh poses for a portrait in Paris, France, on May 8, 2016.
One thing that troubles me immensely is why so many men, including Saleh, flee their war-torn countries and abandon their wives and children to suffer horrendous strife, abuse, imprisonment, torture, and certain death? Does Saleh’s thought of conscience trouble him enough to try to find or help his wife, children, brother, or his three other fellow activists? Though I agree with his wanting a better Syria and sympathize with his horrible plight and suffering, why does he, and too many other men, abandon their wives and children to such horrendous suffering?
This man claims that the West is ignorant of Syrian history, but he is the one who is ignorant of the West and the history of US (and other Western” interventionist history.
He knows nothing of US evil-dongs in Latin America decades past, and apparently was asleep during the recent Libyan horror.
The West is OPENLY backing the “rebels”/terrorists in Syria, and wishes to directly bomb and ruin that country as it has Libya.
Doesn’t make President Assad the “good guy”, but it sure makes him better than his Western-backed enemies.
This guy is just auditioning for the Syrian Ahmad Chalabi role, is all.
You believe in human dignity and call ISIS the lesser evil????? Really??????
I’m not sure Yassin al-Haj Saleh even knows who Max Blumenthal is, but talking about Western pro-Assad journalists, here’s an article by Saleh published by Robin Kassab-Yassin about Robert Fisk and Seymour Hersh
https://pulsemedia.org/2014/04/25/raging-with-the-machine-robert-fisk-seymour-hersh-and-syria/
And we can add Rania Khalek (another self-promoting ‘journalist’) to the pro-Assad propagandists (I think the Intercept published her BS story on the ‘UN’ report). Rania is scheduled to speak at a two-days propaganda conference in Damascus this week-end together with Syrian officials such as Buthaina Shaaban, the official spokewoman for Bashar al-Assad, she’s the one who right after the first demonstrations in Latakia in the spring of 2011 blamed the Palestinians for being responsible of trying to foment sectarian divide in Syria.
Stop the US! No wars for Israel or for Zionists! If we have to topple every corrupt dictator on earth we will be in oerpetual war and broke.
Remember when the CIA used chemical weapons and we tried to blame assad? Fuck US terrorism!
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/1996/eirv23n45-19961108/index.html
Unfortunately, I’m in agreement, that Syrian people suffer the most. There is no simple answer. I would like to see the US use strong intelligent aid (instead of funding weapons) to help – not escalate, the destruction of Syria; and return it to its people. I can only wish for the best for Mr. Saleh and justice for his family. Thank you for your perspective.
Russians deny that a school was bombed which the UN says killed 22 children and six teachers. A Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman called the photographs “computer graphics” (Daily Mail):
“………A Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman on Friday said an expert examination of pictures showing a strike on a Syrian school that UNICEF said killed 22 children, had shown they were fake…….”Today after expert analysis of photographs from the Syrian village of Hass, it turned out that there was no strike on the school and there were no victims either,” Maria Zakharova wrote on Facebook………..Air strikes on a school in Hass village in Syria’s rebel-held Idlib province killed 22 children and six teachers, the UN children’s agency UNICEF said on Wednesday…….Russian defence ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said Thursday that photographs taken by a Russian drone showed that the roof of the school reportedly hit in the strikes showed no damage and that there were no craters attributable to bombs in the area……And he said that “not one Russian warplane entered that area” on that day……”This is an absolute fact.”…….”
The bombing could have been conducted by the Syrian regime, but when you have a history of lying and covering up war crimes, your credibility takes a hit:
1. Putin denied that Russia was responsible for shooting down the Malaysian airline MH17 over Ukraine (NYT):
“…….A Dutch-led investigation has concluded that the powerful surface-to-air missile system used to shoot down a Malaysia Airlines plane over Ukraine two years ago, killing all 298 on board, was trucked in from Russia at the request of Russian-backed separatists and returned to Russia the same night…….”
2. Putin denied bombing the aid convoy in Syria (AJ):
“……..”The air forces of Russia and Syria did not conduct any strikes against the UN aid convoy in the southwestern outskirts of Aleppo,” defence ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said in a statement……. Konashenkov said the attack the previous night doesn’t appear to have been from an air strike.…….”
However a study of satellite photos led the UN to a different conclusion:
“…….Analysis of satellite imagery of a deadly attack on an aid convoy in Syria last month showed that it was an air strike, a UN expert said on Wednesday……”
3. Putin lied when he said the Russian military was not on Ukraine soil (Telegraph):
“……..Vladimir Putin admitted to deploying Russian military specialists to eastern Ukraine on Thursday, dropping nearly two years of denials that Russian servicemen were involved in the conflict there……”
This article is below minimal standards. Who is this guy Murtaza interviews? Whom does he represent? How many Syrians share his views? How many shared them before this massacre?
However, to address the points made here:
1) it is not true that Assad represented the Alawites only. He had the support of a vast chunk of Sunni, and of Christians as well;
2) nonetheless Assad father and sons are dictators. There is no future for Assad in Syria;
3) the most important opposition the father had was from the Muslim Brotherhood, which can be seen as the predecessor of the terrorists currently fighting the son;
4) the West, particularly the USA, has started sabotaging Bashar’s regime back in 2006. The reasons are the usual. Syria belonged to the sphere of influence of Russia and the USA cannot stand anybody not belonging to its own. In addition, Syria is on the way of Qatar’s gas lines to the Mediterranean and the European market. The USA wants regime change. This runs contrary to international law, but the USA makes and undoes the laws as it wants;
5) Russia saved the day. If it had not intervened a year ago, now we would have IS and/or Al Nusra in Damascus, Christians and Alawites expelled or killed.
Agreed.
“Who is this guy Murtaza interviews?”
Haha, that’s fucking incredible ! I just love Western commenters who deliver your kind of BS comments pretending to have the ‘geostrategic’ overview but apparently lack basic knowledge about the Syrian society, culture and intellectuals. That’s exactly what Yassin al-Haj Saleh says in this interview. Thank for proving his point so brilliantly. You also prove his point about a part of the international Left: you don’t care about Syrians, just about the international sphere of influence.
Yassin al-Haj Saleh posted a response to Greenwald on FB, saying that he should stick to commenting on things he knew something about, and it clearly didn’t involve Syria, it goes for you too !
bro take your propaganda elsewhere dude
Who the hell do you think you are to ask me not to comment here ? My ‘propaganda’ is exactly the same as Yassin al-Haj Saleh. Why don’t you ask the editors here to ‘take their propaganda’ elsewhere, ya himar !
For Hillary it’s all about democracy, not imperialism
A Jewish activists has released a tape of Clinton’s remarks from 2006:
Fixing elections — we’re the U.S.A., it’s what we do, it’s what we have the right to do.
“And if we were going to push for an election, then we should have made sure that we did something to determine who was going to win.” – HRC
Wow. Democracy is hard. Btw – Do you have a link for this, Mona?
These are the two outstanding pieces of investigative journalism that so upset many foul pro-intervention propagandists (including any number here in comments) that they commenced labeling Max Blumenthal an “Assadist” & etc.
Part I: Inside the Shadowy PR Firm That’s Lobbying for Regime Change in Syria
Part II: How the White Helmets Became International Heroes While Pushing U.S. Military Intervention and Regime Change in Syria
Russia was denied a place on the Human Rights Council at the UN (Guardian, 10-28-2016):
“……..Russia has lost its bid to become a member of the UN’s human rights council, in a defeat that reflects the diplomatic cost of its war in Syria……..It was the first time one of the permanent five members of the security council had failed to get elected to the HRC since its formation a decade ago, and followed a campaign by human rights groups opposing Russian membership because of its role in the bombing of Syrian cities, eastern Aleppo in particular…….“They bomb a hospital one day, they run for the Human Rights Council the next. And they wonder why they missed the cut,” a western diplomat said…….”
They bomb an aid convoy one day, they run for the Human Rights Council the next……
Max Blumenthal’s Open Letter: The right to resist is universal: A farewell to Al Akhbar and Assad’s apologists. The same Blumenthal who has written the definitive two-part series showing that the White Helmets, while truly saving lives, are nevertheless founded by Westerners to (tote around cameras filming themselves) and serve as sophisticated PR for intervention and regime change.
You know, the kind of truth that would only be told by a supporter of Bashar al-Assad. My emphasis:
Sing it, brother Max! Yes, “the right to resist tyranny is indivisible and universal. It can be denied to no one.”
And, as with Max, I too, often reflect on the somewhat understandable but nevertheless reprehensible history of leftwing Stalin apologia. Those making an error now, are doing so in contrivance with neoconservatives and warmongers who seek direct confrontation whit Russia, and all to very probably only put Islamists in power rather than Assad. But as with the Stalinists of yesteryear, they use lies, deceit and smears to do it.
I am not having it, and will oppose it with all my might. No matter that the fucking “Conscience of Syria” disagrees and dismisses me as an Assadist.
Thank you, Mona.
rrheard
I have discussed the definition of extreme (far, hard, radical) left numerous occasions on these threads. As I have mentioned before, extreme left political philosophy is opposition to the US (and always in tandem, Israel). It is NOT a reference to “Marxism”. You don’t have to be a Marxist to be a “radical leftist”. Critically, human rights are far down the list in importance. “Liberal” Nick Cohen writes (“Jeremy Corbyn’s failure of courage over Aleppo is no worse than that of other western leaders”, October 15, 2016”)
“……..The far left’s ideology is not “leftwing” in any sense that a socialist from the 19th or 20th centuries would have understood. It is simply opposition to the west whatever the west does. Occidentalism explains the appearances of Labour’s leaders on Iran’s propaganda channels , the endorsements of Russian imperialism, and the silence that greets the Syrian massacres……There is no secret about the nihilism and double standards. Both have been obvious to me at any rate since the bulk of the left failed to show solidarity with the victims of Saddam Hussein in the Iraq war of 2003 . Nor does the far left, if we can call it a left, try to hide its prejudices. When asked why the streets of London were not heaving with demonstrators protesting against Russia turning Aleppo into the Guernica of our times, Stop the War replied that it had no wish to add to the “jingoism” politicians were whipping up against plucky little Russia. The left’s task was “to oppose the west”. That was all……..”
“Liberal” Johnathan Freedland writes about Stop the War Coalition, a British-based anti-war organization (“If they really wanted to Stop the War in Syria, they’d target Russia”, 10-14-2016):
“………….Pity the luckless children of Aleppo. If only the bombs raining down on them, killing their parents, maiming their friends, destroying their hospitals – if only those bombs were British or, better still, American. Then the streets of London would be jammed with protestors demanding an end to their agony. Trafalgar Square would ring loud with speeches from Tariq Ali, Ken Loach and Monsignor Bruce Kent. Whitehall would be a sea of placards, insisting that war crimes were being committed and that these crimes were Not in Our Name. Grosvenor Square would be packed with noisy protestors outside the US embassy, urging that Barack Obama be put on trial in The Hague. The protestors would wear Theresa May masks and paint their hands red. And they would be doing it all because, they’d say, they could not bear to see another child killed in Aleppo……..But that is not the good fortune of the luckless children of that benighted city. Their fate is to be terrorised by the wrong kind of bombs, the ones dropped by Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin. As such, they do not qualify for the activist sympathy of the movement that calls itself the Stop the War Coalition. Indeed, it’s deputy chair, Chris Nineham, told the Today programme that his organisation would not be organising or joining any protests outside the Russian embassy because that would merely fuel the “hysteria and the jingoism” currently being whipped up against Moscow. Stop the War would instead, explained Nineham in a moment of refreshing candour, be devoting its energies to its prime goal – “opposing the west”……..”
Everyone can shut the fuck up about Western leftists supporting Bashar al-Assad
Below, one “Joe” claims Saleh is talking about Max Blumenthal when Saleh cites all of these supposed leftists who support Assad. From now on, I’m gonna post this whole thing, every time anyone even hints at that obscene accusation.
For you see, in 2012, a certain leftwing journalist quit a job at a newspaper called Al-Akhbar, and did it in a letter titled: “The right to resist is universal: A farewell to Al Akhbar and Assad’s apologists.”
This same journalist — who, oh who, could it be? — was then interviewed and had this to say, my emphasis:
So, whether it’s Joe, or Mr. Saleh, now you know that to claim Max is an Assadist is a fucking lie.
Max Blumenthal is an anti-Israel activist, anti-Zionist and a clear apologist for Hamas – an internationally recognized terrorist organization. In an interview with Greenwald last year, he served as a mouthpiece for Hamas propaganda:
“……..So, the development of the al-Qassam brigades is one of the untold stories of this war. If we look at the casualty total of Israeli citizens, we see that about 72 Israeli citizens died. Sixty-seven of them were combat soldiers, which is evidence that soldiers and not civilians were targeted…….Mohammed Deif, the commander of the al-Qassam brigades, and his spokesman, Abu Ubaida, both explicitly declared they were targeting Israeli soldiers, and not civilians. They mocked the Israeli military as cowards for attacking civilians in the Gaza Strip……”
How can Hams legitimately mock anyone for targeting civilians? Hamas has a two decade history of targeting and murdering civilians (Jews) including children. Their record of governing for the people in Gaza is horrendous leading to three wars with Israel. Hamas operatives murdered the three Israeli teens which led to Operation Protective Edge. Indeed, in March of this year, a Hamas terrorist boarded a bus and set off a bomb injuring 19 Israelis (only killing the terrorist). Blumenthal erased the long record of Hamas atrocities while attempting to promote the terrorists organization to the level of respectability. It’s this kind of denial of humanitarian law for political convenience which sets the radical left apart from most liberals.
In the interview, Blumenthal explains a Hamas operation during Operation Protective Edge:
“……They burst into the military base, killed every soldier they confronted, losing only one man, and then ran back into the tunnel, back to the Gaza Strip, and this operation, the video of it, was deeply inspiring to young Palestinians who had only seen, throughout their lives, video of Palestinians being humiliated by Israeli soldiers……”
You could tell that Blumenthal was gushing with pride as Hamas “killed every soldier they confronted”.
READERS: About 95% of the time I do not reply to Craig Summers, who is an authoritarian, pro-torture, Republican and ardent Zionist. Multiple commenters asked that I not reply to Craig because doing so causes him to post yet more walls of drivel-text, which pollutes the board.
Thanks Mona. I don’t need you to reply. As I have just shown, Blumenthal is indeed an apologist and propagandist for Hamas – an internationally recognized terrorist organization.
READERS: About 95% of the time I do not reply to Craig Summers, who is an authoritarian, pro-torture, Republican and ardent Zionist. Multiple commenters asked that I not reply to Craig because doing so causes him to post yet more walls of drivel-text, which pollutes the board.
-Mona- to craigsummers
October 28 2016, 9:53 a.m.
Yes, but is he an anti-Semite? Just kidding …
I appreciate -Mona- acknowledging CS “pollutes the board” by offering a response that “pollutes the board” one more time. The other paste-ups were insufficient but that last one registered.
During times of conflict resolution the ‘broken record tactic’ does work.
Mona, stick to 100% of the time. He isn’t worth the 5%!
Keep up the Good Fight.
I am shocked by these comments. I get that we are all opposed to american interventionism but how can we living in comfortable safety dismiss this guys claims that Assad has killed more people and caused more harm in Syria than isis. I think a little empathy should allow us to see how Assad is the greater evil to someone who has lived their whole life in Syria. Just because the truth is uncomfortable to our political beliefs and is difficult to determine the best solution to doesn’t mean we can just pretend there is nothing wrong with what Assad is doing. And we all know the hype about isis and terrorism is primarily for unrelated political reasons. I don’t know that american action would be helpful but let’s not all attack this guy just to make our moral situation easier
I couldn’t have said it better.
You’re right, you couldn’t have. For one thing, you are not “opposed to American interventionism.”
For another, you are an extremist who thinks Max Blumenthal is an “Assadist.” Stephen doesn’t come off that foul or nutty.
Those here, pushing the usual line of “Assad worse than Hitler” and WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING, line of argument, fail, as they invariably do to explain exactly what that something is, and why it is better than the alternative. These individuals also fail to explain why they have the right to speak on behalf of the Syrian people. Specifically, why they have the right to reduce the entire Syrian conflict to “OMG, HEARTLESS EVIL ASSAD SLAUGHTERING BABIES, WITH VOLDEMORT PUTIN’S HELP, ALL SYRIANS WANT TO BE FREE OF EVIL, BABY SLAUGHTERING VOLDEMORT PUTIN, WORSE THAN HITLER ASSAD!!! EVERYONE WHO OPPOSES ASSAD NEVER LIES, THEY ARE ALWAYS BETTER THAN ASSAD, AND DON’T YOU DARE QUESTION ANYTHING I SAY, or you’re a VOLDEMORT PUTIN, STALINO ASSADIST!!!”
