While Talking With al-Qaeda Kerry Accuses Assad of Supporting Extremists
The president of the Russian Federation Putin famously called Secretary of State Kerry a liar. Yesterday Kerry again proved Putin to be right in his assessment:
[Kerry] said Assad has “purposefully” facilitated the rise of extremism to present himself as a Western ally against radicals.“He’s been doing this for months — trying to make himself the protector of Syria against extremists, when he himself has even been funding some of those extremists,” Kerry said. He accused Assad of “purposefully ceding some territory to them in order to make them more of a problem so he can make the argument that he is somehow the protector.”
What extremists is Kerry talking about? It is not Hizbullah, which has support from the Syrian government, that is killing civilians and cutting off heads but the "western" supported Takfiris. Those were certainly not created by Assad. They created themselves, through money from outside Syria, and did so even before the first protest in Syria started in March 2011:
In another town in northern Idlib, another jihadist — belonging to a different group — shared Ibrahim’s goal of an Islamic state. “Abu Zayd” is a 25-year-old Shari’a graduate who heads one of the founding brigades of Ahrar al-Sham, a group that adheres to the conservative Salafi interpretation of Sunni Islam.
...
The Ahrar started working on forming brigades “after the Egyptian revolution,” Abu Zayd said, well before March 15, 2011, when the Syrian revolution kicked off with protests in the southern agricultural city of Dara’a.
The leader of Ahrar al Shams has now claimed himself to be part of Al-Qaeda:
A top official of a major Syrian rebel group acknowledged Friday that he considers himself a member of al Qaida, an admission that undercuts Western hopes that the new Islamic Front would prove to be an acceptable counter to the rising influence of other al Qaida affiliates in Syria.Abu Khaled al Suri, who is a top figure in the rebel group Ahrar al Sham, made the statement in an Internet posting [...]
...
Ahrar al Sham is one of the most militarily effective groups fighting to topple the regime of President Bashar Assad and is one of the largest groups aligned with the Islamic Front, a coalition of rebel groups that announced its formation in September as a counter to the U.S.-backed Supreme Military Council. Ahrar al Sham’s leader, Hassan Aboud, is the political chief of the Islamic Front.
These al-Qaeda affiliated groups, ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al Sham, all existed before the "revolution" in Syria started and they were all preparing to fight the Syrian government. Does Kerry believe that the Syrian president Assad created these even before the U.S. instigated campaign against him began? When the U.S. military withdrew from Vietnam and now from Afghanistan is it also "purposefully ceding some territory" so it can make the argument that it is "somehow the protector"? What utter nonsense.
After talks with the U.S. the Islamic Front, led by self acknowledged al-Qaeda affiliate Ahrar al Sham, has together with other groups now reportedly agreed to talks with the Syrian government in Geneva. There Kerry is the one representing the anti-Assad side. Who then is really cooperating with al-Qaeda?
Posted by b on January 18, 2014 at 15:28 UTC | Permalink
could someone ask kerry about the false data on the chemical weapon attack that was going to be used for the basis for an open war on syria? it sums up his 'regime change' priorities very clearly. thanks for the article b.
Posted by: james | Jan 18 2014 16:42 utc | 2
Oh that evil Assad, not only is he commanding the Syrian Army to fight Jihadists, he is also working with the Jihadists to fight the American-backed Jihadists !
So when different rebel groups start fighting each other, who is to blame? Assad is to blame. Obviously. The last 3 years have been one huge deception by Assad, all of us fools who thought the Syrian government was actually fighting Jihadists never realised that they were working together this whole time. Waiting patiently for the right moment to strike and make John Kerry look like a jack-ass in front of his boss.
Those bastards.
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Jan 18 2014 18:46 utc | 3
Colm O' Toole@3 John Kerry doesn't need any help looking like a jackass. He's doing a fine job all on his own. I can't believe anyone's buying this. Then again, judging by some of my fellow citizens...
Posted by: Jim T | Jan 18 2014 18:58 utc | 4
the universe should by now be aware of the mouthings of American and israeli leaders
flush the toilet
Posted by: ja1 | Jan 18 2014 19:42 utc | 5
Holy shit! Talk about conspiracy theorists...
Finally American duplicity and twisted methods have gone to their heads. Psychological studies have shown that those who believe in what are commonly derided as "conspiracy theories" are those most likely to see such secret, duplicitous methods as viable policy options.
So it should be no surprise to discover that what Kerry accuses Assad of has been exact US policy since the mid-1990s!
This is outright insanity. US policy makers have lost it completely. Hopefully the world has enough straightjackets and Thorazine for the lot of them.
Posted by: guest77 | Jan 18 2014 19:53 utc | 6
So, western politicians, in particular zamerican politicians, lie when they move their lips?
Oh Gosh, who would have thought that after only decades and thousands of cases?! * snark
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Jan 18 2014 20:15 utc | 7
Kerry has a very long, and publicly accessible, record of telling lies. The "Swift Boat" critics may have had all manner of tacky associations to corporatists and racists but they were not far off the mark: Kerry exploited his "war record" in a very familiar (and to military men, sickening) way by turning it into a career.
The issue, itself, however-of the recruitment of jihadists and the growth of the "rebel" brigades-is one of great interest. And one which has recently been receiving attention in a way that Kerry and Bandar, who prize their control over al qaeda, find alarming. But it is the Europeans who are really alarmed because the very last thing they want is thousands of trained irregular fighters returning to the angry streets of the declining cities of Britain and the EU
The story takes us back to 2001, before the "truthers" (who may very well be right in blaming the US government for 9/11) got to work. The initial reaction of many/most? people was that the attack was a case of, as Ward Churchill said, "chickens coming home to roost." The assumption was that, after countless provocations, not least in Palestine, young muslims had decided to exact some spectacular revenge. This was "blowback." The world had been waiting for it and it seemed to have arrived.
Since then most of the "blowback" that we have seen has either been phony, sponsored by western intelligence and police agencies, or taking the form we are seeing in Syria: the diversion of alienated, marginalised, unemployed and demoralised youth, not only from Saudi Arabia but also from the "west" whose cities are full of badly treated muslims, victims of neo-liberalism, compounded by racism and islamophobia, into the ranks of organisations acting as the spearhead of imperial military adventurism.
This has happened before-most of the soldiers imposing the British Empire on resisting natives were recruited from dispossessed Irish or Scots peasants reduced to unemployment and starvation; much of the US army is recruited from badly treated minorities, from immigrants to hillbillies- but it still surprises us to realise that many of those in Bandar's legions of terror, many of those who fought the Russians in Afghanistan or did NATO's dirty work in Bosnia or Kossovo, were fighting, for a pittance, on the side of their worst enemies.
That this is so- that young muslims, including not a few who are recent recruits to wahhabi islam, from the north of England, or Germany or Alberta (as in a recent case) react to their ill treatment in a time of capitalist crisis by taking up a gun and joining their enemies to fight people, such as the young Syrian soldiers and civilians whose heads they cut off, with whom they have much more in common than they do with their commanders and the Empire that sponsors them- is a matter of great significance.
After five years of precipitously declining living standards, throughout Europe and north America, as well as in the "developing" world, the great mystery has been the lack of resistance. Particularly from the unemployed youth (now numbered in the tens of millions) and particularly among the more marginalised "minorities" such as the black kids regularly "stopped and searched" in London, Toronto and New York. Why, instead of rioting and flocking into organisations capable of moulding change for the better, have so many done nothing, some become Jihadis, fighting for the Empire, and others drifted rightwards to neo-fascism and other fan clubs of imperialism?
