Five civilians were killed overnight in Homs, 165 km (100 miles) north of the capital Damascus, when tanks were deployed to halt protests in the besieged city, residents said.

Six more people were later shot dead in protests in the Damascus suburb of Mleeha, in Homs and in the Idlib area in the northwest, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and the National Organization for Human Rights said.

“So far we have six martyrs across the country. All six were killed today,” said Ammar Qurabi, head of the National Organization for Human Rights.

The 4-month-old uprising, mirroring unrest and dissent elsewhere in the Middle East and North Africa, is the biggest challenge to Assad’s authority since he succeeded his father 11 years ago and it is spreading.

Rights groups say Assad’s forces have killed more than 1,400 civilians since the uprising began. U.N. human rights advisers said on Friday the crackdown might amount to crimes against humanity.

Activists reported protests after Friday prayers in several places — the Medan district of Damascus, Latakia on the coast, Deraa in the south and Deir al-Zor in the east — as well as Homs, the latest focus of the armed crackdown.

“Tanks and armored vehicles have deployed in Homs thoroughfares but in every street adjacent to them there are people in the streets,” a resident of Homs, who gave his name as Osama, said by telephone.

Once confined to outlying towns and rural regions, the uprising has now taken a firm hold in cities such as Homs and Hama, scene of a 1982 massacre by the military.

In the first crackdown on Kurds since the uprising began, dozens of people were wounded when police and militia used batons and teargas against protesters in the mainly Kurdish northeastern city of Qamishli, witnesses said.

The protesters demanded political freedoms and an end to state-endorsed discrimination against Syria’s 1 million Kurds. They also voiced solidarity with the protesters elsewhere.

ASSAD’S ISOLATION GROWS

Assad, 45, has described the uprising as a foreign conspiracy intended to sow sectarian strife.

Opponents say he has played on sectarian fears to maintain support of the minority Alawite sect and keep power for his family, which has ruled Syria for 41 years.

Two special human rights advisers to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called for an “independent, thorough and objective investigation” of events in Syria.

“The scale and gravity of the violations indicate a serious possibility that crimes against humanity may have been committed and continue to be committed in Syria,” Francis Deng, adviser on prevention of genocide, and Edward Luck, adviser on the responsibility to protect, said on Friday.

Once courted by the West to break Syria’s alliance with Iran and militant groups, Assad is becoming increasingly isolated internationally. Iran’s Shi’ite clerical rulers are maintaining their support, to the disquiet of Syria’s majority Sunnis.

Rights groups say the killings of civilians are causing a backlash against Assad among the mostly Sunni rank and file in the army.

Activists say several tank crews defected this week and joined protesters in the eastern town of Albu Kamal bordering Iraq’s tribal Sunni heartland, prompting the deployment of Alawite forces who surrounded the town and demanded the army defectors be handed over.

Diplomatic pressure on Assad mounted this week after Qatar, previously a supporter, shut its embassy in Damascus and the European Union said it was considering tougher sanctions.

Relations with Qatar deteriorated when Sunni Muslims were among those killed by Assad’s security forces, whose leaders, like the president, are Alawites.

Assistant U.S. Secretary of State Jeff Feltman told U.S. based Al Hurra TV that fear of a sectarian crisis was being instigated by Assad to sow fear among the population.

“They are trying to raise the specter of the ghost of a civil war but it’s clear from the majority of demonstrations that everyone is protesting without concern about the dangers confronting them for the sake of a better future for Syria,” Feltman said.
Reuters

Gripped by a massive wave of anti-regime protests since March 15, Syria may just have lost a heavyweight diplomatic ally in the region.

‘More than a fleeting spat’

The diplomatic rift between Syria and Qatar has been simmering as the so-called “Arab spring” spred across the Middle East, with anti-government protest movements rocking countries like Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen. But the tension between the two countries is now at its boiling point and may contribute to Syria’s growing isolation on the international stage.

“Qatar’s move looks more like a shrewdly calculated divorce from the Syrian regime than a fleeting spat,” explained Karim Sader, an independent political scientist who specialises in the Gulf nations. According to Sader, Qatar “cynically concluded that it is no longer necessary to support the Syria of Bashar al-Assad, because this Syria no longer has the same strategic influence ever since the recent Arab revolts started shifting the power dynamics in the region”.

