The Passionate Attachment

America's entanglement with Israel

Exposing Emir’s Declaration of War on Syria: Amateur blogger does what should be doing

with 2 comments

Here’s another example of what’s wrong with

In a piece today entitled “Qatari Emir Pushes for Attack on Syria,” Jason Ditz writes:

With the Arab League’s monitoring mission continuing in Syria, Qatari Emir Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani took the unprecedented step of urging the Arab League to organize a military attack against Syria.

Apart from the fact that he got the story from Rupert Murdoch’s Sky News, one has to go to Moon of Alabama to get some crucial (and genuinely antiwar) context:

But what is really curious here (and what only Qatar’s AlJazeera(!) reports) is that the CBS interview is old:

In an interview due to be aired on Sunday with US broadcaster CBS for the news programme 60 Minutes, Sheikh Hamad was asked if he was in favour of Arab nations intervening, to which he replied: “For such a situation to stop the killing … some troops should go to stop the killing.”

The interview was recorded in mid-November.

Why and on who’s request did CBS hold back this interview for two month?

Were the preparations not yet finished for the NATO intervention in Syria? Was some additional time needed to make the Arab League observer mission fail to convince other Arab states to agree to the next war phase?

The interview was given after Syria in early November agreed to an Arab league cease fire plan which the rebels immediately rejected. “Western” news by now is always forgetting that last point. Despite continuing attacks from the opposition the Syrian government has largely followed the agreement, pulled back tanks, released prisoners and is implementing reforms. The observer mission was agreed to on December 19. Unless renewed it will run out in five days.

But it seems that all along the plan was not to allow for a peaceful solution for Syria. Why else would the Emir of Qatar, in an interview for the U.S. public, call for troops to attack Syria back in mid November?

So here we have an amateur — in the best sense of the word — blogger doing what the “professional” writer is paid to do by’s naïve donors.


Written by Maidhc Ó Cathail

January 16, 2012 at 7:13 am

Posted in Uncategorized

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. “Peaceful resolution” seems to be the phrase that all of these interventionists can’t contemplate. Their entire focus is on demonizing the target and insisting on military resolution, which, given the demonization obviously then necessitates utter destruction. Quite a propaganda formula.

    They fall back on “I never claimed to be a pacifist” as a defense against their warmongering. As though there were only two possibilities; pacifism or destruction of the “evil dictator.”

    These warmongers have had plenty of recent opportunity to learn from their mistaken view by the outcome of their intervention in Libya. Yet they persist in their outrageous activities.


    January 16, 2012 at 3:54 pm

  2. What makes someone like Jason Ditz, a self-described pacifist, so insidious is that he can say he opposes intervention — and even write against it — without ever acknowledging that his uncritical reporting of unverified claims of regime atrocities by Regime Change, Inc.-backed “pro-democracy” activists helps prepare public opinion for the intervention he claims to oppose.

    Maidhc Ó Cathail

    January 16, 2012 at 7:30 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: