Monday, February 20, 2012

Anti-Imperialist Shabiha. Again...

So anti-imperialists don't mind championing the cause of Khader Adnan who is nearing death now after being on hunger strike for over sixty days, but then they scream murder because some salafists are probably fighting the Syrian regime in Homs (by the way a Christian died fighting for the FSA a few weeks ago). Could somebody tell me what would happen to a salafi prisoner in Assad's dungeons? Or perhaps whether or not anybody would care if a salafi prisoner went on a hunger strike in a Syrian dungeon? Would the anti-imperialists even care about him then? Or is it only the oppression of the side we don't like that counts as oppression?

There is a fine line between trying to maintain objectivity regarding somebody you like and wilful ignorance. Many anti-imperialists have crossed that line, and I feel like throwing myself out of the window when I read some of the comments made. If Assad's secret police archives are ever investigated, I'd really like to do some research on the efforts by the regime to groom intellectuals and writers into its service. I expect we will find some very interesting associations and networks.


zenxbear said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Maysaloon said...

Crazy Bear,
Once again you build up a castle of facts upon a foundation of assumptions and generalisations. You say:

If you look at the mentality of the Syrian people you would understand that conservative forces form a real majority close to 70-80%. And by looking at scores of the Egyptian parliament, you can expect that the syrian people, and to a certain extent FSA would have a similar composition, even more shifted towards the right wing ideologues of the Salafis due to the nature of the struggle they choose. So it is not "SOME" salafis that we are dealing with, but with an irregular army that is formed of nearly 25-30% Salafis, and another 50-60% for religious conservatives.

It's quite an ambitious adventure you wish to take me on, and you start to break down your generalisations into figures and numbers that you've plucked from the air, and then expect me to have a proper conversation with you. I am saying that salafists are one group of many that oppose Assad, and yet you like many others insist on labelling the opposition as salafist or Islamist. Finally, why is that considered a bad thing de facto? And why, if they are the majority, do people like you want to stand in the way of the majority then? These are rhetorical questions, but if you're going to make up facts and figures then at least explore the ramifications of what you're saying.

Your analogy with the treatment of political prisoners is bogus. The revolution is not about releasing any prisoners. It is about assuring rights for arrested to have fair trial, and if condemned, a humane condition in jail. So it comes down to: what did this Salafi do? Was he reading a book, and blogging? or was he aimlessly shooting a rocket at a neighborhood he resents like this "free" fighter that you take pride in endorsing:
youtube / watch?v=GHuhzjs6zxo
[so your use of the term "probable" is real spit in the face. That rocket is real. it may not be representative, but it is a fact]
People who face reality with denial, end up committing bigger mistakes. The biggest of all is repeating history again and again.

I have to start by giving you a name, Tal al Malouhi, who was arrested for blogging, and who has been on hunger strikes because of the unjustness of her imprisonment. So your precious regime has arrested people, Salafist or otherwise, for blogging. Secondly, I will not be dragged into a discussion about "endorsing" anybody. I know what I have written and what I have not, and that is plain to see for any discerning reader. Again, your construction of a straw man to beat up is your business, but at least read what I write and apply some common sense before making up things about me.

Your rants have the same color on anti-communist pundits. A façade that is against repression and regime. An empty one that focus on circumstantial evidence to generalize or discredit an idea. See, Right wing pundits know pretty well that leftists like Rudolf Rocker wrote around 1920's that Bolshevism was not an example to follow for American workers to gains rights [despite being against the Tsarist forces, i guess the Maysaloon of a century ago, would also have thrown himself from the window because this man is equating White Royalists and Red Army]. Ask them about social justice, they insult you and talk about Stalin and the Red Brigades. If you say that some other dude was killing union's leader, they tell you that there is some union leader that agrees with them.

That's your opinion - as with your previous comments it's quite clear that you haven't a clue what I've written about or what my positions are. I'm getting pretty tired of having to - again and again - refute the claims of people like you, claims that are simply not true.

zenxbear said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
نزار الفهد الملكي said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
نزار الفهد الملكي said...

On what possible grounds can one claim based on Egypt what will happen in Syria?

Reality is simple. Egypt is prone to more conservative and liberal strains than Syria. Syria on the whole is more moderate in both directions. On top of that there is no active Muslim Brotherhood in Syria similar to what Mubarak allowed in Egypt.

Further even if Syria had an election, and by some odd circumstances some Islamist groups some how managed to get some 70% (more than more conservative Egypt mind you) of Sunni Arabs/Turks, they would have barely broken the 40% block and would be completely unable to write or affect the constitution without alliances with minority or liberal blocks.

