http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/syria_neither_riyadh_nor_tehran_but_popular_revolution?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Syria: Neither Riyadh nor Tehran but Popular Revolution

Just as the Assad regime in Syria approaches what appears to be its
terminal decomposition, prominent figures on the Anglophone left are
hurrying to defend it—or at least to oppose its opponents. The
anti-anti-dictatorship crowd includes not only sub-Ickean conspiracists
such as Michael Chossudovsky but also people one would have expected to
know better, such as  Tariq Ali <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRkZIiJAiR4>
, George 
Galloway<http://rt.com/news/dictatorship-assad-syria-western-conspiracy-371/>
 and
John 
Rees<http://www.counterfire.org/index.php/theory/157-international/15938-syria-empire-and-revolution-a-reply-to-the-critics-of-the-anti-war-movement>.
Some of the arguments are expressed in more inflammatory style than
others—such as Galloway’s claim that the Syrian uprising is a ‘massive
international 
conspiracy’<http://rt.com/news/dictatorship-assad-syria-western-conspiracy-371/>—but
they follow a similar line. This is that: the Syrian revolution, whether it
has popular roots or not, has now become a purely military endeavour of
Sunni supremacists acting as the catspaws of a Saudi-Qatari-U.S. (perhaps
also Franco-Zionist) effort to topple Assad, the last redoubt of the
anti-imperialist forces in the region. This externally funded rebellion
represents an extension of the U.S. imperial project launched after the
9/11 attacks, embracing the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq. Stories of
Syrian government atrocities in the Western media are the counterparts of
the lies circulated in 2002-3 about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass
destruction, and therefore must be discredited. The only solution to be
hoped for is a negotiated peace (a prospect also
raised<http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2012/syria130712.html> by
parts of the Syrian opposition) leaving some remnant of the Ba’ath regime
in place, thereby denying the U.S. and its co-conspirators the prize of a
pliant regime on Israel’s front-line and a significant weakening of the
Iranian position. These arguments are not made solely by Anglophone
commentators: outside of Egypt’s revolutionary currents
<http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/48575.aspx>,
they are extremely common on the Arab left. One need only glance at the
Lebanese newspaper *Al-Akhbar* to find the Arab revolutions damned *tout
court *as examples of “Political
Sunnism<http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/age-new-takfiris>
”.

Is any of this true?  The situation in Syria is both extremely violent and
extremely complicated and difficult for even those within the country to
grasp, let alone those outside of it. Nonetheless, information is available
if one is ready to consult people within Syria or those who have reported
from there recently—a step rarely taken by those proposing the
anti-anti-Assad argument. Let us take the claims in turn.

*'Massive international conspiracy'?*

The charges laid by, amongst others, Charles
Glass<http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/07/syria-citadel-war/?pagination=false>
 and Patrick 
Seale<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/27/syria-no-plans-peace>,
are that the Free Syrian Army is trained, funded and armed by Qatar and
Saudi Arabia (leading to an increase in Islamist influence within its
ranks) as the co-conspirators of the USA and Turkey. These arms and funds,
it is claimed, are flowing largely through the contact points established
between FSA-held territory and the Turkish border in the north.  It is this
weaponry that accounts for the recent boldness of the rebels, and the
likely demise of the current regime will be a victory for the suppliers of
this ordinance and not the Syrian people.