I have some ideas-one is the snobbery and cowardice of the "marxist" left; another, related, is the juvenile conceit of "atheists" who not only believe that they are the first to have worked out that "God" does not exist as advertised but find it impossible to co-operate with anyone who doesn't agree with them. And then, of course, there is the fact that these are mercenary forces with regular wages - but it would be interesting to hear others' opinions.
(Maybe this should have been posted in the Open Thread.)
Posted by: bevin | Jan 18 2014 20:42 utc | 8
"I have some ideas-one is the snobbery and cowardice of the "marxist" left"
HA! That's a good one! After nearly 50? 100? years of well-funded and coordinated campaigns - propaganda and otherwise - to crush, smash, dissolve, drive to extinction anything even giving off the faintest wafts of true Marxism, you're gonna sit there and lay the blame at the feet of handful of actual Marxists left in the US and West?! Holy crap.
I'm sure you personally think you're above the effect of said propaganda but statements such as the one I pointed out are as steeped in it as those which claim that Obama and the Democrats are Marxist/socialist and both types of statements have the same effect: the continued marginalization and abandonment of Marxist principles among the working classes of the West through belittlement and obfuscation.
Yup, if those Marxists - all 6 of them - hadn't been such cowards and snobs THEN we would see some real change, huh?
Brother.
Posted by: JSorrentine | Jan 18 2014 23:27 utc | 9
Sensible discussions just aren't your thing are they J Sorrentine?
But maybe I'm being pessimistic and you can follow reason if it is spelled out slowly enough.
What I was referring to was the failure of socialists to recruit support from those sections of society most likely to listen to the arguments they (the socialists) put forward.
And, I suggested, one reason for this has been that many socialist organisations have become conservative, hidebound by authoritarian structures and afraid of opening their ranks to broad influxes of new membership.
Sadly the "handful of real marxists" to whom you refer are often not marxists at all except in the sense that they call themselves such and have misunderstood a certain canon of literature.
As to the persecution of socialists, that has been real enough in most-but certainly not all- of the fifty years since I became one, but it is only to be expected.
And,in my experience the major problem the "left" has faced has been sectarianism and its refusal to form broad coalitions. Vide the hatred which Galloway arouses "on the left" for having the gall to win election in a working class constituency with a strong south Asian flavour.
Of this sectarianism, rooted in the insistence that your worst enemy is the person whose ideas come closest to yours, you appear to be a prime example. Almost a parody of the political puritan's insistence and absolute conformity and strict adherence to the "line."
I'll bet that, if you are still part off a "marxist" organisation there are a hundred former members, expelled with your blessing, for every one of the comrades who remains and lives in fear of a new idea or a fresh interpretation, and awaits the Central Committee's bulletin before firming up his opinions.
Posted by: bevin | Jan 19 2014 0:07 utc | 10
I'm glad you noticed this too, b. Switch over to Al Jazeera and watch a suspiciously American sounding Syrian member of the “Syrian Support Group” claim that the Free Syrian Army and SNC had in fact been fighting extremism from the very beginning, and that these two groups were the only parties to the Syrian conflict who were fighting extremism today.
Believe it.
Are these indivduals so arrogant to think that people will lap up every word they say? Though if images of shaving foam around the mouth can successfully excuse the US for standing on the brink of war, anything is possible.
Posted by: Mortlock | Jan 19 2014 0:59 utc | 11
Kerry will say anything to be able to lasso at least some rump representative of the opposition/insurgents to the conference, so that he can continue his charade of diplomacy for Syria. There is no credible "less rat in it" insurgency, even as the labels on the ground are being reshuffled and all of the insurgents' crimes being stamped with the ISIL label (as it exits stage Right). If ISIL's crimes can also be smeared onto Assad, that's a bonus.
Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Jan 19 2014 1:20 utc | 12
Typically superb, timely, analysis, b.
How desperate must the Yankees be getting for the 1%'s Obama to tell his Chief Diplomat to lie like a spoilt 4-year old brat?
It would help a lot of pennies to drop, for a lot of people, if the last line read...
"Who then is really cooperating with al-CIA-da?"
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 19 2014 2:50 utc | 13
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/18/suicide-bomb-al-qaida-saudi-ahmed-al-shayea
Need one say more about where in the Middle East the extremism originates from.
Posted by: blowback | Jan 19 2014 2:52 utc | 14
The evidence that Saudi Arabia is at war with Syria and Iraq is becoming irrefutable.
The adventurism of the Saudi government, backed as it is by the US and Israel, is becoming very dangerous. If the Saud family don't rein the US puppets, such as Bandar, in they will soon be looking for new jobs.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/01/19/346412/syria-militants-confess-saudi-links/
Posted by: bevin | Jan 19 2014 3:25 utc | 15
Sibel on Erdogan's defection
Turkish PM Erdogan: The Speedy Transformation of an Imperial Puppet
Posted by: Cu Chulainn | Jan 19 2014 3:32 utc | 16
Here's both headlines (Tom's & Turse's) from Tomdispatch latest...
Tomgram: Nick Turse, Secret Wars and Black Ops Blowback
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175794/tomgram%3A_nick_turse%2C_secret_wars_and_black_ops_blowback/
The Special Ops Surge - America’s Secret War in 134 Countries
By Nick Turse 16 Jan, 2014
It includes a generous sprinkling of statistics and, like b's post, this one is timely. Amusingly, its premise is "What could possibly go wrong?"
What the article does is demonstrate that the "Bombing pissy little countries back to the Stone Age, from a safe distance, for the 1%" phase of American Hegemony is over and the "guerilla them to death" phase is well-advanced. The big mistake the Yankees are making this time is in assuming that because the US military so often found itself out of its depth when opposed by guerillas, Russia and China & Friends will be similarly bemused. But they won't. They know precisely where Terror Central is AND what to do about it, and how. The Yankees won't even see it comong, imo.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jan 19 2014 5:25 utc | 17
Hariri jr, the Lebanese ex-PM has just made a surprising conciliatory gesture toward Hezbollah.
Translate this into: Saudi Arabia is testing the ground of a possible rapprochement with Iran.
After its vocal and childish tantrum against the US-Iran nuclear deal, its subsequent attempt to flex its muscle in Syria by funding the "Islamic Front" and the Jarba's oppposition, Saudi Arabia seems to have concluded that its chances to win Syria and hamper Iran-US deal are extremely low. It is now attempting to explore cooperating with Shia Iran, hoping that this will disturb the closeness of Iran with its other abhored competitor in the Sunni world, Turkey.
In the same time, it shows that it is following the US advices of seeking dialog with Iran, rather than confrontation.
A deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia will isolate Turkey. One can wonder if the present troubles in Turkey are not initiated indirectky by Saudi Arabia with the help of Israel who hates Erdogan. Turkey's influence is a threat to Saudi Arabia's century long supremacy on the Sunnis in the region. In addition Turkey supports the Moslem Brotherhood that Saudi Arabia is fighting eagerly.
It seems that Turkey will be shaken by more internal troubles to the delight of Saudis and its allies.
Funnily Saudi Arabia and Syria share the same rejection of Turkey's role in the region.
Are we going to see a u-turn of Saudi Arabia in Syria if Bashar al Assad announces that he will not participate in the next elections and cede power to a Sunni?
Posted by: Virgile | Jan 19 2014 5:34 utc | 18
A big Fuck You to my fellow Marines who are at this moment training insurgents in Jordan. I was part of Headquarters and Service Bn. at Quantico from 2000-2004. Worked at Pentagon summer of 2001. Got out of Corps and traveled Middle East, lived in Syria, studied Arabic, met Syrian woman and married.