Those pushing this line (And the accompanying, entirely false assertion about a “peaceful” revolution (which never occurred, see for example this early assessment of the toll of the first year of the war, http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/4645/ ), never actually respond to, or address the following facts.
Why 99+% of Syria’s Christian’s support the evil, worse than Hitler dictator, Assad. Why 99+% of Syria’s Alawites support the evil, absolutely worst human being to ever live, Assad. Why 99+% of Syria’s Druze support Assad. Why 99+% of Syria’s Shiites support Assad. Why a large majority of Syria’s Sunni’s, including, for ex, the overwhelming majority of overwhelmingly Sunni Aleppo, support Assad. Why the ONLY people who oppose Assad that are actually Syrian are radicalized Sunnis, mostly from rural areas. Why over 80% of Syria’s internally displaced live in Syria government controlled areas. Why they never mention the 7,000 CIVILIANS the “rebels” they support have deliberately slaughtered-using weapons that, by their very design, are intended and used to create indiscriminate, mass carnage-while they’re screaming and beating their chests about the notoriously evil Assad. Why they never mention that the head of MSF, admitted, in 2012, that more than half of those who were attacking the city of Aleppo were foreign jihadists. Why they never mention the constant, generous amnesty offers that the Syrian government extends to enemy fighters, even those who have committed serious, even horrifying crimes. Why they never mention the tens of thousands of CIVILIANS slaughtered in Hama, Homs, Latakia, Damascus, by these same “Moderates” there continuous torrent of lies and propaganda always serves, that never ceases, and that, unfortunately, has nearly hijacked the Intercept’s coverage of this issue, driven as it is, by a single, biased person who never engages in good faith and whose clear intent is to advance a particular, sectarian agenda, meanwhile justifying it, and sliming those who dare to challenge these obvious lies.
All that doesn’t change the fact there is a clear moral argument to be made. It lies in accepting the word and accounts of Syrians, living in Syria, who do not support a crazed, propaganda spewing, foreign supported, directed and funded insurgency whose sole purpose is to destroy Syria, to subject every area it does not control to unending terror attacks, and to subject every area that it does to the whims of warlords supported by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the US.
People in Syria are angry. Those people, real, actual Syrians, who don’t have platforms in the Intercept, who aren’t able to contact western reporters via high quality, expensive satellite internet and have their every claim repeated as if its unchallenged fact, are the ones that need to be listened to. They’re outraged at the unending torrent of lies, the constant slander, the constant erasure of the millions of Syrians who don’t support a Western, Israeli, Islamist armed insurgency dedicated to literal (not made up) genocide against every region, group and every individual, in Syria who doesn’t support their particular goal of transforming Syria into a Wahhabi ruled puppet state designed, ultimately, to provide a fertile recruiting ground for Jihadists who’ll than be used to attack Russia, Iran, Iraq, and every other country their Saudi masters hate, and want to be able to weaken and undermine.
Those Syrians that, even as they live under Jihadist occupation, still support the Syrian government. Those Syrians who desperately want to escape from jihadi ruled East Aleppo, and haven’t been allowed to, by the same “Rebels” this article shamelessly propagandizes for. Those Syrians who are literally erased by those in the Western “press” who scream at the slightest claim of atrocity, no matter how true or false, that comes from those who support Al-Qaeda and ISIS, but ignores proven atrocities committed by those very same forces, and in fact, often pretend they never happened.
The true path here for every person who actually cares, whether or not they call themselves a “leftist”, is to listen to those voices, respect them and to stop acting as if the only people that have a right to speak for the Syrian people are random “dissidents” in Turkey, New York, London, Washington, and other places, who’ve, from the beginning supported intervention, who’ve lied about the presence of foreign jihadists, who lied about the vast support from foreign governments-available from day one-that poured like a never ending river of money and arms into the hands of those same forces that hypocritically shriek for a no fly zone and make absurd claims about non-existent US support for Assad, and who now assure us they are absolutely, 100% committed to Western style democracy and every other sort of delusional lie that’ll best advance their true agenda. Don’t follow the false reality proscribed by the MSM and the authors of this article, that simply repeats the same lies found in others, and presents no more proof for them than those did.
As for the propagandists here, who’ll no doubt decide to attack this comment, I’d advise caution. You may draw more attention to your own lies, transparently false rhetoric, and attempts to obfuscate reality than they can support.
Voice of Revenge?
I now understand why Yassin wants to hang Assad for kidnapping/killing his wife, if he assumes Assad Regime did such a thing. I wouldn’t put this action past the Assad regime either. If I was this him, I’d be furious as well.
At the same time though, his arguments make little sense in this interview, as numerous folk have clearly & repeatedly commented. There’s so many holes in his arguments. Too many holes.
Sorry Syria, but if this is your conscience, show us your logic & heart. Show us to a human who can string rational arguments together & bring together the fractured opposition towards a new era of peace in Syria with the millions backing the Assad regime. A plan not built on revenge, but one constructed on a renewed sense of peace and semi-unity.
An angry conscience will likely lead us to more wars, far worse than today’s already high levels of death. By the way, it was just announced that maybe 66% of wildlife is gone by 2020.
So let’s also put Syria in perspective, meaning many of us are not willing to roll the dice on seeing WWIII between Russia & USA, especially when we’ve got so many pressing & urgent problems to deal with that are already far more complex than Syria. We’re looking at Earth’s sixth extinction straight in the eye.
An ‘eye for an eye’ policy does little for sustainable peace. Yassin lost me at his dead end comment ‘I want Assad to be hanged now, not tomorrow.’
That doesn’t appear to be what happened, or to be what Saleh thinks. The man who made an award-winning documentary involving Saleh says it was possibly the Islamic State. At any rate, he doesn’t speculate it was Assad.
The saddest thing this director says is that this occurs between Saleh and a younger, left-wing rebel:
Saleh may well not be able to get over this bitter fact.
Wow. So both bro & wife likely kidnapped by ISIS/rebels.
Thanks for key info & that last powerful quote as well about “admit & accept.” I retract my argument about revenge. I wish the authors would have included this upfront.
However, this info only further proves that the rebels are highly fragmented and at war with themselves, civil wars within civil wars. It seems the stage was & is still set up for a Iraq/Libya-like aftermath chaos if Syrian Gov Forces were/are pulled and the fragmented rebels put in charge.
A number of highly informed, leftwing, Arab sources have a great deal to say about Mr. Saleh. It may well be some of them will be saying it at The Intercept.
“The man who made an award-winning documentary involving Saleh says it was possibly the Islamic State.”
No he doesn’t. Here’s what the article states: “During the making of the film, Homsi himself was captured and detained by ISIS for a month. Saleh’s wife Samira Khalil was also kidnapped, possibly by the Islamic Army, and remains missing.”
You’re mixing up Islamic State (ISIS or ‘Daesh’ in Arabic) and Islamic Army (Jaysh al-Islam), two totally different movements.
His position, the position he represents: In a nutshell: the present conflict in Syria is between a democratic revolution and a brutal dictator. The presence of jihadi elements is secondary, and there is not need to pay too much attention to the notion that they represent and are the tools of foreign powers looking to dismember Syria.
He does not want to talk about jihadis other than ISIS, repeating the current position of the US government that, implicitly, all other Islamist element are just “moderate” MB-type “political Islamists.” Al-Qaeda, et. al., all the “rebels” who have declared their goal to build an anti-democratic sharia state don’t exist for him, have no power or significance. I find that a ridiculous position. You decide.
He holds that, at any rate, any nasty jihadis will (his position shifts, as he thinks necessary for his interlocutor) 1) be defeated at the same time as Assad is—as long as we prioritize defeating Assad, or 2) will disappear or fade into insignificance when, and if and only if, Assad is defeated (because, don’t forget, the jihadis only draw their strength from the presence of Assad, not from the foreign powers arming and funding them). Once Assad goes, extremism and sectarianism will be easier to “isolate.”
(“you must both overthrow Bashar al-Assad and fight ISIS. This will help Alawites to be independent from the Assad regime and will isolate the extremists among the Sunnis.”)
I find that a ridiculous position. You decide.
He takes a clear position denouncing those leftists who want to prioritize defeating ISIS and other jihadis, and who would seek to defeat them without necessarily eliminating Assad, He “Will not do it.”
(“I will not fight against ISIS if…If the proposal is, “Let’s focus on defeating ISIS and then afterward, maybe he [Assad] will still be around,” I will not do it. “)
This is not because he won’t make a “lesser evil” choice. It’s because he takes the clear, mirror “lesser evil” position that “ISIS is the lesser evil.”. He is quite willing, in fact, to see, and work for, the defeat of Assad and the Baath Party government, even if it means leaving ISIS and other jihadi armed forces dominant. This is not a position of neutrality between the parties; it’s a preference for the jihadis.
I think that’s a pernicious position. I have no problem acknowledging that one has to choose one way or the other in this military conflict, and no problem stating that I take the opposite view. But even if you can figure out a neutral position, it’s not his. You decide. Gotta decide.
To support all this, he has not just to ignore how the present Syrian conflict fits in the history of the last 15 years of American imperial policy, he has to contend that the way it fits is that the U.S. supports Assad! He has to contend that “The reality is that they [the U.S] intervened in a very specific way that prevented Assad from falling,” and that the U.S. took the initiative on the chemical weapons deal to get out of attacking Syria .(“The United States also negotiated the sordid chemical weapons deal with Russia in 2013.) Obama, Clinton, the U.S. neocons don’t really mean it when they say “Assad must go!” They weren’t really itching to take him out in 2013, or to start that process with a no-fly-zone now. They’re friends of Assad, working against the “moderate” democratic rebels.
I find these positions ridiculous. I think anybody who’s paid any attention—and certainly the staff of the Intercept—knows that they are ridiculous. But his position requires him to contend, and you to believe, this. But you decide.
When asked whether he would support “a military intervention to depose Assad,” he avoids answering the question, though the implication of his position is clearly that he would. He avoids saying what he means here because he knows the Intercept’s readership probably wouldn’t like his answer. (It has also to be remarked that the interviewers—who are, I infer, presenting him because they sympathize with him—also carefully avoid asking precisely what they mean: “Would you support an American military intervention.”)
It’s a democratic revolution. Jihadi element aren’t important. ISIS is the lesser evil. The American are preventing moderate democratic rebels from defeating Assad. Some vague military intervention by some unidentified humanitarian army may or may not be appropriate to effect regime change.
Brave or ridiculous? You decide. Do have to decide. We’re on the verge of WWII over this
Why Clinton’s plans for no-fly zones in Syria could provoke US-Russia conflict
Oh swell…Hillary Clinton thinks a NFZ is just a great way to get “leverage” over Russia. What could possibly go wrong?
In response to Mona’s fear that a no-fly zone will result in a war with Russia –
Christopher Harmer, Senior Naval Analyst at the Institute for the Study of War (“U.S. OPTIONS FOR A SYRIA NO-FLY ZONE”, 11-4-2015), writes that a no fly zone is “reasonable and plausible” under certain conditions. He acknowledges that establishing a no fly zone “is more difficult with Russian aircraft engaged in Syria”, and that there is always the danger of “escalation”.
“……..The Assad regime has used the Syrian Arab Air Force (SAF) to indiscriminately and deliberately bomb civilian neighborhoods. Establishing a No-Fly Zone over certain locations in Syria will significantly reduce the Assad regime’s ability to conduct widespread bombing attacks against civilian areas. Establishing a No-Fly Zone is more difficult with Russian aircraft engaged in Syria. It is not impossible, however, and can be reasonable and plausible if certain conditions are set. This backgrounder details three separate Courses of Action to establish a No-Fly Zone, as well as two additional courses of action for potential action other than a No-Fly Zone. The suggested No-Fly Zones are limited in geographic scope, covering only a relatively small portion of Syrian air space, and are examined to minimize resource requirements and risk to U.S. equipment and personnel while still presenting a viable and enforceable No-Fly Zone. These are technical studies that explain in practical terms how the U.S. could establish No-Fly-Zones. The options presented here assume the support of Jordan and Turkey in order to put forth a set of options that minimize both cost and risk……”
Mona writes:
“…….In a speech to Goldman Sachs in 2013, Clinton confessed that a no-fly zone in Syria would “kill a lot of Syrians.” This is because it would require bombing Syria’s air defenses, “many of which are located in populated areas,” according to Clinton……” – Mona
According to Christopher Harmer, Senior Naval Analyst at the Institute for the Study of War, in the limited geographical no fly zone he proposes, the Syrian Air defenses would not have to be bombed saving Syrian lives:
“………While a full No-Fly Zone covering all of Syrian airspace would require active electronic suppression or kinetic engagement of the remnants of the Syrian IADS, the following No-Fly Zone proposals are limited in geographical scope and do not require constant electronic jamming or active kinetic suppression [bombing] of the Syrian IADS. As a matter of prudence, the capability to electronically jam the Syrian IADS on a continuous basis should be present, as well as the ability to destroy the Syrian IADS, although it may not be necessary to do so……” my insertion in brackets
Before Hillary blindly forces the US air Force to implement a no-fly zone, she will look at options like this limited geographical no-fly zone and/or possibly increasing the sanctions against Russia.
READERS: About 95% of the time I do not reply to Craig Summers, who is an authoritarian, pro-torture, Republican and ardent Zionist. Multiple commenters asked that I not reply to Craig because doing so causes him to post yet more walls of drivel-text, which pollutes the board.
Thanks Mona. I don’t need you to reply. In this case you can’t anyway.
Ok, here’s one of the 5% substantive answers. See what Charles Harmer says a year later, as in , about a week ago. I found that in the course of searching for something else. And oh my.
You wren’t trying to mislead us about Harmer’s current position and the changed facts on the ground, now were you, Craig? Never mind, I will revert to ignoring you.
You are going to have to provide a link that works Mona.
Russia Advances its IADS in Syria, October, 16, 2016
Fair enough Mona ( i doubt you just happened to find that article, but it’s a good idea to check sources).
The deceit of the pro-interventionists is frequently breathtaking:
Mona writes:
“…….This thread is about Maz Hussain’s propaganda to start war with Russia…..”
Now Murtaza wants to start a war with Russia. I guess we should have a show of hands of people who DON’T want to start a war with Russia. Is there anyone left besides Mona? OK, the yeses have it. Everyone wants to start a war with Russia (except Mona).
You are a true nutcase.
READERS: About 95% of the time I do not reply to Craig Summers, who is an authoritarian, pro-torture, Republican and ardent Zionist. Multiple commenters asked that I not reply to Craig because doing so causes him to post yet more walls of drivel-text, which pollutes the board.
Thanks Mona. I don’t need you to reply. In this case you can’t anyway.
Media Roll Out Welcome Mat for ‘Humanitarian’ War in Syria, my emphasis:
This is one more thread about the humanitarian bludgeoning of the Syrian people hysterically hijacked by Mona because she fears HRC wants (WANTS) to start a war with Russia. This is just one of several articles that she has (non stop) posted drivel about the intentions of Hillary. If this was Gaza, she would be posting about US supplied arms, the Zionist fascists and dead children. Syria? Nothing.
You have to be a little loony to believe that Hillary is going to enter office with the goal of starting a war with Russia.
This article is 100% in line with the western narrative that has by now been largely discredited. A good summary is provided in the following article with sources:
The Revolutionary Distemper in Syria That Wasn’t: https://off-guardian.org/2016/10/23/31166/
Of course there were a small number of political dissidents that experienced and felt like this guy in Syria, but I don’t think they are being honest about the real root cause of the problems nor any grasp of how to realistically achieve their goals. I doubt the current situation in Iraq, Libya and Syria is a price most leftists are willing to pay just to see one dictator go. And also when these regimes by being nationalist and independent actually has done a lot of good for their people. Fueling violence and funneling arms/money to extremist groups is the method of imperialism, not democratic reform to the betterment of the people. You have to make it BETTER, not fuck it all up just coz there is a bastard at the top. That’s what Washington will have you all believe
Adam H. JohnsonVerified account
[email protected]
Russia lost 20m people fighting WW2 but will roll over and let US bomb their only military base in the Middle East is my new favorite take
Where did he come up with the idea that the US was planning to bomb Russia’s only base in the Middle East? That is fucking idiotic!
READERS: About 95% of the time I do not reply to Craig Summers, who is an authoritarian, pro-torture, Republican and ardent Zionist. Multiple commenters asked that I not reply to Craig because doing so causes him to post yet more walls of drivel-text, which pollutes the board.
Mona please stop spamming with your copy and paste comments.
Revenge vs Reconciliation
“I want Assad to be hanged now, not tomorrow. ”
This statement from Yassin disturbs me greatly.