There are elements of truth to this story. It is no secret that the U.S.,
and its more vociferous junior imperial partner, wants rid of Assad and in
this aim they are joined by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the GCC more generally.
The Saudis and Qataris are providing money, and in some cases materiel, to
those bits of the FSA of which they
approve<http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/10783>.
Nor is it any revelation that Western (and Turkish) agencies are attempting
to broker the flow of these resources into the country and thereby exercise
influence over the revolutionary situation. In any revolution, anywhere,
now or in the future, outside powers will try to do this. Where this line
of argument goes very wrong is in
claiming<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRkZIiJAiR4> that
the Syrian revolution, as a result of these attempts, now consists of
‘sundry’ elements working for Western intelligence agencies and abetting
the recolonisation of the country.
First, the weaponry and funding in question is not very much, and not for
everyone. One can spot images of FSA anti-aircraft guns or cannon but very
rarely. These are also most likely to have been taken with defectors of the
defeat of a regime garrison. The regime’s advantage in airpower and ground
armour is overwhelming: the FSA’s resources bear no comparison.  One would
expect a massive international conspiracy worth its salt to furnish its
fifth column with some serious anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry. Such
munitions are not evident. Most of the FSA’s light arms seem to come from
the Syrian army itself, through defection or purchase with money from
Syrian exile businessmen in the
Gulf.<http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/02/201221315020166516.html>
Here
is an example of FSA members having taken Rastan in July, disabling at
least two armoured vehicles visible in the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jEe3G_SWxrs

The regime armour appears to have been hit with improvised bombs, as
described in other reports <http://harpers.org/archive/2012/08/0084010>.
The fighters have kalashnikovs and body armour but no heavy weaponry and
certainly no mortars or rocket batteries.  An example of the motivations
and desires of FSA fighters is given in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=P1YSucJu40c


Defecting out of horror at the regime’s repression, these men seem
desperate for weaponry and support from outside. The provision of such
support, especially were it to entail Western air superiority, would indeed
endanger the autonomy of the revolution—but the fact they are asking for it
indicates that the conspiracy is perhaps not so massive or effective after
all. If you were comprehensively funding and arming a rebel force to topple
your well-armed enemy, would you leave its fighters to rely on the goodwill
of local villagers for food?

Belief in a massive international conspiracy, rather than a popular
revolution, also forestalls understanding of why Assad’s forces are doing
so badly. The Syrian army numbers about 300,000 and it is an actual army,
not a group of men in the woods. Yet it cannot be used, because most of the
soldiers are unreliable. The core  shock troops—their loyalty solidified by
sectarian or clan identity—can be sent to dispatch the FSA forces, but
governing the subdued areas is almost impossible, as the regular troops are
likely either to defect or simply not to do their duty. This form of
rebellion should also be counted part of a revolutionary process that has
been going on since March 2011. The defection of Manaf
Tlass<http://english.al-akhbar.com/node/9959> and
Riad Hijab and the bomb attack killing several high-ranking security
officers indicates that the rot has set in even at the core of the regime.

*Morphed into civil war?*

Yet, are these not simply manoeuvres in a civil war, the form into which
the Syrian revolution has now ‘morphed’
<http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php/news-a-comment/syria/1765-syrian-uprising-morphs-into-regional-and-global-wars>?
Denunciations of the ‘militarization’ of the Syrian revolution, and calls
simply to stop the violence, come long and hard from certain quarters of
the Western left.  And indeed, the economic power of the working class (at
best only scantily visible in the Syrian revolution) provides a firmer
basis for revolutionary strategy than solely armed contest with the state.
There is no doubt that what Syria is now undergoing is a civil war, albeit
one in which the dynamics of a revolutionary process are still present. Nor
is the military strategy of the FSA
uncontested<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/20/pawns-syrian-conflict-await-endgame>
within
the ranks of the opposition themselves. However, absent in the jeremiads
against the Syrian revolutionaries for their resort to arms is any
understanding of the origins of this development.

The revolution was inspired by and followed the model of Tunisia and Egypt.
Even the initial slogan of ‘the people demand the fall of the regime’,
daubed on a wall in Dera’a, consciously emulated Tunisia. Every such
unarmed protest was suppressed with the
uttermost<http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/05/201153185927813389.html>
violence.
The Free Syrian Army was
formed<http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/02/201221315020166516.html>out
of armed detachments protecting demonstrations, only really beginning
in earnest last summer. The Syrian regime has been ‘militarized’ for
decades. If it persists in some form, the solution favoured by some on the
left, the Syrian people will continue to suffer its violence. They are not
to be condemned for fighting back.