Writing the history of Syria pre-emptively using Egypt as an example does not show a good understanding of the Middle east political spectrum.

BTW... of that imaginary 40% I created, how many are likely Salafis? I can't imagine more than 5% of Sunnis in Syria are Salafi, meaning 3.5% of the total population might be Salafi?

On that I am making a pretty big assumption assuming the majority of Sunni are going to vote Islamist to the 70% mark... yet that still doesn't equal a majority of Syrians. Syria is 40% minority.

and supposing that they were "salafi" or "conservative" I suppose the right to representation and freedom of expression should only apply to those who happen to share values with you?

How do we know the free Syrian Army killed those killed in "guilt by association" scenarios? Perhaps they were informants? Perhaps they were killed by the regime...

Last I checked none of that has been "independently verified" about the Free Syrian Army...

I suppose that argument works both ways?

zenxbear said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
نزار الفهد الملكي said...

Birth rates are not an indication of Salafism or religious conservatism, nor lack of education. They are an indication that people have children. You assume women have children against their will in their "patriarchal structure". You point out the literacy yourself but then attempt to discount it solely based on this single factor.

You produced numbers out of thin air and then attempted to call my suggestions Alchemy. How many Syrian Salafis have you met in Syria?

Why should 5% seem low? Salafism isn't a native Syrian movement. In our experience we have known very few Salafi families from/in Syria, conservative Sunnis yes, but Salafism just doesn't have much of a following. Further, it is well known the Mubarak engineered a religious conservative political presence in order to curb western pressure toward reform. Movements like the "charity" organizations that led to Islamist wins in Egypt do not have a legal presence in Syria to anywhere near the extent the did in Egypt.

Perhaps to you Syria is just some other Arab country that has a set of statistics attached to it?

I don't know where people get the odd idea that Syria is filled with Salafis. The Salafi game is simply Assad propaganda and nothing more, you may rationalize your belief in it, but I see no reason to believe in it.

According to my very generous estimate:70%. I gave more "Islamists" more than occurred in Egypt. My numbers are quite frankly inflated to begin with. Over 40% is exceedingly generous after a 70% result within only 60% of the total populous.

You ignore the minority factor yet again: 40% of the country are minorities. The majority of Kurds are unlikely to vote in the Sunni block. We have seen this played out next door in Iraq.

In fact 40% is what happens if Sunnis in Syria are MORE conservative than those in Egypt. Since my estimate is closer to and beyond an Egyptian figure in estimated conservatism than a Tunisian one I don't see the issue.

Further even were you right, a democratic Islamic government with a rotational government constitutional model is far superior to a sectarian kleptocracy based on the model of letting certain Alawi tribes and Sunni and Christian business 1% run the country ragged without elections, accountability or justice of ANY system is preferable to Assad's law of the jungle and mass murder.

Maybe minorities enjoy certain privileges because Assad "allows" them to, as if it is not their right to begin with... but he does so at the expense of the rights of the majority of the population, and only to maintain a Machiavellian order that is frankly disgusting.

On another note, the French killed Nazi and Vichy informants and they were not immoral to do so. The Free Syrian Army are brave and justified in their actions. In situations such as this there is no law or justice to fall back on. Who should they wait for to administer justice, perhaps the UN? Or Assad and his judges?

zenxbear said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
zenxbear said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
نزار الفهد الملكي said...

1. Your link between conservatism and birth rates and fertility rates are circular in their logic and represent data that have neither correlation nor relevance.

2. Salafi estimates in Syria do not exist. Still having been to Syria... and knowing Syrians I say 5%. Knowledge of the differences between Syria and other Arab states are far more important than simple poorly executed number analyses allow for. A parochial knowledge is required which you apparently lack.

3. Only 60% of Syria is Sunni Arab/Turkish. Therefore YOUR 70% conservative model only gets you to a 42% block of Islamists in an elected parliament when pitted against relatively equal participation in a fair and free election by minorities. You fail to account for the separatism of around 12% Kurdish, and that there are around 10% Christian 5% Druze and 14% Alawi and Shia mixed in.

4. Assad is a Nazi, and you should read more about the Maquis, your knowledge of the French resistance is a bit amateur. Further, there are no confirmed reports of the FSA killing peoples brothers, let alone informants to the regime... and recent deaths, a lawyer and judge in Idleb are reported to be the work of the regime.

and then you ask all sorts of loaded questions. Does the free Syrian Army stand for Freedom:

Yes, far more so than the dog called "Assad".

