Thursday, April 19, 2018

Leftists in the Syrian "revolution"? Unless you mean Saudi and Qatari regime are sponsoring leftism

I notice that Western media are so desperate to locate "leftists" in the ranks of the Syrian "revolution" that they basically label self-described Syrian liberals--who bash leftists in the Saudi press--as "leftists" and "communists" and "socialists".  Kid you not. 

Asad Owais is dead

His son told me his story. Asad Owais died last Friday.  He fought with Quwwat Al-Ansar in Amman back in Black September and was arrested and savagely tortured by the Jordanian regime henchmen.  He later moved to the West where he lived. This picture was a fulfillment of a dream: it was in Cuba which he always wanted to visit.  

Tripartite attack

It was indeed a tripartite attack on Syria.  Yet, supporters of Gulf regimes in the Arabic press portrayed the description of tripartite as if it was a comparison between Nasser and Bashshar (when no such comparison was made or intended). It was a label to an attack by 3 Western powers.  Ironically, those same people who protested the analogy are the paid propagandists against Nasser in the Gulf media.  There is a level of zeal in defending the princes and kings in Arab media the likes of which I have not seen before.  Because for the first time there is no rival press (unless you include the small leftist Al-Akhbar newspaper in Beirut) given the death of Libyan and Iraqi funded press in the region.  

The false alarm in Syrian missile defenses

OK. Syrian regime admitted that there was a false alarm in their missile defense systems. But what do we do with their claims of shooting down missiles that didnot exist? 

Monday, April 16, 2018

A former correspondent for the New York Times provides targets for Western military to bomb in Syria: can you imagine a Western writer presenting a list of Israeli targets for the West to bomb in the wake of Israeli massacres?

“command and control, delivery mechanisms including aircraft and bases, storage, research, and the like. “ This is in a magazine edited by a "former" Israeli occupation soldier and funded by a billionaire.

Sunday, April 15, 2018

Saudi King and Palestine in the Arab summit

IT was quite striking how much the Saudi King played up Palestine as an issue today in the Arab summit. There must be a realization among the Saudi ruling circle that Muhammad bin Salman went too far in his English statements during his tour in the US.  But this is indicative of the salience of the subject in Saudi and Arab public opinion in general--Zionist wishful thinking notwithstanding.  You have to realize: that Gulf regime media have really been playing down Palestine (Aljazeera to a lesser extent) but the role of satellite TV channels, including Aljazeera and Al-Arabiyya, have substantially declined.  The people are now relying more on social media but social media are under strict constraints but people find ways to express themselves with indirect references. But Gaza protests have been really big in Arab social media, unlike say Saudi regime media which wanted to ignore it.  

Saturday, April 14, 2018

Ben Hubbard of the New York Times finds image of missiles falling on Syria to be "cool"

Western correspondents find scenes of Western bombing of Arab capitals to be cool. What kind of people are they really? Would he dare call the image of a missile falling on Tel Aviv to be cool? If he said a picture of missies on Tel Aviv is "cool" he would have been fired on the spot. No doubt about that.

"Bravo to , the photographer who took the coolest photo from Damascus this morning."

Friday, April 13, 2018

How many Arab and Muslim country has the US bombed since I came to US in 1983?

I came to the US in 1983, since my arrival the US has directly bombed Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad, Libya, Mogadishu, Sudan, Afghanistan and Yemen--among other countries it bombed around the world (including downing a civilian Iranian plane). That is why they hate you.

Thursday, April 12, 2018

The New York Times and evidence of chemical weapons: not in the headlines but in the small print

It is amazing that despite the agitation for war in all US media (some left, center and most right), you have to read the full text of articles in the New York Times to realize that in fact the US government and the British government does not have incontrovertible evidence. Look at this: 

1) here is the New York Times' own evidence: "“a New York Times review of more than 20 videos of its aftermath”."

2) "“International investigators have yet to visit the site to determine whether chemicals were used”."

3) "“British Cabinet had “agreed that...and it is highly likely that the regime is responsible for Saturday’s attack,” Downing Street said in a statement.”"

4) "“The Trump administration has not yet confirmed the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime.”"

5) "“[Mattis] also underscored the importance of a preponderance of evidence linking Mr. Assad to Saturday’s suspected chemical weapons attack.”"