Nor is the revolution over in the form of demonstrations, strikes, and
popular self-management. This is a crucial factor in considering the role
of foreign intervention: arms and funds are entering Syria from outside but
this remains within a context of surprisingly robust popular mobilizations.
One must remember that tens of thousands have been killed by the regime,
many more arrested and tortured, demonstrations are attacked with live
fire, residential districts shelled, and all this for a year and a half. It
would be no surprise if Syrian revolutionists disappeared completely from
the streets. They have not: indeed, the increased military victories over
the regime go in tandem with the appearance of mass opposition in Aleppo
and Damascus. To take a few examples from the recent offensives in those
cities...
A demonstration in Rukn Al-Din, Damascus, on 19 July:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bRbFDJfzIiE


And on the 20th, also in Damascus. You will note the ‘militarization’ of
the situation at 4:36 when regime snipers open fire:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7cg-YmzbM1Q



Here are demonstrations from Aleppo, from a Kurdish district a few days
later—when watching the scenes of fighting from that city, it is worth
remembering that this is what the Assad forces are fighting to destroy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=eT3TC1uQz1w


Here is a round-up of the demonstrations in Aleppo on 29 June:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=k8SYmL00z2I

The armed attacks on the infrastructure of the security state are also
being carried out with popular participation, as shown in this recording of
the storming of a Political Security office in the village of Al-Tal:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9PbSpu_6wlg


There have been several attempts at igniting general strikes against the
Assad regime, in the hope of repeating the contribution of the Egyptian and
Tunisian labour movements to dispatching the dictators in those countries.
So far, these attempts have not succeeded, partially because of the deep
imbrication of the Communist parties and official union organisation and
partially because of the extent of repression. However, strike days have
been observed in several cities on several occasions—here is film of a
strike of mini bus drivers in the outskirts of Damascus on 8 June:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3WdrGu7Cyts



The Turkish-based Syrian National Council is rightly considered by the
anti-anti-Assad campists to be a pro-intervention outfit greatly influenced
by the Muslim Brotherhood and its Qatari sponsors. However, this body seems
neither representative nor respected on the
ground<http://harpers.org/archive/2012/08/0084010>.
Illuminating dispatches from the towns of Saraqeb and Taftanaz reveal
elements of popular power in areas liberated from the Assad regime. The
Local Co-ordinating Committees, composed of activists directing
demonstrations, have in some cases merged with local committees formed to
take over state functions. Thus in Taftanaz, Anand Gopal
writes<http://harpers.org/archive/2012/08/0084010> of
how

*'*To fill the vacuum, citizens came together to elect councils—farmers
formed their own, as did merchants, laborers, teachers, students,
health-care workers, judges, engineers, and the unemployed. In some cases,
the councils merged with pre-existing activist networks called local
coordinating committees. They in turn chose delegates to sit on a citywide
council, which in Taftanaz and surrounding towns was the only form of
government the citizenry recognized.'

In 
Saraqeb<http://world.time.com/2012/07/24/a-dispatch-from-free-syria-how-to-run-a-liberated-town/>

'the committee’s nine members are each tasked with a different role –
there’s a media liaison, finance officer, military liaison, political
officer, revolutionary courts representative, services coordinator, medical
services, donations officer, and demonstrations coordinator. They are
rotating, elected posts of three months’ duration. “There is no leader in
the group,” said “al-Sayed,” one of the nine representatives who requested
anonymity. “We want to get rid of this idea.”'

These are not isolated organisations – the committees elect
delegates<http://harpers.org/archive/2012/08/0084010> to
regional bodies, which then constitute the Syrian Revolutionary General
Command.

The committees are not to be mistaken for Soviets. Like their (now largely
defunct) counterparts in the earlier phases of the Tunisia and Egyptian
revolutions, they reflect local hierarchies, connections, jealousies and
rivalries.