Anyone who has ever been to Syria knows the truth... yes, one can walk openly with a Corona in hand in downtown Damascus near Marjeh(though maybe tolerance of this was a "tourist" thing). If I knew there'd be a foreign backed Wahabbi uprising down the road I would have taken a nice picture. Can you do that in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, or Egypt, or even many Western countries for that matter?
Keep Syria secular, pluralistic, and free of insurgents! Anyone who has ever been knows exactly what I'm talking about:
Virgile, I think Hariri is being very two-faced at the moment. He went to the opening session of the STL on Wednesday and delivered a pretty toxic speech saying that it had already been proven that Lebanese traitors 'belonging to a certain party' had assassinated his father; the key to his double-facedness is that he can then tell western audiences that, no, he doesn't blame hezbollah at all. But what he means is, the assassins were hezbollah members, but they weren't doing it 'for' hezbollah, they were doing it 'for' syria. Put that baldly, it sounds like a distinction without a difference, which in fact it is, but nevertheless he is misleading the western audiences by playing this word game with it. So the idea that Saudi has agreed to a power-sharing government with 8 ministers from Mar 8 and 8 ministers from Mar 14 is just disinfo, really, because obviously this ongoing accusation makes cooperation into an impossibility.
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jan 19 2014 7:34 utc | 20
re. US activity in Somalia, give a listen to the Thomas C. Mountain interview at this page
http://ryliberty.squarespace.com/
Mountain argues that the Black hawk down incident was a US effort to disrupt a meeting of tribal elders meant to bring peace to Somalia; that the unreported famine in the Ogaden has been made worse by US policy; that Shabab has been taken over by US/Saudi Wahabbi proxies
Posted by: Cu Chulainn | Jan 19 2014 10:42 utc | 21
If Shabab is a pseudo-gang, as we call them, then it follows that AQ Central is equally a pseudo-gang, because otherwise, Zawahihi would have called out the Shabab pseudo-gang leader, Godane. I have been saying this ever since Godane ousted his rival, a certain al-Afghani, in June of last year. I gave a whole dissertation on Shabab as pseudo-gang and pseudo-gangs in general, here.
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jan 19 2014 13:06 utc | 22
Yes, Kerry is a liar (AKA "politician" and "diplomat") and yes Putin is a liar, too, and the horde of sycophants here reject one set of lies only to smother yourselves in a different set.
Of course you all believed Putin when he called the US "our partners," didn't you?
However, in this case, despite a string of nonsense put forth in this shameless ignorance of Assad's murderous duplicity masquerading as an essay, Kerry is quite correct: yes the jihadi threat pre-existed and enhancing the jihadi threat was Assad's only course of survival. He set the conditions for jihadism to fluorish among his enemies early on and began the intense propagandising against the terrorists at the same time.
Instead of denying why not, as steadfast Assad supporters, give the mans brilliance his just due? OK, so admitting this was his strategy also implicates him in the death and destruction surrounding him that you have constructed your infotainment careers denying....
The problem with being anti-American is that the resulting pro-Russian bias is as bad a stance, or worse. You get caught up in a globalist football game where we are all the loosers no matter which team "wins." Ah, well, the game of infotainment is all that matters.
Fools get fooled. This article is red meat, but it is rotten.
Carrion, my wayward sons.
Posted by: donkeytale | Jan 19 2014 14:33 utc | 23
@ 22 The Syrian Government was announcing the names and funerals of dead security forces from the first month of the war in March/April 2011. The rebel claim back then was that they were all 'defectors' or had refused to fire on civilians and therefore executed by their own government. This was a violent war from day 1.
Just as Libya was, and by now there isn't much excuse for ignorance. The initial claims of "aerial bombing of protesters" in the first days were in fact bombardment of arms depots seized by insurgents. The "African mercenaries" were in fact Libyans who happened to be black. The videos of soldiers being executed for "disobeying orders" were in fact army POWs killed in cold blood by the "rebels." Lets not even get into the Viagra deception.
The problem with being anti-American is that the resulting pro-Russian bias is as bad a stance, or worse.
HHMMM...perhaps you can back that up by providing us with a list of all the foreign countries Russia has invaded, bombed, drone, struck or missile struck in the past 25 years. Or maybe a list of countries Russia was trying to sanction into starvation.
If your right your list should be as long or longer than the American one.
Posted by: Lysander | Jan 19 2014 15:04 utc | 24
It seems to me that the sole purpose of this new propaganda campaign against Hizbullah is to justify the upcoming Israeli attack on Lebanon in concert with the equally upcoming attack by the US, NATO and Turkey on Syria.
This is so obvious it's amazing how few people comprehend it. The entire reason why Iran hasn't been attacked yet is that Israel needs to defang Syria and Hizbullah's missile arsenals. The sole purpose of the Syrian crisis is to enable this to occur. It's not even about overthrowing Assad. It's about degrading Syria and Hizbullah's ability to damage Israel during an Iran war.
Posted by: Cynthia | Jan 19 2014 15:09 utc | 25
"shameless ignorance of Assad's murderous duplicity"
"Kerry is quite correct: yes the jihadi threat pre-existed and enhancing the jihadi threat was Assad's only course of survival. He set the conditions for jihadism to fluorish among his enemies early on and began the intense propagandising against the terrorists at the same time."
pray tell? some meat would be helpful. what conditions did Assad set? and kindly dispel my ignorance of A's murderous duplicity
Posted by: Cu Chulainn | Jan 19 2014 15:26 utc | 26
Interview with Jihad Makdissi in the NYT
In Syria, Former Official Says, ‘Nobody Is Winning’JAN. 18, 2014
The following are excerpts from an interview with Jihad Makdissi, a former Foreign Ministry spokesman in Syria who fled in 2012 as the government of President Bashar al-Assad cracked down on antigovernment protesters. Mr. Makdissi, however, has not supported the rebels. He casts himself as a voice for the Syrians who remain on the sidelines, skeptical of the armed uprising but still wanting change.
....
Q. What are the prospects for the Geneva 2 talks?Mr. Makdissi. The opposition is adopting the “step aside” approach and focusing on the president; the loyalists are adopting the “let’s fight terrorism” approach. Meanwhile, Geneva is calling for the formation of a transitional body and a process of restructuring the country. So there’s a missing elephant in the room! That is why it’s in each side’s interest to make Geneva fail. Nobody likes Geneva. It’s like an orphan child that nobody wants, because they know that when they do attend Geneva they will lose something in the eyes of their crowds. People in Syria want to achieve change and not only regime change. People have a larger scope than the politicians.
Q. So is Geneva bound to fail?
A. No, it will happen, and it’s going to be a benchmark in the Syrian crisis. It will kick-start a long process that every Syrian, not every politician, wants. Syrians need a process in place that might give them a cease-fire as a first gain. And then you see what’s the defect in this process and work on it and improve it. Today there is an absence of process. So far, it’s fighting, fighting and fighting. So there is a need to give room for diplomacy after three years of failed strategies by everyone.
Posted by: Virgile | Jan 19 2014 15:26 utc | 27
“We would like to inform you that there are some changes that will take place in Saudi Arabia next March,” Ford said, noting that these changes will reach Bandar Bin Sultan and Saud al-Faissal.