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

My tweets on Syria from yesterday

Arab journalists who work for Western or Gulf regime media are salivating at the prospect of another US war.
Zuckerberg falsely claimed today that Facebook bans all calls for violence. He meant to add: excluding calls for Western and Israeli wars.

American conservatives and liberals are converging on a foreign policy agenda hatched by the GCC- AIPAC alliance in DC-and all in the name of freedom and humanitarianism.
All-I mean all-advocates of US intervention are also supporters of various dictatorships and foreign occupation around the world, especially in the Middle East. Some opponents-but certainly NOT all-of US intervention also support the Syrian dictatorship. Let us not confuse.

The irony of all this, if you carefully read US newspapers, is that US military calculations aim at punishing the Syrian regime (and whoever else among the innocent who get killed) while strictly preserving the Syrian regime and preventing its collapse. Opponents haven’t noticed.
Key words: “suspected”, “apparently”, and “circumstantial” evidence. Case closed. Let the jet be launched. “Chemical weapons are again suspected to have been used in Syria, apparently by government forces, circumstantial evidence suggests.”(NYT)

I don’t trust US government intentions, or Russian government intentions for that matter, even if they throw flowers on a country.
Notice the crucial phrase “what appeared to be”: “On Sunday, groups in Douma, a town in eastern Ghouta, reported what appeared to be a chemical weapons attack”.(NYT)
So the US strike will either be big or small. Thanks for the brilliant insight. “Michèle A. Flournoy, an under secretary of defense under President Barack Obama. “Conceivably, they could design a larger one-off strike or a series of smaller strikes.” (NYT)

When th dust settles in Syria, we will know much more about the Syrian Observatory and its role in the conflict and the agendas it served. Notice that not one Western or Arab media source treats its reports with any skepticism at all, which makes it all the more fishy.
This line. Typical of this war-mongering paper. It makes the massive use of force a mere necessity for the protection of “civilians”. Remember how they agitated for war in ‘03 “deterrent against further use of chemical weapons on Syrian civilians.” (NYT)

All-I mean all-advocates of US intervention are also supporters of various dictatorships and foreign occupation around the world, especially in the Middle East. Some opponents-but certainly NOT all-of US intervention also support the Syrian dictatorship. Let us not confuse.

How war propaganda begins. What is wrong with this poll? 1)it makes it an established fact that chemical weapons were used and that the user is certainly known beyond the shadow of a doubt. 2)it makes it sound like US bombs and rockets only fall on a “regime“.See footage of Raqqa" (Spectator Index had a poll saying: "Do you support military action against the Assad regime over the use of chemical weapons?"

The same media and personalities who assured us back in 2003 that Saddam possessed MWDs are assuring us now that Syrian regime has just used chemical weapons in Syria. If true, show the world the evidence--and please don't insult our intelligence by citing "US intelligence".

Yet again, the Israeli lobby and the GCC's lobbying shops in DC are agitation for another war in the Middle East. This is not to absolve the administration of responsibility of course but is to indicate the source of loud noises of propaganda.

Those of use who are opposed to Western military intervention and war in the Middle East are not less opposed to the use of chemical weapons--whether by Syrian regime or by rebels. But the tendency to link skepticism with support for Syrian regime is like Zionist tactics.
Syrian regime and the rebels are capable of a variety of war crimes. That has been established in the course of the Syrian war. But to accept at face value claims by Western governments and their subservient media, or by media shops set up by Gulf regimes, is lend a hand to war.

To insist on clear and incontrovertible evidence of use of chemical weapons in Syria and identity of the user is not to absolve the Syrian regime or rebels of crimes. But it is to question the veracity of West governments and media with long track record of lying and fabrications.

If you said in 2003, I oppose war on Iraq but I accept Western "evidence" of Iraqi WMDs, you wittingly or unwittingly participated in the campaign for war back then. Same analogy applies now.

There is a new tactic to intimidate and kill dissent in preparation for this war:by insisting that you are a supporter of the Asad regime if you reject whatever evidence of chemical weapons presented by Western governments and journalists, or GCC funded shops, or by Israel lobby.

Are you kidding me? theIntercept citing ambassador Robert Ford as an expert on Syria? Why not throw in Thomas Friedman for extra effect? Robert Ford is John Bolton but without the mustache.