However, in a society in the throes of  revolutionary upheaval (to which
the anti-anti-Assadites blind themselves) class conflict is laid bare and
questions of the reconstitution of social order are invariably raised.
Thus, in the town of Binnish near Taftanaz, Gopal
reports<http://harpers.org/archive/2012/08/0084010> how
farmers and consumers agreed food prices through the mechanism of their
council on the grounds that “we have to give to each as he needs.” The
account continues:

'It was a phrase I heard many times, even from landowners and merchants who
might otherwise bristle at the revolution’s egalitarian rhetoric—they
cannot ignore that many on the front lines come from society’s bottom
rungs. At one point in March, the citywide council enforced price controls
on rice and heating oil, undoing, locally, the most unpopular economic
reforms of the previous decade. '

Similar dynamics seem to have emerged in Aleppo, where according to a
report in the 
Guardian<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/28/syrian-rebels-aleppo-besieging-assad>
:

'the wealthy…[view]the rebels as a sort of unwelcome peasant army. “If I
were to generalise I would say the middle class and upper class don’t want
the rebels. They want everything to be how it was so they can trade and go
to coffee shops,” one English-speaking resident, who lives in a regime
area, said via Skype'.

Certain of the local committees, it seems, have even taken
up<http://harpers.org/archive/2012/08/0084010> Gramsci’s
strictures on the role of the revolutionary press, printing their own
newspaper (*Revolutionary Words*) featuring reports from the literal
front-lines, and articles on revolutionary history—in the words of one of
its editors: “This is not an intellectual’s revolution… This is a popular
revolution. We need to give people ideas, theory.”

*A “sectarian gang”?*

The presence of these local committees, and their character, should not be
taken as an argument that the Syrian workers’ republic is nigh. Rather they
indicate that the dynamics in Syria are those—complicated, bloody, messy—of
an actual revolutionary process and not simply an extrusion of armed gangs
operating at the behest of external enemies. One of the commonest arguments
being put about is precisely that claim, accompanied by the assertion that
to the extent that the uprising enjoys any support, this is on the basis of
a violent sectarianism that renders the revolutionaries as bad
as<http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/27/syria-no-plans-peace>
(if
not worse than) the regime. This fact, it is alleged, is being
concealed<http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NC09Ak03.html> by
a complicit and war-hungry Western media.

The uprising, exactly because it is a popular one, carries with it many of
the prejudices and discursive ticks of the provincial, most often Sunni,
centres in which it has found its base. Arabic-speaking readers will have
noticed the prevalence of religious slogans (“God is great”, ‘We obey you o
God”, “the Friday of Confidence in the Victory of God” and so forth) in the
videos I have posted above. Some of these may reflect ideological
commitment: more likely, as Anand
Gopal<http://harpers.org/archive/2012/08/hbc-90008769> writes
, these slogans are “typically part performance vocabulary, part unifying
norm in a riven society, part symbolic invocation of guerrilla struggle in
a post-Iraq War world, and part expression of pure faith.” It seems very
odd that people who accepted, for example, the legitimacy of Hizbullah’s
struggle against Israel now demand that the Syrian revolutionaries abjure
such language. George Galloway’s statement that a “jihadist, extremist,
Islamist<http://rt.com/news/dictatorship-assad-syria-western-conspiracy-371/>”
current is waiting to take over in Syria seems an especially quick
turnaround and a very sloppy use of language. There are, it seems, groups
operating under the Al-Qa’ida franchise in Eastern
Syria<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/30/al-qaida-rebels-battle-syria>
where
the border with Iraq allows for a reverse version of the guerrilla
smuggling practiced against the U.S. occupation. However, evidence that
these are a predominant force within the variegated groups fighting under
the banner of the FSA has yet to be presented.
If Talibanization is far from hanging over Syria, the rural, orthopractic
communities in which the revolution has been strongest up until now have
nonetheless maintained their pre-revolutionary practices of gender
hierarchy. The local committees described above seem largely dominated by
men. Yet, as in the case of class struggle, a revolutionary process cannot
but spur practices of self-emancipation that once experienced are difficult
to un-learn. As well as participation in demonstrations, women have joined
the Free Syrian Army, including the formation of the ‘Hawla Bint Al-Azwar’
battalion shown below.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vowbuLxK7po