I understand why he would feel this, but for him to put that out in an interview that he knew the world will read…just shows me that he’s more interested in putting his personal revenge ahead of at-large peace.
Peace over Revenge
There was recently an inspiring Colombian March by families of victims from the civil war who preached peace over revenge. Mandela in South Africa set an example too when he pushed forth the Truth & Reconciliation Commission that gave amnesty for honesty for would-be war criminals of the apartheid.
I support the Syrian Tribunal at the The Hague that highlights all the tragedies under the Assad regime, as Yassin mentions. I’ve no problem of having Assad speak there too (or via tv from another nation), giving his version of the story. I’ve no doubt about horror stories on both sides, but at the same time, I am personally open to Assad receiving amnesty if a peaceful transition can be engineered. Maybe Assad moves to Russia.
If the choice his putting a rope around his neck or having him put pen on paper for peace, then for the sake of the Syrian women & children on the streets, please offer him the pen. Further, no one in their right mind really thinks Assad, especially now with the backing of Russia, is just going to turn himself in at The Hague and say
‘You’re right US-EU, my family & I are war criminals, so please prosecute us. By the way, we’re sorry for doing all those business operations with western governments for decades. Those governments & companies were in no way responsible for these war crimes. Only me & my family are responsible.”
Speaking of The Hague in Holland, South Africa is set to leave the ICC. Without the nation of Mandela at The Hague, I sincerely worry about the validity of such a courts based there. South Africa makes a strong argument that African Nations appear to be prosecuted far more than any other region.
How you expect Africans to respect such organization based in the EU-US when those nations reward time and time again men who arguably are also clear war criminals. George W Bush in the Iraq Attacks rings a bell and so does his father’s involvement in Latin America. Yet we celebrate their paintings & skydiving activities. Whatever Assad gets, shouldn’t the Bush Boys get similar treatment? I’m open for the Bushes to be put under ranch arrest in Texas too, as I’m not hell bent on putting people in prisons or putting nooses around their neck. Getting them & Assad out of the eye of the public is likely far more helpful than seeking bars & blood.
Various opinions and options must be pushed forth rather than this repeated line that ‘Assad is a war criminal & must be hanged/imprisoned.’
I understand why some would have a hard time living under his rule again, but for Yassin to push for Assad to be ‘hanged now, not tomorrow’ shows me exactly where this his mindset is at. He speaks of killing as his first priority. Great, because that’s what we need most right now, a guy hanged in public. It worked great with Saddam Hussein, didn’t it?! Those few moments of revenge for what, a decade or more of chaos?
Yes, I would have rather had Saddam Hussein alive on some remote island with a treaty of a peaceful transition for his military than what has just occurred this last decade. Imagine all the lives saves, as well as the buildings & artifacts preserved of where civilization literally began.
Men are largely animalistic in their behavior, so maybe we need to get women at the table (or at least 50%), like Assad’s wife and women from the opposition groups. I hope Yassin isn’t at the negotiating table, that’s for damn sure. He’s in vampire mode right now.
“In America, the leftists are against the establishment in their own country… And this applies to leftists almost everywhere in the world. They are obsessed with the White House and the establishment powers of their own countries. The majority are also still obsessed with the old Cold War-era struggles against imperialism and capitalism.”
Yes, exactly. The writer is an advocate of U.S. military intervention – no leftist of any kind. Leftists identify the key source of international crises, proxy wars etc., in the heritage and present activity of U.S./Western imperialism and capitalism. Local gangsters like Assad are merely bi-products of this system.
This Arab woman activist on the TeeVee talking head, Michael Weiss’s, insanity:
As the interventionists transition from: “You are nuts, there isn’t gonna be a war with Russia if we do a NFZ!” to: “So what? It’ll be over in two seconds!” those with most to lose are finally waking up.
It’s quite easy to find someone against a given leader and allow them to voice their opinions, but I would like to see The Intercept interview a Syrian who is supporting the Syrian government as well in order to provide balance.
If a foreign news organization did an interview with an ardent Trump supporter and let them give their view of the Obama administration, it would undoubtedly led many readers to believe many things that aren’t true not only about the US, but about the views of the majority of its people (since not all Americans agree with Trump’s views). Providing a platform to one side as being the only authentic voice of an actual Syrian is misleading and frankly surprising coming from The Intercept.
For my part, I’m one of those leftists who believe Syrian affairs should be left up to the Syrian people. If they don’t like the way their country is governed, they should have the right to protest it and work to change it. I support that. I don’t however support the regime change policies of the Obama regime and the idea that we can decide who should lead foreign countries. I have absolutely no respect whatsoever for people like the man interviewed in this article who flee to other countries and wish calamity and destruction upon his countrymen simply because he doesn’t like the leader.
This man is a coward and a scoundrel who doesn’t deserve the platform provided him by this website. When he said he preferred ISIS to Assad, the interview should have ended right then and there.
I guess it’s good once in a while to hear from someone who actually lived through these conflicts.
The rest of The Intercept must be heard from
This is a start, but not sufficient:
This publication and its principals have a moral responsibility. Silence in a case such as this equals nothing good.
-Mona- to Joe
October 26 2016, 2:16 p.m.
My entire world view is vile ?
Yes.
The neocon/neoliberal worldview is depraved. (Altho, I do allow that some percentage are merely deluded fools, not soulless ghouls.)
hysterical and unhinged… anger issues.
The depraved typically mock moral people who repudiate them. Nothing new in your doing that. But I did neglect to allow that you could be one of the deluded fools.
In any event, I disposed of your inane attempt to equate my accurate characterization of you and your worldview with the outrageous shit many interventionists spew about good people who are their anti-interventionist comrades.
Good day.
“your entire world view is vile”?
-Mona-‘s label-maker is running …
at least it keeps her off the road.
This thread is about Maz Hussain’s propaganda to start war with Russia. Is THAT comment sniping at me really all you can think of to start a new, freestanding comment with? pffft
You are an antisemite. The flip-side of such as neocon Joe. Of course you both dislike me for my denouncing your vile statements and worldviews. Good — I’d be worried of you people didn’t detest me. But for fuck’s sake, there are more important things to be discussing than your fragile ego.
My fragile ego …
Projection it is.
Any one who has disagreed with Mona becomes the most “vile” or “has a vile world view” or “is despicable” or “morally bankrupt” or “crank” and on …
I dislike you because you are not as smart as you would have yourself believe. You prove it by making baseless accusations against the messenger.
The Pareto Principle states that 80% of one’s problems can be accounted for with 20% of the actions involved. That means YOU are in the 20% that ruin 80% of comments.
CS fits in that category, too. I’m sure he appreciates the company …
(Yes, I used some high school level math – I can’t go any lower for you as it would be a disservice to the other readers.)
Let me fix this for you:
There, now the above more or less works, until you get to the Pareto bullshit. Unless, of course, your twist on Pareto stands fort the proposition that antagonism to both antisemitism and neoconservatives is bad for a comments section.
And with that, I revert to mostly ignoring you, except to occasionally point out that I ignore you. Gator began ignoring you for your antisemitism, and he should have held fast to that — I should have as well.
Mona, it would different if I was the only one to note your behavior.
Gator asks loaded questions and drops into the stereotypical, “Let me explain what I was saying …” with a dash of condescension; that is who Gator is. (He just dropped in to do that to Pedinska, of all people.)
You went out of your way to label me a “crank” (with link to not sure where but I can guess) for using high-school level math to describe the tower collapses. (I’m sorry basic trigonometry is foreign to you.)
Your argument that crazy people claim to have the simple math to describe some phenomenon is laughable. You announce your stupidity to the board and then double-down with invective to cement your ego.
I hope Glenn sees this and responds in the most civil way, with facts.
Because this is just straight up factual lying and character assassination. And that’s coming from someone who otherwise appreciates much of the writing Erik Loomis does at LGM.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/10/i-missed-the-memo-telling-the-left-that-we-now-support-the-widespread-invasion-of-privacy
Loomis is a fucking apologist. He points to a risotto recipe as if it is representative of the emails.
That’s pretty weak.
“In America, the leftists are against the establishment in their own country… And this applies to leftists almost everywhere in the world. They are obsessed with the White House and the establishment powers of their own countries. The majority are also still obsessed with the old Cold War-era struggles against imperialism and capitalism.”
Yeah, guilty as charged. Opposition to U.S./Western imperialism and capitalism. Cancers on the human species. Assad is merely a by-product of this system.
I completely forgot to mention. What is the Message to the ‘West’? After all that it didnt quite get through in the end.
The knee-jerk reactions to Mr Saleh’s broadside of the unevolved Left and their disgusting disregard for the Syrian people just shows how defeated and degenerate are what is left of what at one time was a proud and progressive movement.
Saleh need not worry too much about them for they have little following except in the pisspot fringes of the web where despots become deified and all resisters are terrorists.
The one major fact that Saleh does not seem to recognize is that western instilled leftist ideas are as dead in the ME as elsewhere even reformist versions. Transnational Islam based unity is the only way the people of the MENA can resist the poison of western ideology and culture whichever fruit of that deadly tree they may taste.
Your lake of understanding is emphasised by your conflating left and progressive as though they are neccessarily the same. Transnational Islam?
The current brand in existance fighting in Syria and Iraq among other places is neither progressive nor left wing and it is in fact thoroughly anti-democratic.
That one is not a leftist — it’s a wingnut troll seen here before. Best ignored.
I’m an anarchist but I don’t presume to have any right to project my western concepts onto anyone especially the peoples of the Islamic world.
The leftists and progressive brands don’t seem to have much meaning anymore with leftists sucking up to dictators and progressives enabling imperialism. With these vile exceptionalist/imperialist traits on display why would anyone accept either of their judgments on political Islam, as valid.
So called western democracy should be shunned for if you were paying attention you would notice it is a sham built on the backs of slaves and maintained by exploiting those who can’t resist its tentacles.
Too many people in the Islamic World have been poisoned by western culture and ideology and assimilated to allow this transition to be moderate or peaceful but support for it does seem to be growing. The alternative is continued debasement and humiliation under western imperialism and/or the same under local nationalist, another western concept, sectarian rule.
This is a good article. It is important to hear such voices.
However, there seems to be a deleberate beating around the bush.
Yassin doesnt really answer the final questions properly. Does he understand the intentions of US/UK/France/GCC/Turkey in Syria?
Does he really belive it is their desire, intention or even ability to support ‘democratic’ forces in Syria?
Does he understand the role of his host country (Turkey) in Syria, especially against the Kurds, who are absolutely opposed to a NFZ.
Does he understand what a NFZ is and how precisely he would expect the Syrians as a whole would benefit from having one implemente in his country?
Furthermore, there does seem to be a deliberate choice to not ask questions about the main opposition – setting aside ISIS. Ahrar al Sham and Al Nusra who apperently represent the majority
The international left he refers to is not homogenous. And those that oppose the ‘opposition’ typically do so on the basis that they oppose the far right islamist militants not neccessarily that they are fans of Putin or Assad.
That is more of a Macarthyite slur that ‘pro opposition’ individuals tend to use.
He also makes a very strange point about imperialism bieng a relic of the cold war. Im not sure what thats about exactly, its clearly a false statement.
He also makes it clear that he wouldnt fight ISIS and co if it didnt mean fighting Assad as well, withought explaining how that would work exactly.
I feel for him strongly, his coutnry has been destroyed, but his perfectly understandable rage against Assad government seems to blind him to the alternatives under the current circumstances. This is not unusual for dissidents.
There were Iraqi’s and Libyans who were and are the same way.
Mona and Humanitarian Issues
What is the difference between the radical left and liberals? Human rights matters to liberals whereas opposing and blaming the US consumes the radical left. One of the most common themes promoted by the radical left is blaming the US for the world’s political problems. For example, Greenwald initially accused the US of being behind the “coup” in Brazil without a shred of evidence. This is the second article by Murtaza which paints a bleak picture of the humanitarian issues in Syria where the thread is hijacked by Mona to highlight the nefarious motives of the United States. In this case, HRC WANTS to go to war with Russia. Notice that bringing in the S-300 and S-400 missile defense systems, an aircraft carrier and six additional ships to Syria is because Russia has “legitimate” interests in Syria and shouldn’t be interpreted as a provocation directed at the US.
In the first article which featured the White Helmets (responsible for saving tens of thousands of lives), the thread had 119 different references to Blumenthal’s two part series on how the US is behind the funding of the White Helmets – and how the White Helmets seek regime change in Syria. The White Helmets are there strictly to manipulate public opinion in support of a no-fly zone. Just forget about their positive contributions such as their courageous acts to save lives which is most certainly a cover for the truth. God only knows how many times Mona posted links to the two part series.
In the above article by Mr. Hussain and Mr. Hisham, they interview a Syrian left wing activist clearly distraught over the death of so many Syrians and the lack of political rights which has always existed under the Assads (and which led to the civil unrest in 2011 –the Arab Spring). Saleh rightly blames Assad (far more than ISIS). Mona hijacks this thread to disseminate the lie the Hillary Clinton wants to go to war with Russia over Syria. This has become an obsession with Mona spanning several different articles:
“……Hillary Clinton really does want to go to war with Russia. This sociopathic freak actually has no reticence about a brinksmanship that could cause WWIII……”
Notice in Mona’s case, it is HRC that is miscalculating the Russian response – never visa versa because Russia has “legitimate” interests in Syria.
Prove it.
And demonstrate it with links to someone you believe is part of the “radical left” vs. a “liberal”, and demonstrate that that “radical left” person is more “consumed” with “opposing and blaming the US”.
We’ll wait.
And I’m going to say this in advance, you are so ignorant that a) you won’t be able to provide any support for a coherent definition of “radical left” vs. “liberal” that any reputable political scientist in the world would recognize, and b) you won’t be able to link any support to your claim because you’re so intellectually vapid, misinformed and lazy that after years you still don’t know how to “hyperlink” to a purported “source” that supports your vapid intellectually empty opinions.
Like I said, we’ll all wait.
Still waiting. Tick tock, tick tock.
That’s what I thought. You’ve got nothing, as usual.
Really, rr, Craig is best ignored. You are of course, free to do as you will, but ASKING him to post yet more of his “reasoning” is…ick!
According to al-Jazeera (10-27-2016):
“…………At least 26 civilians, including children, were killed when air raids hit a school and the surrounding area in Syria’s northwestern Idlib province, a monitoring group said……..”The dead children are students and the planes are believed to be Russian,” said Rami Abdel Rahman, head of the Britain-based SOHR, which relies on a network of informants in Syria to track the war…….”
According to the Russian Ambassador to the UN (same article):
“……….”It’s horrible, I hope we were not involved. It’s the easiest thing for me to say no, but I’m a responsible person, so I need to see what my Ministry of Defence is going to say.”……”
Typically, Russians deny, deny, deny (like Malaysian Airlines Flight MH17 and bombing the aid convoy). According to the same article in al-Jazeera:
“…….On Monday, more than 80 human rights and aid organisations, including Human Rights Watch, CARE International and Refugees International, urged UN member states to drop Russia from the Geneva-based Human Rights Council over its military campaign in Syria……..”
What were they doing on the council in the first place?
This article is disingenuous rubbish. You know it is from the very beginning-
“Saleh was living in Damascus in 2011 when Syrian civilians rose up to demand political reform. That protest movement soon turned into open revolution after government forces met the protestors with gunfire, bombardment, mass arrests, and torture.”
The authors Hussain and Hisham give a false narrative of the Arab spring in Syria: there actually was no significant ‘civilian’ uprising in Syria in 2011. Certainly nothing compared to what happened in Egypt. What’s more, the CIA and Saudi regime had already sent in Sunni mercenaries who acted as if they were uprising Syrian civilians. Yes: the Syrian arab spring was another US ‘color revolution’ just like what happened in Ukraine. But you’d never know it reading this tosh interview with “Isis is not that big of a monster” liar assin al-Haj Seleh. What a ridiculous interview making obviously false and outlandish claims throughout: “Isis is okay”(LOL!)….”the American left supports Assad” (another lie: most liberals in USA believer the American propaganda and want regime change in Syria)…”Syria is not secular” (in fact Syria IS secular and is described as such by all historians or experts on Middle East countries). To call it sectarian is a hed herring fallacy, i.e. just changing the subject. Another lie from al-Haj Seleh: ‘Syria is a monarchy’ (it’s not: it gives its citizens free education up to university level, and also socialized healthcare. Further: al-Haj Seleh acts as if he speaks for the majority of Syrians: he definitely is lying, and doesn’t. The vast majority of Syrians support the Assad government. There are numerous articles substantiating this fact. You can read them at Off-Guardian website for starters–a website which is far better quality and more honest than the Intercept.