Make no mistake about it: Western human rights organizations (and some feminist groups in the case of the war on Afghanistan) played a big role in agitation and lobbying for Western wars in 1990-91, 2001, and 2003, and 2011. They are playing the same role now, especially HRW.

Is Macron attempting to kiss the hand of Muhammad bin Salman here-I mean, literally kiss the hand?


Monday, April 09, 2018

ISIS-Israeli collusion: not in the Western or Arab oil press

This won’t be reported in the Western press: but Israeli bombing of Homs seems coordinated with ISIS as its fighters-according to Al-Mayadin-began advancing in the area in the wake of the Israeli raid.

They hate despotism except when the despots are rich

I really love that the DC pundit class, sponsored by the GCC-AIPAC alliance, claims that their views of the Middle East are really motivated by an abhorrence of despotism. Those same people stood in line to get a glimpse of the Saudi despot last week, and didn’t notice Gaza.

Macron told Muhammad bin Salman today: you are the embodiment of the French Revolution.


Israel in 24 hours

Within 24 hours, the Israeli occupation enemy managed to bomb Gaza and Syria, and its planes violated Lebanese air space. You won't find one word of condemnation from the GCC-AIPAC- sponsored DC pundits, Western correspondents and those academics who fake sympathy for Syrians.

Israelis cheering as Palestinians slaughtered

“An image showing a group of young Israelis, sitting by the Gaza border, cheering and applauding the Israeli authorities firing ammunition, bombs at Palestinians, as though they were at an "outdoor cinema," has drawn widespread condemnation from human rights groups and social media users.” (thanks Amir)

Saturday, April 07, 2018

American Zionist organizations and support for Islamophobia

I can't believe that this is becoming so mainstream.  US Zionist organizations are now officially endorsing, funding, sponsoring and supporting Islamophobic organizations.  Do those people think that Arabs/Muslims are idiots and won't read those reports and won't know? What kind of poison is this in terms of Muslim-Jewish relations? This will have devastating on consequences on the future of  of Jewish-Arab and Jewish-Muslim relations in the world.  Imagine the (justifiable) uproar if a mainstream Arab or Muslim organization is found funding an anti-Semitic organization.  I bet you that I and every Arab I know would be denouncing such an act by any Arab or Muslim organizations. Yet, why this silence? Where is the uproar?  Where is the outrage?  This from an Israeli newspaper:
"U.S. Jewish leader Ronald Lauder gave $1.1 million to covert group pushing anti-Muslim campaign".

Zionism and anti-Semitism are not necessarily incompatible: Saudi regime media still publishes anti-Semitic trash

Here, Jihad Khazin basically says that while Christianity and Islam are real religions, Judaism is not.

Friday, April 06, 2018

Robert Fisk, the fortune teller

"But, having covered parliamentary and presidential elections in Cairo for more than four decades, I thought I'd have a crack at Field Marshal/President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi's victorious results a week before the election was actually held. Since he picked up more than 96 per cent in previous polls, I reported in The Independent: "I have a hunch it will be somewhere between 93.73 per cent and 97.37 per cent for the President..." (thanks Basim)

Wednesday, April 04, 2018

Israeli hackers gave Cambridge Analytica stolen emails

“Israeli hackers reportedly gave information from the hacked emails of two world leaders to Cambridge Analytica, the political-research company at the center of a massive Facebook-data scandal.”

U.S. media boosts Saudi front group as neutral think tank

“No one on the panel brought up Saudi Arabia’s ongoing war crimes in Yemen—consistent with MSNBC’s network-wide virtual blackout on one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises (FAIR.org, 3/20/18).”

EU funds Israel’s war industry

“The suppliers of weapons and services to Israel’s military are conducting cruel experiments against Palestinians. Inviting those suppliers into its science programs is a major way that the EU connives with cruelty.”

Invisible victims of racist terrorists

“Had killer Mark Anthony Conditt been a brown Muslim, it’s hard to imagine corporate media not at least speculating that hateful ideology was a motive, and using (or at least debating the use of) the term “terrorism” to describe his crimes. But because Conditt was a white, conservative, homophobic Christian, corporate media and police alike have been—ahem—generous in their eulogies.”

Dont make fun of North Korea

Don't make fun of North Korea. This is the entire Lebanese political class (minus Hizbullah) clapping for the mere appearance of a portrait of the Saudi King. Kid you not.