If the influence of armed Takfiris is exaggerated, the danger of sectarian
carnage is a real one. The longer the regime clings on, pulling everyone
else down with it, the greater this danger becomes. A year and a half of
continuous conflict has undoubtedly led to an increase in sectarian
polarisation—although, as the International Crisis
Group<http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/middle-east-north-africa/egypt-syria-lebanon/syria/128-syrias-mutating-conflict.aspx>points
out, it is perhaps surprising that this has not reached an even
worse level. The committees described above operate in Sunni areas and some
of their members show a
hostility<http://harpers.org/archive/2012/08/0084010> to
the local Shi’a village . There are credible reports of the execution of *
shabiha* prisoners and suspected collaborators, including the mass
killing<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/01/syrian-army-aleppo-rebels-tactics>
of
members of the pro-regime Berri clan in Aleppo. But, were the revolution
simply a communal civil war, then the Sunni Arabs (by far the preponderant
community) would have won it by now. There are also Alawites who have
identified with the revolution—they have a
website<http://www.facebook.com/AlawitesInTheSyrianRevolutionlwywnFyAlthwrtAlswryt>documenting
their participation. There is a struggle going on within the
revolutionary side to assert unity against sectarianism—witness, for
example, the code of
conduct<http://razanghazzawi.org/2012/08/15/lcc-new-fsa-battalions-sign-the-code-of-conduct/>
drawn
up by the LCC and signed by the commanders of 29 FSA brigades, pledging to
“refrain from any behaviour or practice that would undermine the principles
of our revolution: the principles of freedom, citizenship, and
dignity…[and] respect human rights in accordance with our legal principles,
our tolerant religious principles, and the international laws governing
human rights.”
These commitments are frequently couched in a discursive culture that
confuses those who see ‘Islam’ as a monolithic project, rather than as a
political vernacular. For example, this video shows the formation of the
‘People’s resistance unit’ in Damascus. The screen is filled with masked,
armed men, standing around a Qu’ran and swearing obedience to God almighty:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vO1hx9wRhmo



But what is the content of their oath? It is ‘ to protect and defend’ the
‘people’ who ‘will determine their desired government’, and to ‘reject and
prevent revenge from occurring outside of our brigade’s control’ and to act
‘without any discrimination among the civilians, regardless of their
ethnicity, sect, or religious or political belief’.
A similar scene is found in this video, showing the formation of the
‘United Syrian Military Coast Brigade’ in Latakia, the Alawite heartland:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LV-jJUDFeBw



As in the previous video, the declaration begins with a Qur’anic verse, and
the room is full of beards, guns and martyr’s headbands. They pledge to
‘build a nation of mutual love, justice and peace’ and to follow
international human rights law ‘without regard to ethnicity or religion.’
Both videos feature long lists of the brigades declaring their adherence to
these pledges.

It is impossible to tell how far this commitments will be followed: what
they indicate, however, is a battle within the revolutionary side to
preserve national and cross-sectarian unity in a very violent and chaotic
situation. There is no such concern on the side of the regime, and to treat
the two as equal in this matter is a grave error. Even more so when, as in
the case of the Houla massacre, Western leftists replicate the regime
narrative 
<http://www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php/usa-war-on-terror/1612-john-pilger-why-do-we-let-the-psychopaths-that-lead-us-to-war-get-away-with-it>that
the revolutionaries are the ones doing the slaughtering, in order to
discredit the regime. In May of this year, scores of people were killed in
their homes in the region of Houla north of Homs, after an FSA attack on an
army checkpoint. The
survivors<http://freesyriantranslators.net/2012/06/18/a-statement-from-the-residents-of-al-houla-in-response-to-rainer-hermanns-article-published-by-frankfurter-allgemeine-zeitung/>
maintained
that the perpetrators were pro-regime elements, either soldiers or
*shabiha<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-14482968>
*. The regime claimed that in fact the FSA had carried out the killings and
then pinned the blame on the government. A German journalist from the
*Frankfurter
Allemeine Zeitung* published a similar
story<http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/jun2012/syri-j13.shtml>,
based on anonymous sources claiming that the families were  Shi’a killed
because they refused to join the opposition. The local co-ordinating
committee stated in
response<http://freesyriantranslators.net/2012/06/18/a-statement-from-the-residents-of-al-houla-in-response-to-rainer-hermanns-article-published-by-frankfurter-allgemeine-zeitung/>
that
the victims were Sunni families (as one of the surviving family members
confirmed, also stating that he believed the killers to be *shabiha*) and
that no German journalist had contacted them or visited the area. The UN
investigation<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/15/houla-killings-un-blames-syria-troops>into
the matter concluded that pro-government forces were responsible. And
yet this incident continues to be
cited<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRkZIiJAiR4>by the
anti-anti-Assad left as if it were Alastair Campbell’s fake dossier
justifying the war in Iraq.