This idiot al-Haj Seleh reminds me of Ahmed Chalabi, insofar as he is a convenient ‘victim’ being used by these 2 writers to push for regime change in Syria.
Let’s face it: the Intercept is a one man show: there is only Glenn Greenwald. No other journalists at this website are worth reading. They suck. Not only that, as shown in this article, there is nothing ‘alternative’ about their positions: here is an article demanding for regime change in Syria. You could read this rubbish on the US State Department Website, or in the NY Times or WAPO.
This is easily the most dishonest, manipulative, rubbish article I have read at this website. Don’t think I’ll be coming back to the Intercept any longer. Pure bullshit, I’m outta here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc-RmAVK8Pg
Here, for anybody interested in finding out the impartial truth about what is happening in Syria: here is the findings of the US Peace Council who sent a team of their members on a fact finding mission to Syria at the end of last August. They gave this presentation at the UN. What they found out totally goes against what al-Haj Seleh and these 2 authors claim.
The Intercept has become a massive propaganda site. It has some good articles but plenty of trash like this article.
deschutes
“……This is easily the most dishonest, manipulative, rubbish article I have read at this website…….”
I.e., In Russia, we kill journalist for less.
“…….Don’t think I’ll be coming back to the Intercept any longer. Pure bullshit, I’m outta here……”
That’s a shame. I will certainly miss you, deshutes. A Russian-bot (-bought) is difficult to distinguish from an extreme leftist because they assume many of the same radical positions. Some classic positions of Russian-bots on current events:
1. A democratically elected government of Ukraine was overthrown in a US sponsored coup.
2. The referendum in Crimea was free and fair. The people of Crimea chose freely to leave Ukraine.
3. Crimea was always a part of Russia.
4. Russia is protecting ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine.
5. Russia didn’t shoot down Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17
6. Nazis are running the Ukraine government
7. The US is supporting Nazis in Ukraine
8. Assad is fighting the “war on terror”.
9. Assad didn’t use chemical weapons.
10. The Russians didn’t attack the aid convoy.
11. The opposition in Syria are ALL terrorists.
12. The US is supporting the jihadists/terrorism in Syria (rather than bombing them).
13. The US created ISIS.
14. There is no proof that Russia bombed the UN aid convoy
15. there actually was no significant ‘civilian’ uprising in Syria in 2011.
I added 15 because denying the Arab Spring is an attempt to delegitimize the uprising – and of course, the civilian uprising was another CIA concoction like in Ukraine. And then you have to really enjoy when deschutes calls al-Haj Seleh a liar when he refers to Assad worse than ISIS. That certainly undermines the Russian-Assad “war on terror” theme. Furthermore, it was a Ukrainian jet which shot down MH17 and Russia did not bomb that aid convoy………
“…….Let’s face it: the Intercept is a one man show: there is only Glenn Greenwald……”
Translation: Real men exclusively oppose American imperialism.
Again in the copy/paste?
why do you have need to state (and re satate!)what everybody hears million times in the thousands of the MSM corrupt organs?
i will answer… because it is one of the “elites” preferred methods to brainwash us…
repeat a lie everyday in the most possible outlets… they think (and it works in general) it will become truth!
“…….repeat a lie everyday in the most possible outlets… they think (and it works in general) it will become truth!……”
You should be somewhat thankful, Jack. I didn’t even mention that Russia was behind the hacking of the DNC.
thanking to liars?!?!?
no thanks!
oooooops i did it!
btw
“I didn’t even mention that Russia was behind the hacking of the DNC”
what a stinky like you does mention is the dirtiness that the emails reveal!
that dirtiness fits you well!
“She (killary) started to hate everyday americans”
“…….what a stinky like you does mention is the dirtiness that the emails reveal!….that dirtiness fits you well!…..”
What the emails reveal is irrelevant to Russia hacking the emails because Putin likes Trump.
“What the emails reveal is irrelevant to Russia hacking the emails because Putin likes Trump.”
you are just a piece of trash…
You should work for mainstream media.
A simple question to The Intercept: Why are you publishing article after article on Syria by Murtaza Hussain that simply repeat the dominant narrative presented by the mainstream press? I thought you – The Intercept – wanted to uncover stories, to excavate, to interrogate. Here, again and again, all you have done is give a larger megaphone to the current large megaphone. At least, present something challenging the dominant discourses (like Bassam Haddad’s excellent piece in The Nation) or talk about what is *not* discussed in Syria – the other besieged villages, for example. As it stands, you are becoming just another mainstream paper. Disappointing, to say the least.
I can think of three states and their leadership that are worse than Assad and Syria: 1. America! 2. Israel! 3. Yep, you guessed it, Saudi Arabia! You can bunch in the 5-Eyes to their Yankee masters as well.
This is the new politics of the world, reflecting the current Presidential elections: look, there’s something REALLLLLLLLLLY terrible over there, so we’re going to behave just REALLLLY terrible and then everyone MUST think we are good because we are better than the things we say are REALLLLLLLLLLY terrible.
I have one response to that line of pseudo-logical thinking: fuck off.
So, does The Intercept believe that the World will Return to Being a Nice Place if and only if Assad is removed from power?
I do not fucking think so. You seem to be overlooking the fact that the Middle East is the Number One Hell Hole on Earth spun like a Mid-West tornado by the collision of enormous external forces. But blaming Assad is nice and easy for a moron. I guess. Maybe I am a moron, too. Who fucking knows?
Cheap, lazy journalism with an axe to grind. Fuck you.
Hilarious. This guys bashes Assad, but just few years after his rebellion started, “By late 2013, Syria had descended into anarchy”, his country is now just a pile of smoking ruins and rubbishes, his wife has been kidnapped and probably murdered by islamist rebels and his brother killed by ISIS. Still, he supports the uprising, and wants a greater role for islamists fascists in Syrian politics, while he hides in Turkey rather than fighting for his so called ideals. Typical leftist’s hypocrisy and narrative out of touch with reality
Michael Weiss is not some random Twitter troll. He’s a journalist with, among others, CNN, The Daily Beast, and the author of respected books. (And a fierce Zionist.)
Dangerous fool, or sociopath.
“Dangerous fool, or sociopath.”
Why is -Mona-, Glenn’s former law partner, allowed to spew such trash?
I’m going with projection.
Well, at least you’ve stopped denying who I am. And I’m pretty damn sure Glenn’s assessment of Weiss is the same as mine. Cuz, I know Glenn really, really well.
“Cuz, I know Glenn really, really well.”
Charlie
@Erelis:Israel loves ISIS, not Assad
I wish there was more of Saleh quoted at your link, because it is hard to understand his brief comment suggesting that. Israel has become downright pro-ISIS, and Israel apologists in the West are among the fiercest pro-interventionists as long as the interventions is against Assad and not ISIS.
We have a regular commenter here, Craig Summers, who is a fanatical, rancid Zionist. He rants constantly about the horrors of Assad, and would have you believe he’s appalled for humanitarian reasons. Actually, however, he simply wants what is good for Israel and its ability to continue oppressing Palestinians.
A rather prominent Zionist, Michael Weiss, today tweeted that war with Russia is winnable and that the “entire Russian deployment could be wiped out in 48 hours.”
A transition is occurring among Zionists and other interventionists. It’s going from (and this has essentially been Craig Summers): “You are a paranoid fool, there’s no risk of WWIII, and Hillary isn’t gonna go to war with Russia. We can intervene without making Russia mad.”
To: “Meh. War with Russia. So what? It’d be a cakewalk.”
At any rate, Israel absolutely loves ISIS in Syria, and not Assad.
Those Israelis playing this game of supporting Isis are literally asking for the destruction of Israel. If Isis takes over Syria, they will then move into Lebanon, and then to the border of Israel. Isis will become the tip of spear for all anti-Israeli Muslims world wide.
Very troubling quotes about directly attacking the Russians in Syria and expecting some immediate overnight victory. I suppose for the neocons, order the attack in the morning and celebrate the next night with some good wine. Ain’t gonna happen.
Saleh’s preceived betrayal by the West and Leftists has resulted in an intellectual miasma involving everything Assad. I can see it. He served a horrendous prison term. Here is what Saleh had to say in earlier in this year.
http://www.france24.com/en/20160514-interview-syria-yassin-al-haj-saleh-assad-status-quo-arab-spring
Really, we are to believe that the US and Israel favor Assad in power? Strange way to show it.
Lots statements he is throwing against the wall which are devoid of sense.
The struggle against imperialism is an old Cold War obsession? Did it pass over Saleh that what happened to Syria is because of imperialism? Since the end of the Cold War: bombs have come down on Somalia, Iraq, Sudan, Afghanistan, Serbia, Syria, Pakistan, Yemen, and Libya. I would include the fascist inspired American-supported coupe of Ukraine and Honduras as acts of imperialism. Last year, Obama dropped roughly 24,000 bombs on various peoples. He will probably exceed the number of bombs dropped by Bush. Did Salah just shut the door to the world to make such as remark which really implies that imperialism and capitalism are and should be of no consequence at least to the American left.
I can see how Saleh is a compelling figure to American and European neocons. He holds the same belief that the be all, and the end all, of stopping the war in Syria is the removal of Assad and that anybody else would be preferable. I am sure at least Syrian Christians may have a different opinion.
I read this interview. However, some articles I have read,contradict some so called facts here. Also, what is “the left”?? …… very vague and general with no specifics. I do not and can not question Mr Saleh’s personal experiences in the prison however who has designated him the voice of conscience of Syria? May be I am not well informed!!
May be Mr Saleh is not aware that there is a split in the so called left….
two groups fixated on their narrative!! Individuals like Max Blumenthal and Nir Rosen have been maligned…..
Here is an excellent article worth reading…… teaches one to keep an open mind and listen to the others’ point of view…..
After all, it is not about the “powerful players” in this catastrophe… it is about the innocent Syrians that are the victims, no matter what their political, religious, “sect” affiliation……
? The Debate Over Syria Has Reached a Dead End
Two warring narratives now dominate discussions—and neither is sufficient.
By Bassam Haddad
https://www.thenation.com/article/the-debate-over-syria-has-reached-a-dead-end/
And here is an excellent write up by Rami Khouri….. a great perspective..
http://agenceglobal.com/index.php?show=article&Tid=3026
The vicious attacks on people of the left continue. Two of the most prominent targets make insightful observations:
That’s all exactly right. And I, for one, will not stand for this bullshit.
Why I Love The Intercept
It’s fresh journalism blasted by a comments section that topples me over with info loaded with arguments that pierce thru those neo-neos.
I’m with Frank when his appreciation for TI publishing this perspective. I’m with frank again when he spanks Yassin’s claim that the West considers Assad as a partner in war on terror – quite the opposite. And then Frank spanks a third time on that there’s not a third moderate faction that has the power to keep the nation together.
I’m with Mona many times, especially when she backs Max and calls out authors for not putting out more specifics. Just because some of us disagree with the west’s attempt to overthrow Assad does not equal us as an “Assadist.” Yet Mona may gentle her tongue sometimes as her point sometimes gets hidden by the vinegar, but I love her straight punches to the point.
I’m with the Dead Italian Dictator when he calls out all the motherf’n players’ interests, like Russia’s naval base, Europe’s gas pipelines, Saudi’s Sunni Regime and their never-ending desire to detonate anything that’s connected to Iran (ok, so Mussolini didn’t mention Iran), and last but not least, the US-Israel desire to see the chaos continue to keep all the middle east players in check.
I’m with rrheard + his 5 questions and echo his concern when he states he knows it sounds callous given Mr Saleh’s losses, but seriously, when facing a well-established tyrannical government, maybe one should have planned ahead instead of going with half-baked secret CIA support.
I don’t have specific solutions except to put up a neutral negotiator like Mujica in the middle to work on some sustainable conversation that might lead to new nations too (like for the Kurds), but if we roll the dice to slice out Assad before simmering ISIS, I give it a 5 in 6 chances it turns into a Libya-like mess.
My primary interest is in Latin America, not the Middle East, which is why I don’t have specific solutions and can only put up our superstar to the rescue. I’m also with the next UN Sec-Gen for getting truce between US & Russia. Except for the global military industry complex, the rest of us lose with the breakout of a new cold war, as those resources could be dedicated towards turning our world over to renewable energy.
Thanks, and yes, I know I’m quite…acerbic. Sometimes I do try to rein that in, but for the most part I don’t. The primary reason is it is stressful to have to keep censoring myself and it interrupts my flow.
I’m genuinely outraged. While I know a “nice” tone impresses more people, I’m not willing to frequently crab my style — in a comments section — in a way I find uncomfortable.
I admire your style, so go with your flow. Just know though some are intentionally trying to drag you down to their level of trash, so don’t waste too much time on them. However, maybe your tongue-tank of outrage is what’s needed!
Your arguments are generally solid and I thank you for all the research (names, quotes, views, background info, etc.) you post up. It saves many of us much time.
“I know I’m quite…acerbic.”
sock-puppet …
You hurl invective after your label-maker has an orgasm.
A naif named Brian posts:
Hillary Clinton has both personally, and thru surrogates, sent a very strong message to Russia that she will go to war with them in and over Syria. She unleashed a true sociopath (no hyperbole), Robert Caruso, to make that clear to all, including Russia, at the Huffington Post. Russia believes her, and is preparing for war with the United States.
She will do this because she is a Goldwater-level hawk, and has been her entire life, save for a brief moment in the late 60s, early 70s, when she gleaned that it was popular to oppose the Vietnam war. She will do this, notwithstanding the myriad military and other experts who declare it dangerous, and a serious flirtation with WWIII.
(Citations/support on request.)
“…….Hillary Clinton has both personally, and thru surrogates, sent a very strong message to Russia that she will go to war with them in and over Syria…..”
Citation Mona?
Such offers do not apply to you, you are well aware of that, and are also well aware why.
The grievances against Assad by the general population Syria are valid and real. Much like the general population of Iran grievances against the Shah were valid and real in the 1970’s. Yet the mistake made by Rumsfeld and others foreign actors in both cases was fostering and fueling violence. In the case of Syria, it was by arming radical rebels and in the case of Iran it was funding and supporting Saddam Hussein in his war against Iran. In both case the groups that are and will most likely prevail are the militants. Hence the left’s and the libertarian rights objects to militarism. Time and time again violence begets violence.
The Saudis want a pipeline through Syria. This was the case before all the strife started and continues to be the case. Assad wouldn’t play along. (Russia no likey)
This is the whole game in a nutshell.
The U.S. does Saudis bidding and helps neutralize all their rivals in the region.
All other view points, internal or external, are meaningless to the root motivator.
Take the article about Israel selling state of the art surveillance to Saudi royal family and supporting maintenance. Do they wish to see a stable U.A.E. as the reason for doing this? Or, are both power structures only interested in keeping the status quo? This example leads us to Russian interests added to the mix in Syria… Russia is relatively vulnerable through the Ukraine from land war, no need to explain that any further. Financially, Russia is also vulnerable if the Syrian pipeline goes through. Ditto.
Mr. Hussain and Mr. Hisham
Good interview which will take more than one reading to absorb the complexities of Mr. al-Haj Saleh’s political positions. Reading the interview certainly does motivate one to support a no-fly zone – a possible goal of the interview. Max Blumenthal will probably write an article accusing Mr. Saleh of being on the CIA payroll.
There is one constant in the interview with Yassin al-Haj Saleh – and that is the evil of Bashar al-Assad. As I have mentioned numerous times, he is the ultimate terrorist in Syria – bar none. He has committed more war crimes than Genghis Khan. Additionally, there is no political solution that leaves Assad in power (even though the US has unofficially dropped that requirement in negotiations). There has been too much damage done to everyday Syrians by Assad so he can hold on to the reins of power.
“…….In many important ways, the Americans have been supporting Bashar al-Assad. The United States helped create a situation in which Syria would be plunged into chaos, but the regime would remain in power……..”
In fact, this is a truthful statement. The US and allies supplied the opposition (including jihadists) with weapons early in the revolution and then began bombing al-Qaeda and ISIS at the end of 2014 – effectively helping the Assad regime. This simply points out the remarkably inept and inconsistent policies of the Obama administration. Putin will likely find HRC a little more difficult to deal with, but he still carries most of the cards.
The future is bleak for Syrians (especially in east Aleppo).
Israel apologists support anti-Assad interventions, and oppose taking out ISIS, for the reasons I set forth in this comment. Craig Summers is an authoritarian, Republican, pro-torture, ardent Zionist who despises anyone on the left.
He writes nice things about leftists only when their agenda coincides with the use of U.S. military force, especially when that would benefit Israel. Any humanitarian concerns he cites are cosmetic drivel.