“We also would like to tell you that the US had asked Saad Hariri (head of al-Mustaqbal parliamentary bloc in Lebanon) to participate in a coalition government with Hezbollah.”Ford told the Syrian opposition figures: “Bandar’s plan for the Syrian conflict, put in 2012, had catastrophic repercussions on Syria and the region. It had made of Syria a powerful hub for al-Qaeda that US cannot confront. For that, you have to stop objecting and to go to Geneva 2, this is the US’ interest.” Ford also said Bander is in the US, he is sick and suffering from psychological fatigue. http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=131228&cid=23&fromval=1&frid=23&seccatid=20&s1=1
Posted by: harrylaw | Jan 19 2014 16:10 utc | 28
Virgile, the "Crisis in Syria" is just the democracy mask slipping off the fascist face of the US. Obama has no authority, is not in charge of anything, has no clout. He is the elected figurehead of the Wall Street military and that's it. The whole government is a shadow play, the real power is out of view and untouchable. Congress spends all of their time raising money for re-election, which is why all legislation is written by corporate lobbyists. The White House is designed purely as theater. The president does what he's told to do and if that means sending drone attacks upon allied countries or bombing the snot out of a nation that poses zero threat to US, then that's what happens. That bombing Syria slip out of their control is all about mismanagement and believing that Americans are so numb they no longer care who or what is bombed. Putin's intervention on Syria's behalf wasn't even considered, it took not only the White House by surprise but the goons in the darkness were also caught off guard because they're so used to getting their way no matter what. All this backpedaling and comic opera fumbling coming out of Kerry and Obama is them trying to cover their asses and please their bosses.
Not to worry. Syria is still a target. Assad will be provoked into some kind of action, perhaps after a "terrorist" blows himself up in a crowded marketplace, and we can swoop in to help the freedom fighters of Al-Qaeda from this horrible, horrible man. And after that, maybe that pipeline we want built will finally go up and we can move onto Iran.
Posted by: Cynthia | Jan 19 2014 16:13 utc | 29
@ Donkeytale 22
Ahh I see you are going with the view that "everyone is as bad as everyone else" chain of logic.
Kerry is a liar and Yes Putin is a liar too. Of course you all believed Putin when he called the US "our partners," didn't you?
The fact that you gave that "our partners" line as an example of Putin's lies, just undermines your own argument. John Kerry lied about a chemical weapons attack to try and start a war. Your example that Putin also lied when he referred to the US as "our partners" is not exactly damning. Some lies are worse than others. Putin has spoken honestly about Syria since day one, he made Russia's position clear and hasn't changed that view. I dare you to find one example of Putin lying about Syria in 3 years.
Meanwhile Kerry spewed lie after lie. He lied about shipping weapons Syria, as revealed after the Benghazi attack. He lied about the Chemical Attack on Ghouta. The reason Putin called Kerry a liar was for neither of these two but another one where Kerry was asked in Sept 2013 whether Al Qaeda was in Syria and Kerry said "No, we are telling you responsibly that they are not." Lies, Lies and Lies, all to achieve regime change in another country.
But hey Putin lied by referring to the US as "our partners" in a diplomatic meeting, so they must be as bad as each other.
Enhancing the jihadi threat was Assad's only course of survival. He set the conditions for jihadism to fluorish among his enemies early on and began the intense propagandising against the terrorists at the same time. Instead of denying why not, as steadfast Assad supporters, give the mans brilliance his just due?
This is an ignorant view. That Assad is such a genius that he engineered for the Jihadists to fight each other while his Army sat on the sides and watched them kill each other. I've predicted and written about Jihadist infighting several times on this blog. This is what the Jihadists always end up doing. I've talked about the Algerian civil war where the Jihadist infighting led to a regime victory. Was Assad responsible for that too?
In Iraq the same thing with the Sunni tribes turning against them. Afghanistan during the 80's is another example of massive Jihadists-on-Jihadist infighting. Gulbuddin Hekmatyar in Afghanisan was a Jihadist who earned a reputation for killing more of his fellow Jihadists than Soviet fighters. You can always bet on Jihadist infighting in every war. Assad had nothing to do with it, its a historical pattern present in all wars they are involved in.
The problem with being anti-American is that the resulting pro-Russian bias is as bad a stance, or worse.
What shit. America is seeking to dominate the world (a Unipolar World). Russia is seeking to share influence amoung all the major civilisations (a Multilateral World). I know which kind of world I want. If that makes me Pro Russian I'm gladly Pro Russian.
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Jan 19 2014 16:26 utc | 30
i share colm o'toole's view @ 29 post in reference to donkeytale @22 post.
Posted by: james | Jan 19 2014 17:07 utc | 31
bevin
"Of this sectarianism, rooted in the insistence that your worst enemy is the person."
On the contrary.
The inherent arrogance of your line of argumentation belies the imbuing of your mind with the worst of neoliberal propaganda/philosophy.
Exactly like the neoliberal mandarins who think that each individual human is a robotic processor who has the ability to gain perfect information about the world around them and thus make the rational solutions that will keep the entire negative-liberty based sham going, you similarly sit there self-satisfied and smug thinking that everyone is as smart and smarmy as bevin and that from their perches they should also be able to see the errors of their lines of thinking.
Thus, the problem with the Left is really that they haven't seen things as clearly as bevin as and they haven't taken the course of action that bevin has figured out, right? I'm not even going to bother attacking your embarrassing assumption - in which is rooted your naive optimism about the reformation of the system from within that has been documented here many times - that the "left" is making "wrong decisions" in not forming broader coalitions since nothing even remotely resembling the Left has been apparent in the US at least for at least 50 years. Your Canadian smugness doesn't do you any favors as your firm but erroneous belief in your own handle on American politics belies the painting of a caricature of the US that YOU wold like to believe - remember not so long ago when you were trying to tell us the soldiers would be coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan and that would really start the shake-up. Brother, please.
Again, maybe in Canada they offer courses in university on Marxist economics but you're more likely to find majors in Old English, Latin other arcane classes/majors before you're going to find a program dedicated to explaining how to end the system we find ourselves trapped in here in the US. So, I say again, the very few people who have taken it upon themselves to weed through all of the mountains of neoliberal propaganda, persecution etc and again taken the time to educate themselves about Marx - so how many people are we at now? 100? 1000? 10000? out of 300 million - how are these people supposed to have made any kind of dent in the neoliberal superstructure especially when "leftists" such as yourself who should be receptive to Marxist thought call them all elite snobs, cowards and whatnot? Seriously, did a Marxist street gang beat you up when you were in school? Is that why the childish name-calling/mocking of a near extinct political minority?
BTW, I saw the conversation people were having about Keynesianism the other day and for supposed leftists/Marxists I saw neither hide nor hair mention of Kalecki and other Marxist-Keynesian economists who one would think would be part and parcel of said discussion b/c his work laid the foundation of MMT and other schools of modern economic thought that could undermine the neoliberal worldview which people still struggle with. Here's a good webiste for those who would like to start educating themselves.
So, to wrap up, bevin, others here laud you for being some sort of godsend and I'm not going to argue that you don't have your points concerning foreign affairs but when it comes to domestic politics your grasp is as blinkered as the worst neoliberal as you are using the exact same arguments they have used to destroy the Left: i.e., they're a bunch of eggheads, they've lost touch with the common person, etc etc all the while not thinking as to the true difficulties faced by someone who would 1) be interested in Marxist thought esp. in the US and 2) how many seemingly intelligent people - who one would think would be your allies - end up using the exact same bourgeois neoliberal arguments to deflate any many momentum in gaining movements.
The fact that so many of you got caught up in the OBVIOUS "color revolution" nonsense of Occupy says more to me about your perspicacity than anything you could try and tell me about what us Marxists should or shouldn't do especially as the main message of the Occupy "salvation" was that is was to be a strictly non-political phenomenon. Brilliant!