What if the improbable and distasteful tale of revolutionaries slaughtering
children to make Assad look bad were actually true? It is surely false, but
even so, Assad needs no help to make him look bad. The bombing of the town
of Azaz 
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/16/syrian-crisis-azaz-airstrike?intcmp=239>on
the 15 August, killing tens of people, was surely carried out by the
regime, unless we believe the FSA has obtained fighter jets and is using
them to bomb its own supporters in order to make Assad look bad. In which
case we may as well go the whole hog: let’s believe that Qatar, Saudi
Arabia, Israel and the U.S. have conspired to install a decades-long reign
of cruelty and dictatorship in Syria, torturing, imprisoning and killing,
amassing huge wealth at the expense of workers and peasants, and imposing
neoliberal policies on the impoverished masses, all to make the Ba’ath
party look bad. Or, if we accept that all these things are not a
conspiracy, is such a regime a basis for a sustainable pole of
anti-imperialist resistance?

Thankfully for the Syrian revolution, there is at least a small group of
leftists internal to the struggle. The Syrian Revolutionary Left publish,
when the extremely difficult conditions permit, a newspaper entitled *The
Frontline*. This organ campaigns against sectarianism and foreign
intervention and for Permanent Revolution. The Arabic original of their
programme is here <http://www.ssrcaw.org/ar/show.art.asp?aid=279740.>. I
have translated part of it
here<http://the19thbrumaire.wordpress.com/2012/04/15/the-transitional-programme-of-the-syrian-revolutionary-left-translation-part-1/>.
It
states as the main task of the current “to build an active revolutionary
left able to mobilise the toiling and suffering people, and all those who
aspire to freedom, dignity and social justice, on the basis of a
progressive programme confronting the social and economic programmes of
other political forces.” Their putative comrades in the West should take
some time to investigate and support such currents before declaring their
revolution the work of massive conspiracies.

*Jamie Allinson* *is a researcher specialising in Middle East politics*
About this article

Published on 25 August, 2012
By *Jamie Allinson*

*New Left Project <http://www.newleftproject.org/>*

*---------------*
Syria (and Beyond) Live Coverage: More Deaths, More than 200,000
Refugees<http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/2012/8/25/syria-and-beyond-live-coverage-more-deaths-more-than-200000.html>



inShare <javascript:void(0);>*0*

[image: Date]Saturday, August 25, 2012 at 12:57 | [image: Author]James
Miller <http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/author/james-miller> in [image:
Category]Africa <http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/category/africa>, [image:
Category]EA Global <http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/category/ea-global>,
[image: Category]EA Live<http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/category/ea-live>,
[image: Category]EA Middle East and
Turkey<http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/category/ea-middle-east-and-turkey>,
[image: Category]Middle East and
Iran<http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/category/middle-east-and-iran>

*See also Syria Audio Feature: What Now For Western Intervention? --- James
Miller with Monocle
24<http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/2012/8/25/syria-audio-feature-what-now-for-western-intervention-james.html>
Lebanon Analysis: The Surge of Fighting in Tripoli --- Serious, But Not Out
of 
Control<http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/2012/8/25/lebanon-analysis-the-surge-of-fighting-in-tripoli-serious-bu.html>
Friday's Syria (and Beyond) Live Coverage: Damascus and Its Suburbs
Hammered 
Again<http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/2012/8/24/syria-and-beyond-live-coverage-damascus-and-its-suburbs-hamm.html>
*
------------------------------


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to