95% of the time I do not respond to him substantively and shall continue that in this thread. I encourage all to follow suit. Engaging him causes him to post endless walls of dense (sic), very long, redundant text.
/PSA
Excellent article. There are many progressive people in the West who are angry with the nauseating hypocrisy of those who claim socialism, and cannot support the Syrian people in their struggle.
We should allow that the US’s purpose has been to achieve the current result. By creating regional instability it undermines the emergence of Eurasian rivals. It is not that interested in how the instability is resolved, only that its impacts are contained. So Syria is just collateral damage. At this stage the US has no interest in peace or democracy in Syria. If it did it could create the circumstances within a very short time.
This is the most interesting and comprehensive view that I have read from the perspective of a Syrian resident. I may be kidding myself, but at some point in our imperial navigations of the world, we truly may have had a chance to change the perspective of Bashir al-Assad and blew it big time. Now, we are condemned to blow it even worse and create more havoc, more deaths, which may have been preventable.
I do hope he is right about the resilience of the Syrian people.
It is not so much Assad who needs to change his perspective, but the material supporters of the jihadist armies to let a political solution play out. As with the Saleh, there is no option to any political solution but to remove Assad, regardless of who takes over. In 2012 the Russians proposed a solution that would remove Assad as part of a peace deal. It was ignored by the main Western supporters of Al Queda and Isis in Syria.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/15/west-ignored-russian-offer-in-2012-to-have-syrias-assad-step-aside
From what I read, Assad did propose some early political solutions, and the Western allies of the opposition forces encouraged and fueled instead violence as a way to remove Assad. Sy Hersh talks about how the Saudis with Bush’s approval in 2007 would fund and control violent terrorist groups in Syria. Basically the West rejected any sort of political compromise/solution. This happened in Libya also. Qaddafi tried to contact the Obama administration through the State department and was totally ignored by Clinton’s orders. The Pentagon for gawd’s sakes started to talk to Qaddafi about some settlement and was told by Clinton to back off. And what did we get. Ultra violence that smashed the country.
Thank you very much for that information. Now we have the more-than-likely next President whom we know will pursue the actions even further. If the Russians commit to use force with us and we also commit (which would be likely), then nukes will fly. It is all but inevitable.
So much for global warming being a topic of concern. Do you believe a “nuclear winter” would balance out the climate conditions for those left alive?
Here is a link to an amazing article by Patrick Kennedy with an analysis how Syria got to where
it is,think oil and pipelines!(and the usual suspects)Do not read at your own peril.
http://www.ecowatch.com/syria-another-pipeline-war-1882180532.html
I find Mr. al-Haj Saleh’s opinion to be quite valuable in offering us the perspective of a Syrian who has observed and experienced first hand the atrocities of the Assad regime. I think he accurately notes that there is agreement from many in the West on both the right and left that we should not intervene in order to remove Assad from power. The two paradigms through which many in the West view the Syrian conflict include: 1. The seemingly-dominant “war of terror” narrative where interventions are favored first and foremost as a means of combating “radical Islamic terrorism”; and 2. The alternate viewpoint that Western intervention is responsible for much of the world’s ills and if we just butted out everyone would be much better off. For pretty clear reasons, those stressing a platform of non-interventionism do not support an intervention to remove Assad. With respect to the “war on terror” crowd, the belief is that, while not a guy you would want to have a beer with, Assad’s secular, authoritarian-style regime is much preferable to an Islamist government or an expansion of ISIS that would occur in Assad’s absence, both of which represent a win for the “true enemy” of radical Islam.
Mr. al-Haj Saleh neglects a third paradigm of Western foreign policy: intervention in the interest of preventing atrocities and preserving international law – essentially the support of humanitarian interventions. Americans with this mindset applaud our intervention in Bosnia; abhor the failure to act in Rwanda; and supported the intervention in Libya (although were ultimately frustrated by the poor execution and outcome of the intervention). I would say that Hillary Clinton shares this mindset of humanitarian interventionism. This is the reason why she and many others in the Obama administration advocated for early intervention against Assad in Syria. In the likely event that Ms. Clinton is elected president, the U.S. may very well intervene in Syria, although the likelihood of conflict with Russia and the winds of public opinion will surely be taken into account.
Mr. al-Haj Saleh seems to prefer an international action rather than a move by western powers. I am sure that the West would prefer this as well. However, this eventuality is somewhere in the realm of unlikely to impossible given Russia’s presence on the U.N. Security Council.
For Nate below and anybody else who thinks some sort of sustained military intervention in Syria (at least in any part Assad or Russia cares about) is a viable strategy. Those are misapprehending the very real multiple risks and/or the lack of effectiveness of attempting such an intervention and/or the incredibly low probability if not implausibility of such an intervention even being possible or actually leading to something positive for Syrians.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/25/hillary-clinton-syria-no-fly-zones-russia-us-war
“Retired senior US military pilots are increasingly alarmed that Hillary Clinton’s proposal for ‘no-fly zones’ in Syria could lead to a military confrontation with Russia that could escalate to levels that were previously unthinkable in the post-cold war world.”
I would ask that Donald Trump would tout any and all connections he has with Russia as skin in the game.
Tell Hillary No Bomb Zone, see briefing http://www.syriauk.org/p/no-bomb-zone.html
Your mischaracterization of the nature of the regime change war in Libya and Hillary’s ideology are sad.
Fighting for peace is like fucking for virginity
– Carlin
Not Carlin. A popular slogan on antiwar protest signs during the Vietnam era.
D’oh!
Thanks DS.
For whom does the ‘conscience of Syria’ speak?
List of armed groups in the Syrian conflict:
[Syria Syrian Arab Republic
and allies Syrian opposition/ Syrian opposition
Al-Qaeda affiliates and allies Seal of MSD.png Syrian Democratic Council
Rojava Federation of Northern Syria – Rojava Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and allies
Syria Syrian government forces]
Syrian Armed Forces
Syrian Arab Army
Republican Guard
Syrian Marines[1]
Syrian 4th Armoured Division SSI.svg 4th Armoured Division
Syrian commando.png Special Forces Command
Coat of arms of Syria.svg Tiger Forces
Coat of arms of Syria.svg Suqur al-Sahara
Coat of arms of Syria.svg 14th Special Forces Division
Coat of arms of Syria.svg 15th Special Forces Division
Syrian Arab Air Force
Syrian Arab Navy
National Defence Force
Allied armed groups:
Ba’ath Brigades[2]
as-Sa’iqa[3]
Syrian Social Nationalist Party[4][5]
Amal Movement[6]
Arab Nationalist Guard[7]
Syrian Resistance[8]
Jaysh al-Muwahhideen[4]
Forces of Abu Ibrahim[9]
Sootoro
Jaysh al-Sha’bi[10]
PFLP–GC[11]
Emblem of Liwa Al-Quds.svg Liwa Al-Quds[12]
Emblem of the Palestine Liberation Army.svg Palestine Liberation Army[13]
Liwa Abu al-Fadhal al-Abbas[14]
Liwa Assad Allah al-Ghalib fi al-Iraq wa al-Sham[15]
Liwa Fatemiyoun[16]
Liwa Zainebiyoun[17]
Faylaq Wa’ad al-Sadiq[18]
Fatah al-Intifada[19]
Popular Mobilization Forces
Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada
Badr Organization[20]
Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq[20]
Kata’ib Hezbollah[21]
Harakat Hezbollah al-Nujaba
Peace Companies[22]
DHKP-C[23]
Houthis Logo.png Houthis[24]
Jaysh al-Wafaa[25]
Liwa Dhu al-Fiqar[26][27]
Dareh al-Sahel[28]
Dareh al-Areen[28]
al-Hosn[28]
Dareh al-Watan[28]
al-Berri clan[29][30]
Tayy tribe militias[31]
al-Jihesh tribe militias[32]
al-Shaitat tribe militias [33]
Russia Slavonic Corps[34][35] (2013)
InfoboxHez.PNG Hezbollah[36]
Iran[37][38][39]
Iranian Armed Forces
Revolutionary Guards[40]
Quds Force[41]
Basij[42][43][44]
Saberin Unit[45]
Army
65th Airborne Special Forces Brigade[46]
Russia[47]
Russian Armed Forces
Russian Air Force
Russian Navy
Special Operations Forces[48][49][50][51]
Spetsnaz GRU[51]
Armament support:
Russia[52][53]
Iran[54]
North Korea[55][56][57]
Iraq[58]
Belarus[59]
China[60]
Syrian opposition Free Syrian Army-affiliated rebel groups
Southern Front
al-Rahman Legion
Syrian Turkmen Brigades
Sultan Murad Division
Sultan Mehmed the Conqueror Brigade[61]
Syrian opposition Levant Front[62]
Thuwar al-Sham Battalion
Liwa Jund al-Islam
Liwa al-Majid[63][64][65]
Authenticity and Development Front
Syrian opposition Free Idlib Army[66]
13th Division[67]
Mountain Hawks Brigade[68][69]
Northern Division[70][71]
Army of Mujahedeen
Jaysh al-Nasr[72]
Syrian opposition Jaish al-Tahrir
21st Combined Force
16th Division[73] (until 2016)
al-Moutasem Brigade[74][75]
Syrian opposition Hamza Division[76]
Liwa Ahrar Souriya
Northern Thunder Special Forces Brigade[77][78]
Syrian opposition First Division of Aleppo[79]
Northern Hawks Brigade[80]
Victory Brigades
Jaish al-Izzah[81]
1st Coastal Division
Ahmad al-Abdo Martyrs Forces
Syrian opposition Liberation Brigade faction[82]
New Syrian Army
Ghosts of the Desert[83]
Jaysh Usud al-Sharqiya
Fastaqim Kama Umirt
Central Division[84]
Alotfecat Brigades[85]
93rd Regiment[86]
Firqat al Amiyn al Uwlaa Halab[87]
Martyr Badr Yasturun Brigade[88]
Army of Conquerors[89][90]
Kurdish Revolutionary Brigade[91][92]
Ajnad al-Hasakah[93]
Thuwar al-Jazira al-Suriya[94]
Saraya al-Qadisiya[95]
Division 99[96]
Brigade 93[97]
Brigade 51[98]
al-Jabha al-Suriyya lil-Tahrir[99]
al-Habib al-Mustafa Brigade[100][101]
Liwa al-Adiyat[102][103]
Secret Tasks Brigade[104]
Deterring the Oppressors Brigades[105][106][107]
Homs Liberation Movement[108][109]
Ahrar al-Sharqiya[110][111]
al-Fatah Brigade[84]
Jaysh al-Janoob[112]
Alwiyat al-Jonub[113][114]
Army of Free Tribes[115][116]
al-Fawj al-Awal[117]
Non-FSA-affiliated rebel groups
Ahrar al-Sham
Abu Amara Brigades
Jaysh al-Islam
Sham Legion[118]
Harakat Nour al-Din al-Zenki
Ansar al-Sham
Jabhat Ansar al-Islam
Jaysh al-Sunna
Ashida’a Mujahideen Brigade[119]
Suqour al-Sham Brigade
Ajnad al-Sham Islamic Union[120]
Criterion Brigades
al-Safwa Islamic Battalions[121][122][123][124][125][126]
Abina al-Sham[127][128][129]
Allied armed groups:
Grey Wolves[130][131][132]
Muslim Brotherhood
Muslim Brotherhood of Syria[133]
Shields of the Revolution Council
Hamas[134][135] (2012-2013)
Aknaf Bait al-Maqdis (until 2015)
Free Iraqi Army (2012)[136][137][138]
Joint operations rooms:[139]
Army of Conquest
Fatah Halab[140][141]
Mare’ Operations Room
Northern Homs Countryside Operations Room[142][143]
Jaish Al-Fustat[144]
Damascus Operations Room[103]
Military councils:
Syrian opposition Akhtarin Military Council[145][146][147][148][149][150]
Armament support:
Qatar[151][152]
Saudi Arabia[151][153]
Turkey
United States[154][155]
France[156]
Libya (until 2014)[157]
Inherent Resolve.jpg CJTF-OIR (against ISIL)
United States
US Air Force [158][159]
Turkey (against ISIL and SDF)
Turkish Army
Turkish Air Force
Turkish Special Forces Command
Current and former al-Qaeda affiliates
Jabhat Fateh al-Sham
Jund al-Aqsa
Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar
Khorasan group
Imam Bukhari Jamaat[160]
Muntasar Billah Brigade[161]
Jaish Muhammad[162]
Katibat al-Tawhid wal-Jihad[163]
Jamaat al-Murabitin[164][165][166][167]
Jabhat Ansar al-Din[168]
Harakat Sham al-Islam
Harakat Fajr ash-Sham al-Islamiya
Ajnad al-Kavkaz[169][170]
Junud al-Makhdi[171][172]
Ghuraba al-Sham[173] (2013)
Fajr al-Ummah[174]
Fatah al-Islam[175][176][177]
Caucasus Emirate[178]
Muhajirin wa-Ansar Alliance[179]
Liwaa al-Umma
Liwa al-Haqq
Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan[180] (2013)
Turkistan Islamic Party[181]
Ansar al-Islam splinter faction[182]
Alleged support:
Qatar[183][184][185]
Saudi Arabia[184][185]
Turkey[184][186]
Syrian Democratic Forces
People’s Protection Units (YPG)
Anti Terror Units (YAT)[187]
Women’s Protection Units (YPJ)
Shammer tribe militias[188]
Al-Sanadid Forces
Syrian opposition Al-Nukhbat Brigade[189][190][191][192]
Euphrates Volcano
Army of Revolutionaries
Northern Sun Battalion
Manbij Turkmen Brigade[193]
Euphrates Brigades
Jund Al-Haramayn Brigade
Euphrates Martyrs Battalion
Al-Qousi Brigade
Martyr Kaseem Al Areef Battalion
Jabhat al-Akrad
Martyr Jiyan Ahras Battalion (Shabha Women Protection Front)[194][195]
Seljuq Brigade[196][197]
Truthful Promise Brigade
Fighters for Justice Brigade
Martyr Yusuf al-Quzhul Brigade
Southern Storm Brigade
Eagles of the Sunnah Brigade
Special Forces Brigade
Northern Democratic Brigade
Tel Rifaat Rebel Battalion
Liwa Thuwwar al-Raqqa
Katibat Harayir Raqqa[198]
Liwa Ahrar Raqqa[199]
Free Officers Union
Syrian National Resistance[200]
Jaish al-Salam
Liberation Brigade faction[201]
Jihad in the Path of God Brigade
Ahrar al-Tabqa Brigade
Umanaa al-Raqqa Brigade
Harun al-Rashid Brigade
Tall Abyad Revolutionaries Front
Manbij Revolutionary Brigades
Euphrates Liberation Brigade
Euphrates Jarabulus Brigades[202][203]
Free Jarabulus Brigades[204]
Jarabulus Hawks Brigades[204]
New Syrian Forces
Lîwai 99 Mu?at[205]
Brigade Groups of Al-Jazira[206]
al-Shaitat tribe militias [207]
Syriac Military Council (MFS)[208]
Bethnahrin Women Protection Forces[209][210][211][212]
Liwa Siqur el-Badiye
Al-Baggara tribe militias [213]
Sharabiyya tribe militias[214]
Zubayd tribe militias[215]
Rojava Police forces
Asayish[216]
Sutoro[217]
Rojava Civilian defence units
Self-Defense Forces (HXP)[218]
Civilian Defense Force (HPC)[219]
Allied armed groups:
Kurdistan Workers’ Party
People’s Defence Forces
Free Women’s Units
International Freedom Battalion[220][221]
MLKP[222][223]
TKP/ML T?KKO
United Freedom Forces
MLSPB-DC[224]
Revolutionary Communard Party
Türkiye Devrim Partisi
Sosyal ?syan[225][226]
Proleteryan?n Devrimci Kurtulu? Örgütü
Reconstrucción Comunista
TKEP/L
Devrimci Karargâh
Bob Crow Brigade
RUIS
TKP-K?v?lc?m
Yekîtî Party
Sinjar Resistance Units [227]
Iraqi Kurdistan
Peshmerga (2014)
Military councils:
Manbij Military Council[228]
al-Bab Military Council[229][230]
Jarabulus Military Council[204][231][232]
Armament support:
Iraqi Kurdistan
Kurdistan Democratic Party (2012-14)[233]
Patriotic Union of Kurdistan[233]
France[234]
United States[235]
Russia[236][237]
Syria[238][239][240][241][242][243]
Inherent Resolve.jpg CJTF-OIR (against ISIL)
United States[244]
United Kingdom[245]
France[246]
Australia[247]
Canada[248]
Denmark[249][250]
Netherlands[251]
Belgium[252]
Germany[253]
Jordan
United Arab Emirates
Morocco
Bahrain
Saudi Arabia
Qatar
Russia[254][255][256][257][258][259]
(against ISIL and Syrian Opposition)
Russian Air Force
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
Military of ISIL
Khalid ibn al-Walid Army[260]
Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade (until 2016)[261][262][263]
Islamic Muthanna Movement (until 2016)[264]
Jaysh al-Jihad (until 2016)[265]
Dokumac?lar[266][267]
Jamaat Bayt al-Maqdis al-Islamiya[268]
That just about sums it all up.