Lastly, the funniest thing is that I really believe that you think you and your posting here is your idea of connecting with the common person - y'know that thing that us Marxists should be doing, right? That your editorials are meant to be a vehicle for change, is that it?
Or are your MOA op-eds meant to be read by the vanguards of the Left to help educate them as to their course of action?
Wait a second, you mean a person CAN'T spend all day online pontificating/sermonizing about the organizing/recruiting people should be doing to turn the world around AND actually be doing the organizing/recruiting that they're bitching about in the first place?
Funny that is exactly what posters who spend the most time here tell us Marxists all the time. Oh well.
Posted by: JSorrentine | Jan 19 2014 17:14 utc | 32
Colm, the fact that the takfiris are a priori manipulated makes it inevitable that they will fight among themselves; much jihadi infighting is explained by what RB calls the push-pull effect:
"The pseudo-gang is controlled by eg the CIA at the very same time as members of it are being eliminated by CIA drone strikes. At first you ask, “why do the pseudo-gang members stay in place, once they have realised they are being double-crossed by their own employer?” But the footsoldiers don’t know that the organisation they are in is a pseudo-gang; they think it is Al Qaeda the great champion of the underdog and defier of the mighty USA."
Posted by: Cu Chulainn | Jan 19 2014 17:15 utc | 33
29) You are right, infighting seems to be part of the Jihadi business model.
Posted by: somebody | Jan 19 2014 17:27 utc | 34
JSorrentine, you're being needlessly abusive. Perhaps your temper has been roused by Donkeytale, whose final paragraph contains much the same jabbing at imaginary Leftist sheeple as your comment does. I can't be bothered to read Kalecki, myself. I suspect you are just using him as a polemical football, and find him just as uninteresting as I do. After all, keeping the economy of 1950s Poland afloat is not my idea of an epoch-making project, and anyway, they sacked him. Western economists probably lionised him because they wanted to use him as a trojan horse against the so-called socialist economies, which may explain his sacking by the Poles. I don't really care, but bevin may be more interested than I am. I doubt it.
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jan 19 2014 17:47 utc | 35
Just btw.
I find it funny, very funny, that everybody is so concerned about zusa, zusa's new plans, zusa's urrent schemes, aso. ad nauseam.
Nobody here seems to assume that Russia, China, and others do not just idly sit by and otherwise restrain themselves to responding to zusa's newest farts?
Almost always when I read anything about Russia or China it is about them reacting to zusa.
Bullsh*t!
Actually, major parts of todays policies, actions, and facts in this world are based on Russias, Chinas, and other countries policies while zusa loses influence and power.
Just look at Iran. Putin and Xi basically check-mated zusa. All that is left to zusa is to make some noise and keep its self-delusional image halfway alive.
Or look at Germany, basically hardly more that a zusa colony, that traditionally can't but blabber about the importance of the "trans atlantic friendship", of zusa, zeu, zato and anything western, no matter what. Rather quietly though, they have changed some important parlamentarian leader position responsible for politics towards Russia from a known anti-Putin troublemaker to a known to be strongly pro-Russia one. At the same time they knock at Irans door and try to be Chinas friend in Europe to the extent possible for a zusa colony.
In other words: Germany, the "european economic engine", while superficially smiling towards zusa, actually moves away from it, possibly for no small part because they - correctly - expect both the zusa empire and the euro jail to break apart rather soon.
But then, of course, it is of utmost importance what kerry the chain-liar has to offer as his most current bunch of lies. Sure.
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Jan 19 2014 18:20 utc | 36
@31
I guess we all have a lot to learn about the world from the boy genius who thinks that being on the streets en mass, up in the face of the police and the super-rich in genuine organized protest is "neutered and directionless" but thinks there is true change to be made by him "not watching the superbowl."
Listen and learn, folks.
Posted by: guest77 | Jan 19 2014 18:35 utc | 37
@34
Oh after bevin's insulting post, I'M being abusive. Tosh, as they say.
Regarding learning about someone/something to more than a wiki-level of knowledge: Way to be close-minded. Nice. But don't stop me from you not learning anything. Horse to water doncha know. Seriously, that's the most ignorant comment I've had the pleasure to even read from you, RB.
@36
Gee, that's clever. Another defender of the bourgeois fake-left here to salvage some last vestige of psyOccupy. Oh well. You're right, having the brainwashed, mindless American masses backing you up in the 21st century probably means something good is just around the corner. Numbers are numbers even though no one seems to have any idea about what to do. Great.
Remember that time you posted that post to inform people of Zionist badness in the American MSM. Oh that's right, you never do. Enjoy the Super Bowl!
Posted by: JSorrentine | Jan 19 2014 19:07 utc | 38
BTW, I've seen how this game of trolling ends - you set people up with insulting posts then you accuse THEM of being abusive and continue to ride them until they defend themselves and they get booted.
Sorry, boys, not today. Lates.
Posted by: JSorrentine | Jan 19 2014 19:09 utc | 39
"The fact that so many of you got caught up in the OBVIOUS "color revolution" nonsense of Occupy says more to me about your perspicacity than anything you could try and tell me about what us Marxists should or shouldn't do especially as the main message of the Occupy "salvation" was that is was to be a strictly non-political phenomenon. Brilliant!"
There really is no sense in listening to such blatant stupidity.
If JSorrentine is a Marxist, then it is certainly of the Groucho variety, because everything you write is a fucking joke.
Posted by: guest77 | Jan 19 2014 19:14 utc | 41
Rowan
I think Saudi Arabia is double face too. They were obliged to ask Jarba to humiliate himself and go to Geneva while the opposition in the worst state it has ever be to please the US. One wonders why they had to wait for a year and thousands of dead before accepting that.
Obviously Western pressure and blackmail was overpowering. There was no way the US would accept the humiliation of having to postopone Geneva or call it off because of the disunity in the opposition.
Yet, parallely the Saudi's military militia, the Islamic Front has openly declared their rejection of the Geneva conference.
It seems that the Saudis are wary that Geneva turns out to be a disaster for the opposition, something that is probable.
Therefore they prefer to keep the military wing active in case the political wing, the NOC, collapses.
Posted by: Virgile | Jan 19 2014 22:14 utc | 42
@29, Colm O'Toole did a good job of flattening the donkey's insinuation that Kerry's lies, his egregious and multitudinous lies, are somehow to be set on balance with what Putin may say. This is an absurd washing out of reality that doesn't seem to embarrass the donkey.
What Putin means by the term "partners" is nothing unusual; and insofar as far as I can tell, it is Russian diplomatic parlance these days to describe significant nations with which Russia remains culturally, economically, and diplomatically involved,--especially when it is in the process of negotiation with such nations.
But that a polite diplomatic term is weirdly described as lie, compared to Kerry's logic-bending evil, and wretched, damned lies, is a travesty that can't be allowed to pass without comment or rebuttal.
Kerry's twisted projection upon Assad, of the US$Gang's terrorist/subversive assault on Syria, is a classic model of imperial aggression and mercenary war.
Virgile@41,
Saudi Arabia has been producing a huge amount of a finite resource for 60 years, and is nearing the bottom of the barrel. Ignore what they claim and watch what they do. They are desperately searching for natural gas so they can free up for export the oil they currently burn in power plants, and are redeveloping fields they mothballed years ago due to difficulties in production or low oil quality. They are even actually talking about drilling for offshore, subsalt oil! That will be VERY expensive oil IF it ever gets produced at all.