"And if I don't approve the new gov justice, can I throw RPGs into the Justice Palace"

This is a bit unfair isn't it? Assad is shelling unarmed protesters... and innocent civilians... disagreeing with and fighting back against his regime isn't simply failure to "approve" of his methods it is the most basic self defense.

"Is the blood of any policeman cheap too?"

Perhaps ask Assad who spent the first several months massacring Sunni security personnel and blaming it on the resistance while getting rid of those his religious non-secular government couldn't "trust" in "problem areas". Where people were peacefully demanding their basic human right to free expression and representative government.

Everything you claim against the Free Syrian Army is propaganda whose origin is in the regime and due to its control of information by that regime. If there are so many dying at the hands of the resistance, why not let the international media in to interview the families of the victims?

Have you even been to Syria? You use Tunisia and Egypt as a model but fail to do the same with elections in neighboring Iraq, Lebanon and Turkey when you do you start to realize that every country differs in dozens of ways that you sweep under the rug to make your point.

You invent mechanizations against the Kurdish parties and political manipulations that do not exist and that are speculative at best. by an organization (the Muslim brotherhood) that has no presence in Syria. This is foolish. Further no one is saying that Kurds in one place are more secular than others... but we DO know their history to vote in a block and show solidarity throughout every Middle Eastern country they are in. This is fact and you seem oblivious to it. The Kurds stick in their own block.

Assad gives a variety of privileges to religious minorities to include over-representation and access to government corruption within the regime, this is mostly but not exclusively a benefit to Alawis. To top it off he has convinced them that he is the only reason Christians and Druze are allowed to practice freely, which is a lie.

Syria can only be safe and free if Assad's head is off or if he flees. The Muslim Brotherhood is far preferable to his lying mass murder, and in the end aren't at risk to take control of Syria anyway.

These are all simply obfuscations to keep this disgusting amoral murderous regime in power.

zenxbear said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
نزار الفهد الملكي said...

1. I agree you are applying Demographics 101 number jamming and making uncorrelated guesswork association on a graduate level problem.

2. The regime is in fact Alawi dominated, like it or not, the open opposition were only before because Assad treats opposition from different groups differently, and it is very dishonest to claim that Assad's security Apparatus is "mostly Sunni" when the draftees who make up those "mostly Sunni" remain incommunicado and unarmed like Ottoman Armenians. How are they part of the security apparatus if they don't have guns?

3. I don't know why you keep blaming the MB and the FSA for obfuscations and acts conducted by the regime to discredit them. I don't know why you take the reports of SANA at face value.

4. It is hilarious that you say that a sectarian divided Syria will destroy it. Assad's Syria is a Sectarian divided Syria. That's the way he engineered it. Further you claim the Muslim Brotherhood is hated... but claim they will win in free and fair elections. Nonsense.

and in point of fact the regime is much more brutal than the Muslim brotherhood, who bravely opposed Assad before in the 80s when Assad faked attacks like his son does today and like he did against Markets, churches and Mosques in Iraq.

5. The only thing you have shown here is an unquestioning rationalization for the Assad regime and the status quo,

If you knew what you wee talking about you would use bordering nations rather than unrelated north African nations. You also wouldn't ignore the reality of the Kurdish block.

6. The reality is that Assad does NOT run a secular government: he runs an Alawi government aligned with Hezbollah, Iran and the Mahdi Army...

and yes Sunnis are fighting against Assad's anti-secular nazi regime.

Of course I don't expect an Assad supporter and obvious islamophobe to believe any of that.

zenxbear said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
نزار الفهد الملكي said...

Well, then perhaps, despite my disagreements with you on your amateur understanding of the uses and dangers of demographics and history, and the nature and layout of the Syrian government and security forces (whose intelligence apparatus and officer corps and effective highly trained units are made up mainly of what group that is only 12% of the population?)

We can agree on a few things perhaps. I have no issue with Alawis in general or Fadwa Sulieman, I do not believe in reality that there is any "FSA" that is a cohesive organization of any kind.

and I think the best way to the desired pluralistic society is a coupe of sorts that maintains the civil service corps and more benign portions of the security apparatus, while working with opposition groups at reform, similar to an Egypt scenario. But

Assad has to go for it to work, and the minorities and Shwamioun and Halabioun need to get off their butts and put a little of their real opinion on the streets, before it is too late.

If this revolt succeeds than your worse case scenarios are far more likely if the minorities continue to give Assad support until the last minute as they currently are.

zenxbear said...
This comment has been removed by the author.