Thank you for revealing the writing on a very, very, very long wall.
Read it and weep.
Intercept wins 3 Eppys
As much as the above interview pisses me off — more trashing of unnamed “leftists” without pressing for names and specific accusations — by continuing to malign good people via indirect and cowardly attacks, I’m still going to take the occasion here to congratulate The Intercept.
They won three of Editor & Publisher’s awards. One of them went personally to Glenn Greenwald, in the category of “Best News/Political Blog.” They link specifically to this column about Brexit.
Good work, all. Including Jeremy Scahill and the staff who worked on the Drone Papers, which also won.
Yassin al-Haj Saleh doesn’t have to name any Leftists specifically: if you’re from the Middle East and you read and discuss the topic with Western Leftist you know he’s perfectly right, but if you want a name or two: how about Jill Stein (who only a couple of days ago changed the statement on Syria on her website, until recently it associated all rebels with Jihadists and stated that the West should cooperate with the Syrian regime and the Russians) and what about Corbyn? Or what about French politician Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the leader of Front de Gauche ? More ?
Jill Stein is not an Assadist, and neither is Jeremy Corbyn. Moreover, I don’t believe anything else you say. You neither link nor quote, which is typical of those making this defamatory argument against some vague abstraction called “the left.” Whenever forced to get specific, the examples… are not.
“Moreover, I don’t believe anything else you say. ”
See? You must negate the individual you disagree with. I find it difficult to believe Glenn’s former law partner would behave so.
(I’ll give you a pass on the trig, cuz Glenn doesn’t get it either, but that means you must adopt a position that does not pass judgement on mathematical modelling. In other words, you cannot offer an informed opinion on expert testimony you have no demonstrable knowledge in.)
Here’s the statement on Syria that was posted in november 2015 and only changed on Oct 5 2016 after the combined regime/Russian massive slaughter on Aleppo:
http://web.archive.org/web/20160211082710/http://www.jill2016.com/stein_opposes_obama_s_troops_on_the_ground_in_syria
Corbyn has more or less the same standpoint, Melenchon also.
I don’t really care if you believe me or not: as a Palestinian with family members who lived in Syria I have discussed this topic with Western Leftist on practically a daily basis for years now, and as Yassin al-Haj Saleh I’ve been disappointed again and again to see and read Leftists (among them many pro-Palestinian activists) siding with the Assad regime. You speak about links, I speak about real life , but then, this is the first and probably the only time I read the comment section on this site, I see you’re squatting all over the place (like an Israeli settler in Palestine), but you don’t seem to know anything about real life in Syria, you seem to be more interested in your own ego and in posting off-topics comments. Don’t waste your time responding, I’m not coming back.
I’ll join with the others in seeing too many contradictions here. He criticizes the American left for being anti-interventionist, but then says the U.S. intervention was basically pro-Assad. So why shouldn’t we be anti-interventionist?
The problem here is the U.S. doesn’t seem to know what it’s doing in the Middle East, or it does and it’s monstrous, or it is more than individual people are looking for deals with no higher-order purpose than their own profit or ambition, I don’t know. I don’t even care at this point. All I know is that no means no. No more expensive, homicidal, useless adventures that just prop up more killers to pose more threats to us all over again.
Yassin Saleh is critical of the nature of US military intervention, while he criticizes the left in the West for being anti “all intervention” that involves military force. This means there is some types of military intervention he would support. Syrian activists are pushing for a No Bomb Zone for example (see http://www.syriauk.org/p/no-bomb-zone.html strategy less risk than no fly zone). Yassin repeats in this article that the right concept is about empowering Syrians. A partnership rather than an intervention. Syrians need to provide security for their society. An accountable organized force cannot be created without weapons and training. A credible government needs access to resources to provide food, health and housing security. There needs to be consequences to the Assad regime of its war crimes or those carried out by Putin in its name. This is the intervention that progressive people in the West should be demanding, in real solidarity with Syrians. We have absolutely failed, while many practice high sounding hypocritical skepticism of the Syrian opposition. Are they moderate? Are they organized? Are they genuine? When we are totally useless. Government elites in the West have no policy. It is up to you to use your anger to demand a policy that supports the Syrian people. We must be active not passive critics. To do nothing and appease the “Eurasian Fascism” of Putin will be expensive, homicidal and worse than useless. Make instead for effective partnership.
This interview is a tedious mess of assumptions, logical fallacies, buzzwords and outright lies, which, as many readers correctly judged, results in a propaganda piece for western intervention. I’ll omit the bizare mental constructions like “israelization” of Syria, and concentrate on some basic facts. I hear a lot about Assad the butcher (our interviewee claims Assad killed hundreds of thousands anf alqaeda/isis only tens of thousands) but i am yet to see any proof of that claim. From the beginning of uprising there was a lot of propaganda about the brutality of Assad, about mythical “shabiha” and etc. so far i see little proof of that. in fact, it seems mosy civilians in Syria try to escape from the rebel controled areas into gov controled. I’ve seen and read reports of russian bloggers, who i dont think work for the gov, who to to Damascus, and Aleppo and report that the majority of the ppl there support Assad. Most probably, if all foreign fighters leave and elections are held Assad would win with a landslide. Even the US top dogs recognize publicly that Assad is popular. Brzezinsky himself says so, and so does Kissinger.
Assad also seems to do a good job at using political negotiations with various groups persuading them to switch to gov side offering amnesties and safe passages out of besieged cities.
The claim that ISIS and alqaeda are lesser evil than Assad is too ridiculous even to comment on.
For me, the cold facts on the ground are that the US+Iarael+EU+Turkey+Gulf monarchies conspired to topple a secular government in Syria which kept a multiethnic complex country in peace for decades. and they invaded Syria using the worst kind of scum of the earth headchoppers with a medieval genocidal ideology in order to destroy Syria, just luke they did in Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and ultimately looking at Iran.
The goals of the invading parties are pretty clear. there is nothing complex in this war. the gulf monarchies want a salafist belt that would drive a wedge between Iran and Lebanon. US+EU+Israel want anarchy and a oermanent war
“From the beginning of uprising there was a lot of propaganda about the brutality of Assad, about mythical “shabiha” and etc. so far i see little proof of that. in fact, it seems most civilians in Syria try to escape from the rebel controled areas into gov controled.”
The problem with people like you: you don’t know anything about Syria, you’ve clearly never visited the country. There’s nothing ‘mythical’ about the shabiha, all Syrians know who they are, and they did so long before the peaceful demonstrations started in 2011. You’re going to tell us there’s no moukhabarat either ?
What you call ‘a bizarre construction’, i.e. “Israelization” is perfectly clear, and Yassin al-Haj Saleh is not the first to note similar traits between the two regimes: if you listen to the last interview with Bashar al-Assad by a Danish journalist (on the net), listen carefully: terrorists, more terrorists, terrorists using the population as human shields, also in the hospitals, photos and images manipulated by terrorists. exacly like NutsYahoo’s hasbara.
In fact, your comment is a perfect example of what Al-Hal Salah says in his comment; Westerners who don’t know anything about Syria and it’s history and who don’t see the Syrian people. What the hell do we care about Kissinger and Brzezinski ! Assad is popular, yeah …. that’s why he never bothered to organize free elections …..
Saleh completely fails to address the realistic impact of ISIS, arguing:
What does that mean?
The secular revolution against Assad, of which Saleh’s been a part seems to have created the opening for ISIS and other Islamist groups. Saleh and another secular revolutionary, Ziad Homsi, were the subjects of an award-wining documentary, Our Terrible Country. An article about that film states, my emphasis:
The above article says Saleh’s brother was also kidnapped by ISIS and that neither he nor Saleh’s wife have been hear from since.
What moral or logical sense does it make for Mr. Saleh to prefer ISIS over Assad? These noble fighters for freedom can be seen lamenting that their efforts led to ISIS and other extremists coming into dominance in Syria. How can it possibly, then, be sensible to ignore that these groups would almost certainly replace a deposed Assad?
Western intervention has ever only given birth to ISIS and like-minded groups, and caused them to spread and grow. Why would Syria be different?
“I am a secularist and a nonbeliever, an atheist.” Saleh should have added “fool” to that list.
Because only a complete fool would side with the Islamists if he were also a “secularist, nonbeliever, and atheist.
“Assad killed hundreds of thousands of people”. Really? Stated as if he lined up 300,000 innocent people and executed them. Where’s the mention of the proxy war being waged? The arming and support of mostly foreign fighters? The reality on the ground, which is that the only remaining effective “rebel” groups are essentially Islamic extremists? ISIS is the lesser of the evils… really??? Assad is more palatable to the West… really? You say that as they line up to destroy him?
Both the author and the subject of this article have blinders on to the facts on the ground. The reality of the situation is that Western and regional powers (US/NATO, Saudi Arabia/Gulf countries, Turkey, Israel) have conspired to destroy Syria and replace the government with anarchy.
How can you talk about the necessity for Assad to hang (put quite ruthlessly)
while ignoring the ramifications of the removal of both Saddam and Gaddafi in Iraq and Libya?
I was amazed when I read this interview. Complete tripe. The interviewer did nothing to hold Yassin accountable for his boorish declarations.
The historical revisionism, and more importantly, omission of facts in this “interview” make it nothing more than propaganda.
The “voice of conscience” completely ignores the violence by non-ISIS “rebels” that began three weeks into the peaceful demonstrations. The presence of foreign militants who were attacking the regime in Syria right after the protests began is a fact. Omitting that fact is revisionism.
He mentions ISIS as having only 10.000 fighters. He mentioned al Qaida once, but fails to mention that, among the hundreds of non-ISIS “rebel” groups, the three largest each have an estimated 45,000 fighters. One is al Qaida, the other two are ideologically identical to al Qaida and they collaborate with al Qaida in battle. And apparently he wants us to believe, just like the troll CS here, that the “rebels” aren’t responsible for any of the killing. Pure nonsense.
Assad isn’t randomly killing Syrians for no reason. The foreign fighters attacked Syria. Assad not fighting back was never a realistic possibility.
“they thought that the U.S. establishment was siding with the Syrian revolution — something that is completely false and an utter lie”
Well, the US and our “allies” did fund and arm the estimated 160,000 foreign fighters that invaded Syria in our proxy war… Islamist radicals that, again, aren’t Syrian, so it was actually not “siding with the Syrian revolution”. So, in one sense, he is telling the truth.
But, in another sense, the Syrians who welcomed the foreign fighters and joined the “militarized effort” condemned themselves.
Anybody with knowledge of the US/Saudi partnership in Afghanistan knows exactly what type of people they will recruit… NOT secular, NOT leftists or supportive of leftists or even tolerant of leftists, NOT to be trusted to govern fairly or protect the local inhabitants, NOT to be trusted to protect human rights, and NOT to be trusted to advance the agenda of the peaceful protesters.
It’s like needing help setting up your kids birthday party, and welcoming a known pedophile who shows up to help unasked, and then being surprised when things go horribly wrong.
Except this guy being interviewed is blaming the clown instead.
Not anticipating that the proxies recruited by the US, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey were the worst types of immoral mercenaries requires vast ignorance.
Welcoming the very people that the US war on terror was supposed to be against, and choosing to transform the peaceful protests into a “militarized effort” was an immoral decision.
Whining about the fact that people rightfully view both the “rebels” and ISIS as terrorists that feed into Assad’s claims is just pure bullshit.
Geez… that’s only two questions into the “interview”…
@ Altohone
Well stated. I’m really surprised this piece didn’t have a lot more background context teed up by Mr. Hussain and Mr. Hisham.
I’m not sure if they were doing this as purposeful propaganda, or just journalistic laziness. Alternatively, they could simply see this as an opportunity to permit a “voice” from Syria to make his/her feelings known, and let the audience decide what they think about the substance of Mr. Saleh’s views and arguments without Mr. Hussain or Mr. Hisham providing any context to the conflict. But even if it was the latter, without context it comes off as something very close straight up propaganda for intervention based on an appeal to emotion.
@altohone brilliant contrast appreciated.
@rrheard your analysis also brilliant
https://theintercept.com/2016/10/26/syria-yassin-al-haj-saleh-interview/?comments=1#comment-300984
that last line – it’s about the world – true as it may be, smacks of a call for more intervention, hellary’s nfz and the tpp. save the children, save the planet, save the world, always seems to be the rallying cry of predatory opportunists who screw those things up in the first place.
One might become aware by now that the leaders of major countries are never the target of war – it’s just the citizens whom they throw, away, into battle with preparatory crap like Russia is the enemy, China is the enemy, as if we are somehow toads, war toads. Never the leader the problem. Bush and Cheney – the problems – never held to account, never prosecuted. Hellary lies, no problem. Obama drones – not a problem. NDAA rendition guantanamo torture and Dimona, silent threats to populations and protesters. So the shit rolls downhill onto the people and then the problem starters pretend to come to the rescue with their problem solving problems.
what a scam.
OFF the topic but very important….
Congratulations to the staff of The Intercept on winning three @EditorPublisher #Eppy awards. https://interc.pt/2fgwwxX
CONGRATULATIONS to ALL THE writers and the whole supporting staff at The Intercept and First Look Media.
i read TI as much for it’s well thinking knowledgeable responsible commenters and the real freedom of speech aspect it presents and allows. Other publishers will censor or not allow comments. For that, TI earns my We The People award, not that it matters to most of the population but it does for me.
tx for the OT.
I agree…..
this fellow is either blind or has lost his marbles.
He equates the the Trillionairism of wallstreet thieves with democracy.
His hypocrisy is revealed when he says
His failure is in not recognising the Assadness of the current elite control of the US and the elite candydate Hellary Clinton who runs the Baathtist party in the US comprised of money (wallstreet), military (drones, renditions, torture), and police (f…b…i…)
WHAT A SHAM
@rr heard
They almost never do. But Twitter is a different story.
I’ve tweeted Max Blumenthal and let him know a neocon here has said Saleh clearly means to identify him (Max) as one of these horrid “leftists.” I CCed Maz. I further tweeted to them both my wonder that the journalists didn’t press their interview subject as to who he specifically meant.
The pro-interventionists (and I do not believe it when some deny being such) carry on in such a cowardly and smear-merchant manners all the time. I do not tolerate it.
Have the balls to state who, specifically, you believe is loving on Assad and/or failing to care about the Syrian people as a result of purportedly corrupt ideology. Stop being fucking worms.
Yassin Al-Haj Saleh has plenty of reason to be indignant and upset,
but this interview does not help clarify the situation.
Saleh makes too many comments about “the left” which come across
like buzzwords which indiscriminately and derogatorily lump some
vague group of people together.
Hussain and Hisham offer nothing in the way of clarification.
Then there is the completely misguided assessment that
Trump is a fascist and that Clinton is not a fascist. This assessment
alone should cause great pause to anyone who knows of Clinton’s
well documented ardent support for the war on terror narrative
which Saleh disdains.
In the end, this interview comes across as terribly desperate and
misguided and leaves this reader with a much greater sense of
hopelessness and disappointment
than I had when I started reading it.
These are the words of Syria’s “Conscience?”
A country only exists as long as there is a general agreement amongst its own citizens to solve its own problems. Once various factions start inviting outsiders to fight their battles, the country no longer exists and only the outsider’s agendas have any significance.
So the war is about whether Russia keeps its naval base, Europe gets a gas pipeline, Saudi Arabia gets a friendly Sunni regime, US/Israel get continued conflict that weakens the Arab world, and Turkey insures that no Kurdish state emerges. After those agendas are settled, the Syrians can retake whatever is left of their own country, assuming there is anything left.
Well stated.
Yes. In general, Benito is great when in character, and also when seeming to speak from a genuine voice.
Also whether Israel completely annexes Golan Heights and incorporates it into their country. Assad must overthrown for this to happen and country fractured into smaller pieces.
Thanks. Your words are like an assassin’s razor. Well, okay, too violent an image. Your words are like a Chan Buddhist cook cutting a chicken such that the knife never needs sharpening,
Interesting that so far at least, as of 5 minutes ago, Glenn isn’t linking this piece via his Twitter feed.