The Saudis are trying to compel the US to finish off regional rivals (Iran, Syria) before their declining production reduces their influence.
Posted by: Cynthia | Jan 20 2014 1:56 utc | 44
A bad suprise for the NOC after it was coerced to attend Geneva II despite having less than half of its members in favor.
Iran invitation puts Syrian peace talks in jeopardy
Ban Ki-moon's invitation to Tehran to attend peace talks in Switzerland causes alarm among Syrian oppositionIan Black, Middle East editor
The Guardian, Monday 20 January 2014
International hopes for a resolution to the bloody crisis in Syria will be tested this week as President Bashar al-Assad's government and rebels seeking to overthrow him head for a UN-sponsored peace conference and the first direct talks between the sides since the conflict began nearly three years ago.On Sunday night, the UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon said he had invited Iran to attend the first day of Syria peace talks and that Tehran had pledged to play a "positive and constructive role" if it was asked to participate.
Ban said he made a late invitation to Iran after intensive talks with Iran's foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, who agreed to attend.
However there were reports that the Syrian opposition would withdraw from the talks unless Ban retracted the invitation.
"The Syrian Coalition announces that they will withdraw their attendance in Geneva 2 unless Ban Ki-moon retracts Iran's invitation," the Twitter post said, quoting National Coalition spokesman Louay Safi.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/20/syria-regime-rebels-geneva-peace-talks
Posted by: Virgile | Jan 20 2014 2:22 utc | 45
J @31
I really am at a loss to understand what you are saying, apart from "I'm a Marxist. You are not." It's a claim which is rarely heard any more. It is like listening to the mating call of a passenger pigeon.
I see that the Occupy Movements are now to be counted among the State department's Colour Revolutions. And that there has been nothing resembling an authentic left in the US for half a century.
It really is tough to see the difference between your view of the "Brainwashed, mindless" American masses and that of those other elitists who talked of the "swinish multitude" or the mob. Luckily we understand that class consciousness does not develop through the formal teaching of economics but from real experience as men meet and make history. Because they must.
Posted by: bevin | Jan 20 2014 3:55 utc | 46
41)
I think the Saudis are playing the rebels off against the middle.
Various gulf sponsors fund the rebels, the only way Saudi can control them is by Secret Service. Jihadi ideology potentially turns against Saudi as they are allied with the West.
So should Saudi deem it wise to get an agreement with Syria/Iran or agree to US pressure, how can they withdraw the Jihadis?
To stop paying will not appease the Jihadi they might turn against their sponsors. They either need another cause - that would piss off Russia in the Caucasus, the US in Afghanistan and Iraq, plus endanger Turkey/Europe/the Balkans or they do what they are doing now - let the Syrian army win and turn Jihadis against each other.
Posted by: somebody | Jan 20 2014 6:38 utc | 47
This is such fun, I’m sorry to have to judge it firmly as being absolutely untrue, and indeed it is obvious propaganda, not to say, cobblers. I’ve glossed the english in Ford’s supposed statement to make it more superficially plausible, and more entertaining, but it’s still cobblers:
Robt Ford to Syria Opposition: Bandar on Long Vacation, Go to Geneva 2
Al-Manar, Jan 19 2014US Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford has ordered all the leaders of the foreign-backed opposition to take part in the Geneva 2 Conference, noting that there will be many changes in Saudi policy regarding the Syrian crisis. Quoting an official in the executive committee in the so-called Syrian National Coalition, Nidal Hamade wrote in his corner on al-Manar website that Ford had called an urgent meeting of the SNC figures in Istanbul and threatened to cut funds for anyone who did not attend. Consequently all the SNC figures who oppose Geneva 2 participation were there: Loay Safi, Anass al-Abdeh, Haitham al-Maleh, Burhan Ghalioun, Najib al-Ghadban and Maher Noaimi. At the meeting, Ford announced that Saudi Prince Bandar Bin Sultan is on long vacation in the US “because of sickness and psychological fatigue,” Hamade said, citing an opposition official close to former PM Riyad Hijab. According to Hamade, Ford said: "Some changes will take place in Saudi Arabia in March, involving Intelligence Minister Prince Bandar bin Sultan and Defense Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal. Prince Bandar’s plan for the Syrian conflict, put in place in 2012, has had catastrophic consequences for Syria and the region. It has made Syria into a powerful hub for AQ that we consider unacceptably dangerous to regional security. A new committee for Lebanon and Syria, comprising Information Minister Abd’ul-Aziz Khoja, Deputy Foreign Minister Abd’ul-Aziz bin Abd’ullah al-Saud, and ex-Intelligence Minister Muqrin bin Abd’ullah al-Saud, will assume their responsibilities. Because of this, we absolutely insist that all significant representatives of Syrian resistance fractions attend the Geneva 2 Conference. We consider this, apart from anything else, imperative in terms of US security interests. We also would like to inform you that we have asked Saad Hariri to participate in a coalition government with Hezb’ollah in Lebanon."
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jan 20 2014 7:02 utc | 48
BEIRUT — A top official of a major Syrian rebel group acknowledged Friday that he considers himself a member of al Qaida, an admission that undercuts Western hopes that the new Islamic Front would prove to be an acceptable counter to the rising influence of other al Qaida affiliates in Syria.
Abu Khaled al Suri, who is a top figure in the rebel group Ahrar al Sham, made the statement in an Internet posting in which he argued that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, another radical rebel group, was not al Qaida’s representative in Syria and was not doing the work of al Qaida’s founder, Osama bin Laden, its current leader, Ayman al Zawahiri, or al Qaida’s late leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al Zarqawi, who was killed by an American missile in 2006.
.................
Some analysts of jihadi organizations said al Suri’s admission makes it likely the United States will move to designate Ahrar al Sham a foreign terrorist organization.
“Suri’s prominence in Ahrar al Sham and his public statement praising Zarqawi and Zawahiri will make it very difficult for the U.S. administration not to designate Ahrar,” said Will McCants, the director of the Brookings Institution’s Project on U.S.-Islamic World Relations and an adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University. “If Ahrar is designated, it will be hard for (aid groups) to move humanitarian aid through the country since they control large swathes of it. The designation will also put the U.S. at odds with Qatar, Ahrar’s main state sponsor.”
Ahrar al Sham’s conservative philosophy has been well known, but its ties to al Qaida had been unclear until Friday’s statement, which al Suri made through Twitter.
Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/01/17/214966/key-anti-assad-rebel-leader-acknowledges.html#storylink=cpy
Posted by: okie farmer | Jan 20 2014 7:28 utc | 49
47) Well, what do you think the US is doing re Geneva?
The politicians ambassador Ford controls do not control events on the ground.
Both forces who do control events on the ground apart from the Syrian army are linked to al Qaeda ie cannot be officially supported by the US/effectively brought to power. They are neither supported by the democratic Syrian opposition - see Haytham Manna link above.
The US promised the Russians to bring the opposition to the table. They need Russia (and Iran) for a range of issues to be able to withdraw from the Middle East. They want to end the Syrian proxy war. I also think Obama does not buy into the wisdom of fuelling a Sunni Shiite proxy war in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan in order to "contain Iran".
So Ford has to tell the opposition to go to Geneva or they will lose funding - which comes from the Gulf. Gulf sponsors cannot turn off funding without turning Jihadis against them.
The Syrian government send their Foreign Policy department to Geneva. They want to make the issue "fighting terrorism". Saudi will have to be part of this fight.
Of course "fighting terrorism" is a Syrian regime trap. However the Syrian opposition, the US, and the Gulf walked into it eyes wide open.