Demand for exorcisms has risen exponentially

“The Vatican-backed International Association of Exorcists, which represents more than 200 Catholic, Anglican and Orthodox priests, said the increase represented a “pastoral emergency”. According to a priest from Sicily, the number of people in Italy claiming to be possessed had tripled to 500,000 a year, and an Irish priest has said demand for exorcisms has “risen exponentially”. Last year, the Christian thinktank Theos reported that exorcisms were a “booming industry” in the UK, particularly among Pentecostal churches.” (thanks Amir)

Muhammad bin Salman in the Atlantic

1) By agreeing to an interview with a former soldier of the Israeli occupation army tells you that he is attuned to the American scene but totally clueless how things play in the Arab scene. Many commented on the fact that the interviewer is a "former" Israeli occupation soldier. 2) The man is woefully ignorant, which is what you expect from the Saudi princes who study at the "Princes School" and later at a Saudi university which no professor in his right mind would dare not give a prince the highest grade. a) He thought that Egypt during the Cold War was under communist rule. b) he thought that France has been constantly a monarchy during American history. c) He thought that the Queen of England has "absolute" powers. d) He is totally ignorant about Islamic history and the characteristics of Islamic expansion. e) He thought that the Safavid Empire ruled all over the Arab world.  3) I can't see how this man last.  He has violated so many political, social, economic, and family taboos that he is guaranteeing his own eventual downfall.  In fact, a well-connected relative to the Saudi royal family told me recently that his violations of social taboos has caused the most consternation in the Kingdom. 4) He revealed himself to be an anti-Semite who downplayed the horrors of the Nazi regime and reduced them to an attempt to "conquer Europe".  Yet, his anti-Semitics will be forgiven because Israel and Zionists don't judge a person on anti-Semitism so much as they judge on friendliness toward Israel.  His case proves my long-standing theory: that Arab Zionists and normalizers have all been Nazis (like Sadat) or rabid anti-Semites (like this guy, or Anis Mansour or Ali Salem,  or the Lebanese Phalanges).  5) Clearly, the interview did not go well in the estimation of the regime.  Okaz, the fiery mouthpiece of the Prince printed the whole interview but took out the section on Jews and Israel.  

Monday, April 02, 2018

How to get educated on the Middle East--according to New Yorker

"You can read a lot of books but never get the type of education you get from talking to the Kissingers and Petraeuses of the world.”"

The US mainstream media which peddled the lie of the century want to tackle "fake news"


How the Palestinians "lost" their homes in 1948: the Nakbah according to the New York Times

Don’t you like the phrase “lost their homes”? It gives the impression that Palestinians went outside their homes in 1948 and just couldn’t find their way back: “the 1948 war in which hundreds of thousands of Palestinians lost their homes”.

Anti-Semitism and opposition to Israel among Arabs: the logic of the Washington Post

Look at this statement: "One pilot study, by Günther Jikeli of Indiana University, found that anti-Semitism often accompanies opposition to Israel in Arab countries."  You press on the link to the pilot study and you don't find what the Post maintains it contains.  But let us look at this: So almost all Arabs are opposed to Israel.  So someone then tests anti-Semitism among Arabs (I would like to see how they tested that and whether they used current Zionist definitions which conflates anti-Semitism with opposition to Israel) and they found out that anti-Semitism is accompanied by opposition to Israel.  But let us say that they in fact used an actual legitimate definition of anti-Semitism (like hatred of Jewish people, insults to Judaism (but not to other religions), belief in bogus Jewish conspiracies, or denial of the Holocaust, belief in the grotesque Protocols of the Elders of Zionism--all those would qualify in my book as ingredients of anti-Semitism), and they found out a certain percentage of Arabs who exhibited signs of anti-Semitism. But what is the relationship between that and the widespread opposition to Israel?  This is not a causal relationship.  This is like testing how many people die from pulmonary diseases in Arizona.  If you see the percentage it is rather high and then you can link that to living in Arizona, thereby concluding that living in Arizona would increase the risk of death from pulmonary diseases, which is the reverse actually because Arizona due to its dry weather attracts a large number of people who have pulmonary diseases.  Same thing for trying to find a relationship between cases of anti-Semitism and opposition to Israel.  So most Arabs like Falafel, and if you run a study of signs of anti-Semitism, you can then say that the study found that anti-Semitism accompanies love of Falafel in Arab countries. This is how dumb this statement in the Post is.