Zionists favor ISIS in Syria Israeli Intel Chief: We Don’t Want ISIS Defeated In Syria
The Syrian horror is incredibly complicated by so many different interests and factions being deeply entangled. One of many entanglements that must be understood, is that Israel, and its apologists, are in the broad interventionist camp because they deeply want Assad removed; for that reason they do not want ISIS defeated in Syria. ISIS is good at keeping Assad busy.
Keep this in mind when considering what the known Israel apologists here and elsewhere claim — humanitarian blathering is mere cover.
For these, no risk of ISIS assuming leadership in Syria is nearly as awful as having Assad remain in power, solely because of Israel’s interests in oppressing the Palestinians. A recent piece in The Nation lays it out thus:
Israel has made no secret that it favors ISIS, as the link at the top of my post shows.
So, when the usual Zionist suspects here carry on about Russia, the brave and interventionist White Helmets, dying babies in Syria & etc., what they really mean is: “Assad has to go, because it’s good for Israel.”
(Assad going would be a very good thing, but not by the means — or for the reasons — advocated by these Israel apologists.)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3867912/Israel-s-defence-minister-warns-war-Hamas-completely-destroy-them.html
as much as i hate to disagree with someone, who has lived most of their life in Syria, and should know better than me. let us be frank. this guy is sour old man, who has been kicking and screaming, against whoever is in charge, for the entirety of his life. is Assad bad man..? maybe. what we do know is that Syria has a lot of oil and that they don’t like dancing to the tune of the US. history has shown that this combination results in the US government at its many tentacles being the main force behind turmoil, civilian slaughter and eventual regime change. if at some point the US actually gets its way, after pretending they car for Syrian people, this sour old man will be the 1st one on the street taking issue with the new regime. pitiful?
Syria doesn’t have lots of oil. Most the oil fields are Northern Iraq. Syria has very little oil. On the list of nations with proven oil reserves, Syria ranks below Yemen and the UK and above Uganada and Columbia.
Syria is not a petro-state. It’d be like calling New Mexico oil rich do to its geographic relationship to Texas.
Wrong
There are potential huge reserves of gas and oil off the coast. Look it up.
Mr. Hussain & Mr. Hisham,
Please do your readers a favor and engage them directly in the comments section on this most important of topics.
Please answer the following questions:
1) Are you advocates for direct military intervention (or increased depending on how you perceive what we are doing there at present as intervention) by the US in Syria?
2) If “yes” to 1) then please explain how that could possibly work in the present climate and with Russia actively taking Assad’s side without running the very real risk of a global military conflagration.
3) If part of your argument for proposed US intervention is on the grounds of “humanitarianism” then please explain to your readers why Syria is different from the myriad other peoples and civil wars going on all over the globe that are creating humanitarian crises, and that America and Americans are not the slightest bit interested in intervening in?
4) If you aren’t in favor of direct intervention (or increased intervention by providing more arms and training) then what is the purpose of conducting this interview? I’m pretty sure most of the readers of TI understand that Syria is a historical tragedy due in no small part to US interference and “intervention” in the region?
5) Do you honestly believe as Mr. Saleh does that American “leftists” buy into the “terrorism narrative” as something other than the propaganda bullshit it is? If so you don’t know your readers very well. Or that somehow American “leftists” are unwitting or purposeful allies of Assad? If so, then I may seriously have to reconsider whether you have any meaningful journalistic scruples at all, or are capable of seeing this conflict through anything other than your own “subjective emotional lens” which I don’t find much value in, and are prepared to lose all your “leftist” readers here at The Intercept if you are going to trying to place blame on America leftists for what is going on in Syria or anywhere else in the world.
Most leftists are heartsick at all the violence in the world. But most don’t think you change that quantum of violence by doing more violence. Or engaging in it hypocritically or inconsistently in service of our “national interests” or “humanitarianism”.
Now I’m all for suggestions, viable ones, about how to stop what is happening on the ground in Syria.
If you’ve got any, please share them.
But this appeal to emotion delivered by the “conscience of Syria” is seriously beneath both of you. This is deadly serious business, and being willing to risk global or nuclear war with Russia over the fate of Syria’s “rebels” or the removal of Assad should not be undertaken on the basis of unreasoning emotion.
I am sorry to say that there is no way without Russia’s assistance that Assad will be removed before the Syrian regime, with Russia’s assistance, will have created a fait accompli on the ground in Syria. And that means the Syrian rebels will likely get the short end of the stick and be slaughtered. That’s the risk you run when you engage in armed rebellion against your sovereign.
And to be blunt, no human being on the planet is served by America doing something as foolish and reckless as engaging in a military confrontation with Russia and its allies over something Russian elites believe is within their direct “security concerns” and/or on behalf of a longstanding ally in Assad. That doesn’t make Assad any better or less immoral of a human being, but that is reality.
I’ll share with you a worse reality than all the rebels in Syria being slaughtered, the millions of people all over the globe who will be slaughtered if Russia and America go to war over Syria.
So unless you’ve got a real good plan on how America can “intervene” in Syria without running that very real risk, you should probably focus your journalism on something other than emotionally manipulative fluff pieces from the “conscience of Syria” no matter how nice or honorable a man he is, or how much he and his fellow citizens have/are suffering.
Some good questions. Syria has many questions but few answers. Wish someone would find a positive path for the peoples of Syria. I am clues less and heartbroken. Families huddled in basements hoping to die together if bombed.
This is why their should be less international meddling, and war or revolutions should be carefully considered. Violence can make its own end game beyond help, hope or cure.
Why are you attacking the authors and questioning their motives for conducting and publishing an interview? Their asking him questions and publishing his responses is not an endorsement of everything he says.
You can disagree with the contents of an article without attacking the messenger.
This is both overwrought and fatalist. As if the only options are: (1) for the rest of the world to idly sit by while Russia and Syria bomb Aleppo and other cities to dust, or (2) to intervene and start World War III. Are Russia and the West going to risk nuclear war over Syria? If yes, what is your basis for such a claim? Looking back at the U.S.’s obvious meddling in Afghanistan circa 1980 seems to cast doubt on such fear mongering.
There is no good solution. Unilaterally setting up no-fly zones is a terrible idea. As is letting Russia and Syria barrel bomb the Syrian populace.
@ Nate
I am attacking these “messengers” because they are “interviewers” in this context. In precisely the same way I “attacked” (which is in interesting choice of words given “questioned” is more appropriate and accurate) Glenn Greenwald last week for failing to provide context and/or push back on an interviewee’s answer to certain questions in his interview with Naomi Klein.
What I’m really “questioning” is the motivation of an interviewer in not asking obvious questions to and interviewee’s answers to certain questions. Because follow-up questions help clarify the interviewee’s actual point, his/her reliance on certain facts as stated, or any misunderstanding or weakness in an interviewee’s arguments. It’s the lawyer in me and I hope Mr. Hussain and Mr. Hisham aren’t taking my questioning personally, but when you just let someone be make statements open-end as an interviewer then it starts to raise questions, at least in my mind. I’m pretty sure Glenn doesn’t based on his responses to me over the years, but I don’t know how Mr. Hussain or Mr. Hisham take it as they don’t seem to be willing to defend their conduct of this interview.
No it isn’t.
Go ahead Nate, and share with me what you think the other options are given the reality on the ground in Syria. If America can’t enforce a no-fly zone, and it can’t, Russia and Assad are going to do what they’ve been doing for months and months–ensuring Assad’s regime is stabilized, functional control of Syria returned to his regime, and anybody that gets in the way of that is an “enemy” of both. That you or I don’t like that policy changes nothing.
America’s “meddling” in the 80s was only via arming a proxy and didn’t involve US or Western troops actually getting on the battlefield against Russian forces and/or killing Russian forces.
Better analogy to present day Syria is Cuban missile crisis.
But let’s be clear here–Russia is committed to a longstanding ally in its sphere of influence. Russia has deployed its state of the art anti-missile/anti-aircraft defense systems in theatre. It has zero intention of allowing the US to interfere in what it is doing on behalf of the Assad regime.
You really want to poke a stick in that hive, directly, by pitting US forces against Russia’s? I don’t and neither do most sane people. Do I think if Russia were to shoot down an American plane, or America a Russian one, that the next act by either would be letting a nuclear weapon loose? No. But that’s precisely how things escalate. And the primary reason America and Russia never went to war with each other during the Cold War was in large part that they always engaged each other through proxies, not directly. And MAD.
But notwithstanding I don’t want to run the risk of a nuclear exchange over Syria, I also don’t want to run the risk any sort of outright conventional war with Russia and/or its allies over Syria. And I don’t think the vast majority of Americans or the world’s people do either–because absolutely nothing good will come of that either.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Agreed.
So now please share with me your alternatives that are non-fatalistic, and non-overwrought, because to best of my knowledge Sec. of State Kerry has been pursuing all those strategies in collaboration with Russian and other diplomats (now temporarily failed at present, but worth continued pursuit given alternatives) and it hasn’t amounted to shit. And that’s precisely because Russia and Assad have ZERO intention of permitting any “rebels” to remain in Syria and/or factions that are a threat to the Syrian regime, and they appear prepared to use any and all force (conventional) necessary to accomplish that task.
I am truly heartsick about all the innocent human beings in Syria who are dying. But this is why all groups need to think long and hard before engaging in an armed rebellion against any sovereign government, because there are three necessary outcomes to that choice–1) the regime capitulates almost immediately and a new regime is installed, 2) the incumbent regime fights to the death or until it can no longer stop from being overrun, and 3) a lot of innocents will get killed if number 2) happens which is precisely what has happened.
And it seems to me given what is about to be a fait accompli on the ground in Syria in another couple of months, there is nothing America can/will do (other than very problematic sabre rattling by future Pres. Clinton that is only exacerbating tensions with Russia’s government) that is going to prevent the slaughter of more human beings by Russian and Assad regime forces, because they are committed.
That’s not overwrought or fatalistic–that’s reality as I see it. I hope I’m wrong and Sec. of State Kerry and his Russian counterparts and any other of the globe’s influential diplomats find a way to work together to stop Russia and Assad from continuing this purge, but if they can’t that’s going to be the reality on the ground.
If you think sanctions or threats of international prosecutions for war crimes is going to dissuade Russia from pursuing its current policy, let me ask you, do you think those sorts of “threats” have ever cowed America when it comes to pursuing militarily what it thinks is in its “interests”? Of course not. Russia is a veto holding member of the UN Security Council and their isn’t fuck all the rest of the world can do when Russia decides to stop observing humanitarian norms. Just like there was fuck all the world could do when America and its allies stopped observing those norms in Iraq and Afghanistan.
precisely.
it is becoming all to common that we suffer the slants of willing victims.
Common ownership of life support resources is the best solution but the control freaks and thieves have swarmed that arena like ants onto sugar and have convinced too many the collateral problems are no part of the swarming.
and we NEVER EVER hear about ownership of currency and distribution.
i think Donald Trump reminds wallstreet thieves of Adolf Hitler who took back the currency and banking from the thieves at Versailles.
What should people on the left who have misconceptions know about Syria?
Pretty sobering to see the ongoing deconstruction/restructuring of countries and economies to follow neoliberalisms’ and corporatist wet dreams.
Accepting Yassin Al-Haj Saleh’s assessment, that the Syrian’a republican form of government has been usurped, violently, by neoliberal interests brings what is happening to America and other western governments, i.e., the same transformation, albeit less bloody so far, into sharp focus.
In America’s case, the wording of the first bolded sentence is instead: “transformed the country from a republic into an oligarchy”
The last view expressed in the quote above: “The state has become the private property of the regime, while the economy has been restructured according to the neoliberal agenda.” is pretty much spot on.
The comment, lightly edited for the good ol’ US of A:
I certainly supported the early efforts of these people, but then they disappeared. How are they going to defeat the ‘anti-Assad’ jihadis in Nusra, Daesh, and other anti-working class Sunni formations? All backed by the Saudis, Qataris, Turks and soon the U.S. and Clinton even more clearly? Many of the U.S. weapons from Libya ended up with these people. The bulk of U.S. help has gone to the anti-Assad forces, as they see Assad as another Quaddafi or Hussein, in spite of what the ‘conscience of Syria’ says here. Assad is a butcher, but the armed revolution has turned into a festival of butchery. The prospects of success against Assad will install the Sunni fundamentalists in power, another bunch of anti-worker forces. Ultimately what is being said here is that would be preferable.
It is a nightmare scenario for any leftist. Until they get an armed organization that can take on both, they will not be able to win. What is that organization?
Some US support has gone has gone to parts of the opposition, not Aurar al Sham or Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, etc, but the most important US support as gone to Kurdish YPG to fight ISIS. Lots of weapons and actual air support. The US tried to get FSA and other rebel groups to ONLY fight ISIS but have had limited success. And the author is right that the US has blocked the transfer of anti-aircraft weapons. It seems like the US’s involvement in arming rebels in 2013 was more about controlling what Qatar, Saudi, and Turkey were doing than actually trying to bring down the regime.
Hussain is again writing as an apologist for war crimes. He uses a simple formula that has been used by tyrants throughout the ages.
1. You want to overthrow a regime
2. Find people who have been treated poorly by the regime
3. Justify Anything
In Hussain’s post-Numerberg world, once we have determined that a leader like Assad is ‘bad’ then we are free to do anything. If Hussain had been writing for Hitler in 1939, he would have used this age old formula to find those oppressed by Poland as a blanket justification for war crimes, illegal regime change, and economic plunder.
If we were to stoop as low as Hussain, we could find someone like Chelsea Manning who is oppressed by the US government — interview him in a sappy, insincere, piece like Hussain’s and … Viola! We are now morally justified in sending thousands of Jihadist fighters across the US border. Forget that they rape women, execute them for the smallest offenses, commit ethnic cleansing, murder gays, and thrive in failed states.
Hussain represents the end of civilization and a new fascism – where all you need to do is find malcontents in a nation you wish to conquer, and then you are free to arm Jihadists, Nazi’s, anyone who will destroy the state, the society, and the population.
I call on Edward Snowden to denounce the Intercept, which has become that which he so bravely fought against.
Right on the money on all counts, Jamie. I mourn the passing of the Intercept. But if the rubbish in this interview is any indication, it is dead.
I hear Taps in the distance …
Intercepted Pravda
Welcome to The Intercept – craigsummers edition.
AlAssad may well be a vile president, but none of those who wants his removals has a better record on human rights or democracy.
“the Obama Administration falsely blamed the government of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad for the sarin gas attack that Obama was trying to use as an excuse to invade Syria”
http://conservativepapers.com/news/2016/05/08/hillary-approved-sarin-gas-to-rebels-to-frame-assad/
This what is <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/10/26/syria-airstrikes-kill-children-at-school.html"happening with frequency.
This is happening solely because of US weapons. Hellary doesn’t care. Her neocon backers are driving this slaughter.
Oops.
<a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/10/26/syria-airstrikes-kill-children-at-school.html"this should work.
jesus
this might work
vs.
Well which is it? Do you want the help of Americans and the French, or don’t you? If it’s not about us “intervening” militarily to “hold Assad accountable”, and willingness to do it yourselves, then what do you really want from a nation or its people–say America or France? Weapons?
And I know this is going to sound callous given the situation in Syria, and in light of Mr. Saleh’s personal experiences and personal losses, but maybe if you are going to engage in armed revolution against your tyrannical government, maybe you should have planned ahead and had built the necessary human relationships (both inside and outside Syria), materials and strategy necessary to remove Assad yourselves?
Seriously, should America and Americans necessarily put their lives and money on the line to help every oppressed people in the world at all times overthrow their governments? If so, you don’t know much about America’s history–it has never ever done that (nor does any nation in world history that I’m aware) nor will it ever.
Moreover, at what point are another nation’s people so “oppressed” and their “political economy” so “disempowered” that America must expend its citizens’ lives and money to correct a situation not of our creation notwithstanding the fact “capitalism” which you think is so passé for “leftists” to be concerned about is the fundamental underlying reality and driving force that causes much of the present “world order” and “practices” of the world’s elite including America’s elites. So if you don’t reform capitalism, good luck removing people like Assad who disempower his people with the tacit approval of other “capitalist” elites.
Look here’s my larger point, unless Mr. Saleh is calling for a universal global solidarity movement of the working class aimed at creating “economic democracy” together with secular conceptions of “human rights” as its twin cornerstones as a global “movement”, then good luck changing anything in this world because its entire structure and ideology is “nation state based” and overwhelmingly a “capitalist” one (albeit a very problematic manifestation of “capitalism” i.e. neoliberalism or state capitalism).
Now if you are asking the world’s people to peacefully go on strike up and down the capitalist “production chain” until the globe’s capitalist elites (including Russian and American elites) work together to remove and refer Assad to the Hague, then I’m all for it and will gladly act in solidarity with you, the Syrian people and all the working class of world.