Posted by: somebody | Jan 20 2014 8:05 utc | 50
And Hairiri agrees to a cabinet with Hezbollah - see?
Posted by: somebody | Jan 20 2014 8:09 utc | 51
USs provocateur in chief Kerry claims President Assad supports extremists: #bigliesgetbigger . I recall USD supported extremists called Mujahadeen in afghanistan. these later turned into alqaeda and taliban/.....At no point has Assad done the same
Posted by: brian | Jan 20 2014 8:29 utc | 52
In an interview with Reuters in The Hague Friday, Hariri said he was ready to share power with Hezbollah in a coalition government to help stabilize Lebanon as it faces growing threats to its security from the war raging in Syria. Hariri’s remarks are expected to seal a political deal on an all-embracing Cabinet based on 8-8-8 lineup that would break the 10-month government deadlock. The deal, suggested by Berri and Progressive Socialist Party leader MP Walid Jumblatt, will most likely involve Hariri’s Future Movement, the Hezbollah-led March 8 alliance and Jumblatt’s bloc.- I see it, but I don't think Hariri is serious. I think he knows it won't happen. He just wants to create an appearance that he is the accomodating one, but that Hezb' is intransigent, that it wants total control.
Posted by: Rowan Berkeley | Jan 20 2014 8:54 utc | 53
52) It's simple, Middle East conflict raises the oil price. If the US want to leave the Middle East and want a deal with Iran they have to say "shoo" to their lap dogs.
Posted by: somebody | Jan 20 2014 11:11 utc | 54
I think Kerry is running two parallel 'peace processes' to nowhere, in Palestine and in Syria.
The Israelis are steadily winning in Palestine, it's just a matter of time if we in the rest of the world continue to sit on our thumbs and watch the John and Bibi show there. 'Good' support too, from the US re-installed military government in Egypt, the pressure on the in- and out-of-Palestine Palestinians is as intense as it can get ... al CIAda is not doing so well in Syria proper, but they are keeping any sort of reconstruction from happening there, and they are gaining in Iraq,
Obama/Kerry's bosses are probably well-satisfied.
Posted by: john francis lee | Jan 20 2014 13:06 utc | 55
The embattled opposition as well as Saudi Arabia have no choice than to swallow Iran's presence in the conference or call for its cancellation. Ban Ki Moon is finally showing some independence.
Syrian opposition suspends participation in Geneva IIISTANBUL, Jan. 20 (Xinhua) -- Syria's main opposition group in exile Syrian National Coalition (SNC) said here on Monday that it suspends its participation in Geneva II conference due to UN's invitation to Iran.
The SNC spokesman Louay Safi said in the announcement that it suspends the participation unless UN rescinds its invitation to Iran or Iran accepts the Geneva I communique.
The Istanbul-based coalition, which decided on its participation on Saturday night, threatened to pull out the peace conference shortly after Iran was invited to participate in the meeting.
Posted by: Virgile | Jan 20 2014 13:28 utc | 56
54) Well, let's say Israel loses by winning.
But despite Netanyahu's warm words, the latest document posted on the Canadian Foreign Ministry's website, under the heading "Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict" shows that the Canadian government is not backing nearly any of Israel's demands in the negotiations with the Palestinians. In fact, Canada's policy is practically identical to the official policy of many of the EU countries.The policy statement, published on January 13, six days before Harper's arrival in Jerusalem, points out that Canada does not recognize permanent Israeli control over territories conquered in 1967 and says the settlements constitute a violation of UN Security Council resolutions. "Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The settlements also constitute a serious obstacle to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace," it reads.
The Canadian government does not support Israeli policy on Jerusalem either: "Canada considers the status of Jerusalem can be resolved only as part of a general settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute. Canada does not recognize Israel's unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem."
The Canadian policy statement also does not express support for Netanyahu's demand for recognition of Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people. It states that Canada supports the Palestinian people's right to self-determination and "the creation of a sovereign, independent, viable, democratic and territorially contiguous Palestinian state" and also affirms Canada's recognition of the PLO as the principle representative of the Palestinian people.
On the refugee issue, the policy statement does not endorse Netanyahu's position that not a single Palestinian refugee will return to Israel. Instead, it hews much closer to the language of the Arab Peace Initiative. "Canada believes that a just solution to the Palestinian refugee issue is central to a settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as called for in United Nations General Assembly resolution 194 (1948), and United Nations Security Council resolution 242," it says. "A solution to the Palestinian refugee issue must be negotiated among the parties concerned in the context of a final status peace agreement. This solution should respect the rights of the refugees, in accordance with international law," the statement concludes.
It will be one state.
Posted by: somebody | Jan 20 2014 14:03 utc | 57
Two words to describe Kerry - Stupidity personified!!!!
The US seems to be more afraid of calling the Syrian opposition for what they are - Terrorist! They're carried water for these murderers for well over 3 years now with no success.
In any case, why should Assad negotiate with people who're only interested in his demise, while he's actually gaining the upper hand on the battlefield??? The SNC doesn't represent anyone in Syria but themselves and their sponsors.
Posted by: Zico | Jan 20 2014 14:22 utc | 58
Zico
The US is scrambling to save their face after their disastrous policy towards Syria. After months of promises they have been able to squeeze the weakened opposition to attend on a last minute coercion. Kerry absolutely wants the Geneva conference to take place to be able to call it an "achievement", even if Iran attends. ( BTW, I think the USA wants Iran's presence to counterbalance the Sunnis hawks,Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey. The USA's feeble reaction seems just an act).
The Syrian opposition already shaken has not choice than to accept Iran's presence that would weaken them even more or withdraw and simply collapse.
It seems that the USA secretly wants the opposition to loose as it trusts Bashar al Assad much more to deal effectively with the Jihadists than it trusts the emasculted opposition.
Posted by: Virgile | Jan 20 2014 15:13 utc | 59
The funny thing is, the SNC's now set a deadline for the UN's Ban Ki Moon to retract the invite to Iran OR ELSE!!! I mean, this must be the joke of the century. These idiots, who only exist because someone pays them to live in expensive hotels in Dubai, Doha, Istanbul etc etc, have the nerve to make demands???
Gentlemen, this is how/where Geneva 2.0 hit's the brick wall and crashes...From here on, everything goes down South for them. The Syrian government can now boldly claim there's no reliable "opposition" to negotiate with thereby negating the need for any talks. They're well and truly finished!!!
Posted by: Zico | Jan 20 2014 15:48 utc | 60
CC @20: Thanks for the link on the TS Mountain interview. Worth a listen. Another voice from the wilderness, confirming the evil wrought by US foreign policy.
Posted by: ben | Jan 20 2014 16:33 utc | 61
Why, instead of rioting and flocking into organizations capable of moulding change for the better, have so many done nothing, some become Jihadis, fighting for the Empire, and others drifted rightwards to neo-fascism and other fan clubs of imperialism?
Well, obviously, because they face a no-hope future.
Particularly the ones who become Jihadis (not religious most of them but in situations of deprivation, even hunger - or just the need to take sides such as in Syria because of danger of like loss of life..)
Because there is nothing else out there in any organised shape or form to attract them, except for these counter-status-quo forces such as MB (at present in Egypt), Golden Dawn, Islamists, etc.
They are not fighting for Empire, but against it, most often against the US - Isr (unless paid up and profiteering, and that spreads..) and that is the common thread.