If you are asking for Americans to unilaterally spend more money arming more people in societies that we barely understand (if at all) culturally, historically and politically and/or actually putting our lives and those of our children on the line to “free Syria” then I think that’s problematic. Not once ever has America’s military forces intervening directly (with the exception of WWII) ever altered or improved lives for those living on the ground in those nations. Providing arms to “rebels” hasn’t worked out very well for America either, and in fact only perpetuates violence in the world by arming the likes of Assad, or Al Qaeda, or Isis, or Saudi Arabia or any other of a laundry list of “tyrants” and revanchist forces all over the globe.
American “leftists” understand this. Similarly, please don’t accuse “American leftists” of buying into the “global war on terrorism narrative” as we know and understand quite intimately that it is utter ongoing bullshit and nothing more than a social control mechanism that permits America’s elites to manipulate a majority of the American public to do things, or permit its elites to do things, it wouldn’t otherwise do or permit.
As an American “leftist” I find the situation in Syria to be a monumental historical tragedy, Assad to be a violator of international law, and a despot and murderer of his own people. And I might even be persuaded to continue to arm certain “moderate rebels” in Syria to continue to fight a fight that only they can. Because America and the West certainly can’t do it without exacerbating the very real risk of a global military confrontation between the “West” (which is really America by dollars and number of soldiers) and Russia, China and Iran. And I’m quite convinced sparking off that sort of conflict will do no Syrians any “good” nor anybody else on the globe–that’s the reality of where we are at.
Syria is burning at present? Would you like America to do something as monumentally stupid and anti-human as to increase the risk of a global conflagration with Russia, China and Iran over Syria? Sorry, but I think you are going to have a hard time convincing the American people that that is a risk worth taking. Maybe that makes Americans some sort of indifferent monsters to the plight of Syria and Syrians. I don’t believe that, I simply believe it demonstrates the horrible conundrum that is Syria and the lack of any good viable solutions at present except to continue to put pressure on American and Russian elites to work together to cease violence on all sides, permit the people of Syria to return to Syria free of threat of imprisonment or harassment from regime forces, and create enough stability for the people of Syria to peaceful remove Assad via a democratic process. That’s a dilemma of Syrians creation when they decided to engage in armed revolt against their nominal sovereign (waiting and/or continue to organize until a critical mass could be reached that wanted Assad peacefully gone)–it’s an all or nothing gamble and should never be taken lightly no matter how repressive a regime a people are up against. It’s usually a fight to the death if history is any indicator, and one that usually only a people can sort out for themselves if that type of “revolt” stays confined to one nation state’s borders (unlike WWII Germany or whichever nation).
There are not good answers to the problem presently afflicting Syria. But you should understand that America’s elites (and a good segment of its citizens whether left or right) are not your “friends” or “allies”. For better or worse, America’s elites act in its/their own “national interest” (which cannot even be defined, debated or voted on in America by America’s citizens which speaks to a level of anti-democratic disempowerment of the American people which isn’t so very far removed from the situation in Syria as a function of a “political economy” understanding of the world). And I’m not sure exactly what “national interest” there would be in intervening in Syria, that isn’t concurrently present in dozens and dozens of other countries all over the globe from North Korea to Burma to Yemen to Somalia to Niger to Sudan . . . .
very well said!
Well, rr, I don’t have any problem with Saleh’s objecting to the U.S. providing awful weapons to Russia, or to other vile regimes. That is a form of intervention.
Mr. Saleh argues both that he’s not asking the West for anything, but also that Assad should be removed because, he asserts, rule by ISIS would be “the lesser evil.” He is, in fact, advocating for Western intervention to remove Assad. He’s just doing so very manipulatively and elliptically, and based on very dubious assumptions.
I despise manipulative, innuendo-riddled, not-straightforward propaganda like this. A pox on it. And a pox on “journalists” who let the subject get away with it.
The US is providing weapons to Russia? [maybe that was a typo]
I agree with Saleh that America should not “provide” weapons to any other nation, ever, for the very reason that it is “intervention”, and a very direct form of intervention.
The only time America should ever legally be permitted to sell or give arms to any group or nation, is if the American people by democratic vote approve such transfers/sales, and generally speaking only if Americans democratically decide we are prepared to “take sides” with another nation or group on the ground, and align and declare war on whomever it is that group or nation is fighting and join in that fighting. Arming and using “proxies” to pursue America’s “national interests” (whatever those may be that we never get to democratically weigh in on) is immoral, and short-sighted in my opinion.
Short of that, I agree with MLK Jr.–America is the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet in pursing its “national interests” via the arms trade (among other mechanisms and means). I would like to see the American people retake control of their own government and put a stop to America’s international arms sales to anybody. Our nation’s military technology sector and arms manufacturing industries shouldn’t be “for-profit” but for our actual “national defense”. Unfortunately that’s never been America’s history, we’ve been selling arms since we could produce them to almost anyone willing to buy them and/or as a package deal to advance our global economic interests. Not really news to any actual American leftist except possibly the authors of this shitty article and interview.
Oh geez, I sure did a stoopid there. No, of course the U.S. didn’t provide Russia with weapons. On reflection, I don’t understand why Saleh would have a problem with the deal to make Syria destroy those things. It’s diplomatic pressure, much of it via the UN, and would seem to be a good idea. [shrug]
His implied complaint is, at the time of the chemical weapons deal, Chemical weapons in Syria had killed 1,500 people, but the Assad government had already killed 250,000 people. The chemical weapons deal was about solving a problem for other people, America, Russia, etc. in getting rid of weapons that could harm them, while ignoring the problem of Assad’s government.
I see. So the international community should have ignored the chemical weapons as just a minor issue, given the numbers thus far killed with them, and many more killed without them?
Correct.
Leftists worldwide understand this. Shame Mr Saleh doesn’t seem to know that.
Fascinating read. Thank you for publishing this perspective.
I appreciate what the guy has to say, but I certainly don’t see the people in the West (or at least the USA) accepting the narrative that Assad is a partner in the war on terror. Quite the opposite. It seems to me that the overwhelming majority of people, especially on the political left, along with the U.S. media have completely bought into the idea that Assad is a brutal dictator and that the Syrian regime and the Russians are the bad guys. I disagree, but I think that’s a minority viewpoint. Hell, 40% of the country is ready to elect a president who will go to war with Russia and the Syrian regime.
I think he’s being a bit of an idealist when he says: “…you must both overthrow Bashar al-Assad and fight ISIS.”
That’s just not going to happen. There is no “moderate” third faction within Syria who has that sort of political and/or military power. Depose Assad and you’re either going to get a failed state like Libya with multiple factions claiming legitimacy, or you’re going to give ISIS an actual state to govern.
Really, what the fuck does this codswallop even mean?
Oh, that “left” sure sounds like it’s missed the poetry of life. Other than that, I don’t have the first clue who Saleh means, or what the crime specifically is.
I guess Maz and Mr. Hisham just couldn’t press their subject for any, you know, specifics. That might have messed up the emotional manipulation, eh? And created a situation in which actual, accused people could respond, or others could on their behalf with recourse to the accuseds’ public statements.
I came across this article. “Massive evidence foreign-funded White Helmets support terrorist entities in Syria” by Journalist Vanessa Beeley
Any merit to this side of the story.
Same interventionists shit, different day
I flatly do not believe this:
Like so many, Saleh names no names. He insults and indicts some abstraction called “the left” and claims “most” of this abstraction “sides with Assad.”
With no hard evidence of specific, significant numbers of noteworthy individuals reasonably considered to be on the left, I will not believe anything this man says. It’s the same playbook I’ve been rejecting since the cowardly and manipulative interventionists began these antics many months (or years) ago.
Moreover, I demand to know what specifically Mr. Saleh believes “the left” should be advocating for in Syria. And I do mean SPECIFIC. Military intervention? Of what sort? And how can Russia reasonably be expected to respond?
Anything that doesn’t address who on the left Saleh indicts, as well as the very specific policies he wants advocated, is mere emotional manipulation.
It is obvious , that, when Saleh talks about the “left he is talking about Max Blumenthal and his ilk ( Mona you obviously are a fervent believer ).
He is talking about people who sit in the living rooms expounding their opinions about the plight of the Syrian people.
He is talking about people like you, Mona, who have never looked into the haunted eyes of a Syrian who has lost his entire family to indiscriminate bombing. He doesnt care if the killers were, Assad, ISIS, or the other imperial powers who are protecting the turf.
He is talking about so called leftists like you who see the world only through the lens of evil American imperialism and dont give a damn about the actual suffering of people.
he i
Joe, I expect the “journalists” to pin in Mr. Saleh down. If he means Max Blumenthal, make him say so. You are a neoliberal/neocon (hard to tell the difference any longer) asshat. So your opinion doesn’t matter to me.
I want to know what the two journalists, and their subject say — and what/who they specifically mean. Your belief about what/who they mean is not especially relevant.
“Asshat”..”neoliberal/neocon”. ……Mona, for someone who frequently complains about Hussain and others being mean to staunch leftists like yourself on Twitter and elsewhere, you certainly throw around insults and adhominems at will. I have been reading your commentary on Intercept articles for a while now, and where I previously had a modicum of respect for your intellect, I am now coming to the conclusion , that you are just another, shrill, hysterical person…with anger issues. Hope you can get the needed help.
Nope.
I do, however, get righteously angry when Maz and others deploy bad faith, FALSE accusations against comrades. No one here is an “Assadist,” and certainly Max fucking Blumenthal is not. That’s not “mean” to say otherwise: it’s outrageous, obscene, false and defamatory.
You are not my comrade. You actually ARE a neoliberal/neocon of some variety. Moreover, that’s a descriptor. Not an insult.
I don’t care what you think about who this article means by “leftists,” because your entire worldview is vile — your judgment doesn’t matter to me in the least.
My entire world view is vile ? Because I don’t agree with you ?….see what I mean by hysterical and unhinged…you should really do something about those anger issues.
Yes.
The neocon/neoliberal worldview is depraved. (Altho, I do allow that some percentage are merely deluded fools, not soulless ghouls.)
The depraved typically mock moral people who repudiate them. Nothing new in your doing that. But I did neglect to allow that you could be one of the deluded fools.
In any event, I disposed of your inane attempt to equate my accurate characterization of you and your worldview with the outrageous shit many interventionists spew about good people who are their anti-interventionist comrades.
Good day.
Mona…reading your numerous comments on every article written by Murtaza Hussain and others, gives one the impression that your entire life revolves around posting angry , personal insults aimed at any writer who you disagree with. Don’t you have a job? A family that require your attention ? Is this your entire universe…trolling ? As our GOP presidential candidate would say….SAD !
@ Joe
If you “give a damn” what’s stopping you and your children from expending your family blood and treasure to go fly over to Turkey, and fight alongside the Syrian rebels?
Or are the only people who have sympathy, empathy and compassion for suffering Syrians by definition those like you who want to send other peoples money and children to fight for Syria?
There are no good solutions to what is happening in Syria. That is why real “leftists” understand that state level violence (military intervention), or domestic violent revolution, is rarely if ever a viable path to anything good.
If Gandhi and the people of India could throw off the yolk of the British empire without firing a shot, maybe there are some lessons to be learned there about how to successfully conduct a revolution that doesn’t end up looking like Syria.
You are certainly making a lot of assumptions. I never mentioned sending other people’ s money or sons to fight wars. I was expressing outrage for Assad and ISIS over the slaughter of innocents. For the life of me I don’t understand, this lack of sympathy for the massive civilian casualties, majority of them by Assad.
@ Joe
Do you actually believe what you wrote here (in interpreting Mr. Saleh’s answers) as applicable to someone like Mona or say me?
Do you honestly believe as “leftists”, American or otherwise, that “all we [leftists i.e. like me and Mona] care about is anti-American/Western imperialism” and not the horrible waste of human life and destruction in places like Syria?
If so then you are making assumptions of your own, in at least tacitly agreeing with Mr. Saleh. Either that or you don’t actually know any actual leftists or what motivates them.
Most of us are “anti-imperialism” born not of some vague ideology, but the practical reality that imperialism and the bad parts of capitalism are what create the Syria’s situations in the world.
But here, I’ll do it for you unequivocally so you know where I stand:
Assad is a murderous despot. I am outraged and heartbroken that so many Syrians have lost their lives either fighting to remove Assad or incident to that fight. There is no justification on the planet I’m aware of that makes any of what is happening in Syria defensible. I have both sympathy and empathy for my fellow human beings in Syria. I am absolutely heartbroken that the people who run the world and its governments (unlike me, Mona and presumably you) have not found a way to put an end to this conflict. I am absolutely heartbroken that I’m not smart enough or knowledgeable enough or powerful enough to persuade those with decision making authority in the world to stop killing one another.
But this is what happens in a world of human beings, a majority of whom are not leftists, or non-interventionists, or anti-capitalists, or who think violence is a solution to the problems that afflict human beings, their cultures, their governments, and their interpersonal relationships. I wish I could change that reality about the violent bald apes with jobs that I call my fellow human beings, but I can’t. I guess I can join in expressions of “outrage” with people like you, but I think that has limited effect in the real world, although I occasionally engage in it myself even if for the very limited purpose of an emotional release so I don’t lose my mind sometimes thinking about how awful human beings are to each other sometimes. Thankfully I am mostly rational and realize that the vast majority of the human beings on the planet aren’t daily engaged in figuring out, or actually engaging in, ways to kill each other. And given that reality I’m hopeful for humanity if we don’t kill ourselves first as a function of our consumerism and inattention to the biological world we all share and are codependent upon.
Is that clear enough as far as my outrage and empathy for Syrians and all the other people on the planet? Or should us “leftists” be doing something else to prove our sympathy and empathy to you?
+10!
Jill Stein had a basically pro-Assad pro-Russian statement until she was forced to take it down. She still doesn’t acknowledge any kind’ve revolutionary dynamic in Syria. Her running mate had a blog post in 2014 chearing Bashar’s “election” (these are not real elections). Black Agenda report pretty consistently. Jacobin only recently put out anything even mildly even handed on Syria, and unlike in a lot of other countries they have not put out an interview of Syrian leftists like this. Actually for most of the last 5 years they’ve put out pieces that claim their was never any real revolutionary movement in Syria, totally erasing guys like this. The Nation has had editorial actually cheering on the beginning Russian of Russia’s bombing campaign. Its pretty widespread.
No links. No article titles, or even quotes. That’s wholly insufficient to demonstrate what Mr. Saleh and others assert about “the left.”
” It is a matter of helping Syrians to regain ownership of their country and to hold the criminals accountable.”
No. It is a matter of helping Americans to regain ownership of their country, and to hold the criminal war profiteering elite and their corporate criminal enterprise Government accountable for their war crimes.
Get your head out of your ass, and look at Syria from the vantage of Syrians who are the first hand victims .
The geopolitics of the world are not just all about evil American imperialism. There are actual human beings…hundreds of thousands of them, who are being slaughtered by a cold blooded dictator on one hand, and a nihilistic band of terrorists on the other.
No.
But that factor is rarely absent, and certainly IS NOT HERE.
Nothing stopping Turkey from letting in every single refugee, and taking the fight to Assad directly. Oh except Turkey is a member of NATO and that’s a perfect way to start a global conflagration with Russia, China and Iran.
So what’s your answer there Mr. Big Brain Full of Empathy? Please give all us unempathetic leftists dupes who only see the world through the lens of anti-“American imperialism” (which of course we don’t), your big master strategy for solving the Syrian problem that doesn’t involve a likely military confrontation with Russia?
We’ll wait.
What an amazing interview. Gives a clear insight into the complex mess that present day Syria has become. Kudos to Hussain and Marwan Hisham.
Another “white helmet.” As if the example of Libya is beyond understanding of the west-encouraged “Assad mist go” crowd in emigration.
He sounds like a very educated man.
A profound article –
More power to him :)
I’d love to hear his opinion of the YPG and why Americans shouldnt be giving them overwhelming support.
“The majority are also still obsessed with the old Cold War-era struggles against imperialism and capitalism.”
I’m just curious, since apparently I am among those who did not realize this was old hat and all over — who won?
Looking forward to comments here, especially as they have been totally disabled on Mackey’s blog within the blog.
In the Cold War? I would say the US won. But in terms of imperialism? Russian imperialism (in Syria) and American imperialism in much of the world are still alive and well. Thats not what he means though. He’s saying that when you look at things from an old “campist” perspective, between geopolitical blocks, you don’t actually see the dynamics of struggle on the ground.
“Mackey’s blog within the blog.”
I think you give Bob too much credit. It’s a glorified twit feed.