Nobody is there is to hear or take their povs seriously, in fact these are dismissed or repressed, as in France, say the followers of Dieudonné, who are a-political but find some echo in his comedics and/or victim status. (Not that masses are going off to fight but you’d be surprised at the atmosphere. Good-bye parties are taking on.)
Young neo-Nazis in Switzerland (I know several) are not fooled by the People’s Party (nationalist, anti-foreign on the face of it, and the first party in CH on some criteria) crazy gymnastics - they know it is fake - they don’t hate Jews but want Swiss Supremacy on CH, and an end to the EU, for their European Brothers. They support Palestine and think Mandela was a great hero. So all this is confused - and considering them all, young men opponents / fighters, in a same box is perhaps not the best...
Nevertheless, they are all thrown back, if I may pursue, into a sort of tribal functioning which is or goes under the radar as there is nothing else on offer.
The Jihadis are in a much tighter bind, but are no different, just with an extra tremendous measure of desperation and violence to go, a higher pride and acceptance of self-sacrifice, as, amongst others, there is no fallback, it is do or die, prevarication, hesitation, lack of purity, cannot be accepted.
There is no credible ‘left’ or even ‘out of the mainstream party of any type’ in Europe, the US, or the ME.
The left does not deal with DIRTY DISGUSTING Jihadis, neo-nazis, poor drug-dealers, obnoxious protestors, Evangelicals (yes there is that too), prostitutes, fringe political opponents even when serious and making an effort, often associated with National Fronts, or for that matter, always missing from the discourse, girls or young women unless they join the mainstream.
All those groups - and more - are ignored, dismissed, mocked, vilified, and some members are imprisoned. Or, of course, co-opted (paid, often) and used in various ways.
Posted by: Noirette | Jan 20 2014 16:35 utc | 63
@57
Have you met the new Canadian ambassador to Israel? She's a Likudist Iranophobe. I'm sure she'd like to reconsider those positions Canada currently holds on Israeli/Palestinian issues.
Posted by: J. Bradley | Jan 21 2014 5:23 utc | 64
Noirette @63
Thanks, your analysis confirms what I suspected. I would add that the reason why there is "credible left" in connected with this refusal to connect with the alienated. This is what I meant by snobbery and racism getting in the way of contacts between the old New Left and the millions of young, and not so young, unemployed, dispossessed and hopeless people whose impotence is entirely due to disunity.
The sad truth is that, for the elites running the sects and monopolising the revolutionary end of the political spectrum, life is very bearable and there is no desire among them to upset the apple cart by opening their ranks to un-indoctrinated newcomers or, more important yet, their debates to fresh ideas, some of them, inevitably, tarred with racism, sexism and the same sorts of reactions against finance capital that one fuelled the ranks of right wing and even fascist movements.
Revolution is, in my view, in the air. The main obstacle to its development is that the ideology of left and right complement each other and rule out anything which cannot be traced back, in an evolutionary sense, to C19th economists and positivists.
Posted by: bevin | Jan 21 2014 19:08 utc | 65
64) And Harper. Unfortunately it happens to be international law.
Therefore Kabuki.
Posted by: somebody | Jan 21 2014 20:08 utc | 66
Why is this POS Kerry aka Kohn satanic skull and bones, Knights of Malta, Committee of 300...etc... Why is this criminal Not being exposed for the pure evil he is. He is a Rothschild PUPPET!
Posted by: dan | Jan 21 2014 21:08 utc | 67
@63 "There is no credible ‘left’ or even ‘out of the mainstream party of any type’ in Europe, the US, or the ME."
Not so fast:
http://proletaricomunisti.blogspot.co.uk/
http://www.revolucionobrera.com/
http://www.prolcom.altervista.org/guerre%20popolari.htm
http://moufawad-paul.blogspot.ca/
Posted by: ruralito | Jan 21 2014 22:57 utc | 68
dan 67
Because: Guess who controls or even owns the media that would be needed to do that? ...
Posted by: Mr. Pragma | Jan 21 2014 23:12 utc | 69
O'toole at 29
No, you miss my point in fact you miss it so badly you actually reinforce my point while you miss it. The equivalency is in the diplomatic speak of Kerry (which you/b incorrectly term a lie) and in the diplomatic speak of Putin (which you correctly term "diplomatic speak)
Diplomatic by definition consists of lies. Putin does it and Kerry does it. That is the equivalency you evade. Good or evil has nothing to do with it except in puerile interllects.Y
Everybody is as bad as everyone else. No.
All that Syrian blood is on Putin's bloodstained hands.
And you who are in denial of this plain truth are covered in Syrian blood too.
Which is why your guilt evading denials grow more drearily obtuse to the point of absurdity.
Stalinism lives! LMFAO!
Posted by: donkeytale | Jan 22 2014 1:28 utc | 70
@70 - by those standards, that is very diplomatic of you donkeytale! i will just forget about reality when reading your posts!
Posted by: james | Jan 22 2014 1:42 utc | 71
"Diplomatic by definition consists of lies"
well, actually, no
in diplomacy the rule is never lie, though you don't have to tell the whole truth
lies are in fact taken seriously in diplomacy, unlike politics, because they tend to destroy relationships
Posted by: Cu Chulainn | Jan 22 2014 2:11 utc | 72
Donkeytalk, its a little bit odd for you to come and say "They both lie" and that "Good or evil has nothing to do with it " and then throw the blame for "ALL the blood" on one side.
..
"The left does not deal with DIRTY DISGUSTING Jihadis, neo-nazis, poor drug-dealers, obnoxious protestors, Evangelicals (yes there is that too), prostitutes, fringe political opponents even when serious and making an effort, often associated with National Fronts, or for that matter, always missing from the discourse, girls or young women unless they join the mainstream."
That is what I felt was positive in Occupy. It was very open to all types of people, and the action was in the streets where anyone could approach and get involved. The 99% slogan held very true. The feeding of people, the communal living, the openness was very important. And because people were in the streets interacting, the aspect of "friend and foe" became very clear. The tours of Manhattan's wealthiest areas and protests in front of the very homes of the billionaires. This was real stuff. It is easy to forget how big it was - from New York and LA to the bravest of all - people in the Midwest and "the heartland" sort of all, seemingly spontaneously, moving. I don't think I had ever realized what a "movement" was until then.
And it went well beyond just the protests - I think the hurricane relief that followed soon after was a very important phenomena. This was an effort to cast aside everything you and bevin have critiqued to some extent. This was breaking the "left/right" thing, and just getting down to helping - to living together, For many young people it was getting out of the universities, or getting off-line, and getting out and among our fellows, getting reintegrated into the fabric of society. Something groups like Hezbollah do very well. Something the Old Left was very, very good at. Something groups like Food Not Bombs should get more credit for.
Because the atomization of our societies is very real tactic of the power elite against the rest of us. If it isn't #1, then it is at the top of the list of dangers that we face and Occupy, for however it "failed", made a genuine effort to combat it.
Posted by: guest77 | Jan 22 2014 2:44 utc | 73
I know someone posted this, but there wasn't much comment. I'd be interested in b's and other's comments. Is this all hot air form the US? The mafia don letting the soldiers know he's still the boss?
During the meeting, Ford told the SNC figures that Saudi prince Bandar Bin Sultan is on long vacation in the United States, “because of sickness and psychological fatigue,” Hamade added.“We would like to inform you that there are some changes that will take place in Saudi Arabia next March,” Ford said, noting that these changes will reach Bandar Bin Sultan and Saud al-Faissal.
Posted by: guest77 | Jan 22 2014 3:27 utc | 74
The comments to this entry are closed.
Posted by: erichwwk | Jan 18 2014 15:59 utc | 1