Already weakened by internal political conflict as well as pressure from the international community in the wake of the Syrian regime’s violent repression of protests, Syria has seen its influence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict decline. Since the reconciliation in late April between Hamas – which Qatar supports financially – and Fatah, Syria’s input on the matter has been less frequently solicited. “The reopening of the Rafah border crossing following the fall of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak also loosened the stranglehold on the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip,” Sader said. “That development, combined with the reconciliation of rival Palestinian factions, makes it so that Qatar can now do without the Syrian go-between when dealing with Palestinians.”

Al-Jazeera, a source of Syrian-Qatari discord

The shift in Qatari-Syrian relations has roots in the Arab revolts in which Qatar played a role through the decisive influence of the Qatari-owned news channel Al-Jazeera. “The channel displayed a clear support for the revolutionary movements from the very start of the protests in Tunisia”, explained Claire-Gabrielle Talon, a French political scientist and author of a book on Al-Jazeera, in an interview with weekly news magazine Jeune Afrique. “The channel broadcast images of the revolutions, accompanied by music, and it looked almost like an advertising campaign.” Talon said that until the Arab revolutions of this year, Al-Jazeera had broadcast those types of montages almost exclusively to show Palestinian resistance efforts.

Last week, supporters of Bashar al-Assad stormed the Qatari embassy in Damascus to protest against Al-Jazeera’s “exaggerated and dishonest” coverage of the events in Syria. The incident was an indication that Syrian authorities feel threatened by the channel, which is credited with providing momentum to the uprising against Libya’s Colonel Gaddafi and especially to the fall of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak.

Playing the Sunni card

According to Karim Sader, Qatar seems to be playing “the Sunni card” by cozying up to Saudi Arabia – which would explain why Al-Jazeera has been covering Syria more extensively, compared to its past silence when it came to Syrian repression. “Qatar decided to make overtures toward its ally and fellow Sunni bastion Saudi Arabia…by adjusting its coverage of Syria, which is the main Arab ally of Shia-dominated Iran.”

Sader explained that “the rift with Qatar amounts to a colossal diplomatic loss for Bashar al-Assad, who is losing an ally that made him more palatable” to other nations. Indeed, Qatar had worked significantly toward the improvement of Syria’s image on the international stage in the wake of the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, which was attributed to Syrian authorities by Hariri’s entourage.

“It’s thanks to Qatar that France, under Nicolas Sarkozy, renewed relations with Damascus,” Sader concluded. “It’s also Qatar that rallied for President Assad to be invited to the July 14 parade [in honour of Bastille Day] in 2008.”
France 24

A resident told the Reuters news agency by phone that the army fired at worshippers in eastern Khalidiya district as they left the Khaled Ibn al-Walid mosque in the early hours of the morning on Thursday.

“There is heavy military deployment in Homs; military checkpoints are everywhere in the city. There is heavy shooting in Bab al-Sebaa, one house was burned and the humanitarian conditions are dire,” the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a London-based independent rights monitor, said in a statement.

Activists claim that more than 50 people have been killed in the city since the weekend.

Last Friday, more than one million people turned out across Syria, mainly in the cities of Hama and Deir Ezzor, to protest against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s rule and to demand the release of hundreds of detainees seized at earlier anti-government rallies.

“Many gunmen on the streets [are] shooting randomly,” Al Jazeera’s Rula Amin reported from the Lebanese capital Beirut, citing sources in Homs.

“People are telling us some of the injured and people who have been killed are still on the streets. People have not been able to pick them up because there’s so much [gunfire].”

A resident of the city said mosque loudspeakers were calling for people to the aid of Bab al-Sebaa.

The resident, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of government reprisals, said the neighbourhood had been subjected to heavy machine-gun fire since 4am.

Activists said some of those being arrested had played leading roles in protests while others were Homs residents who had been randomly detained.

Some said family members of activists had been arrested in order to force their relatives to turn themselves in.

Our correspondent said that demonstrators and government officials had given very different accounts of what was happening.

“If you talk to the activists in the opposition, they say these are security people shooting at people who are potentially protesters, getting revenge for taking the streets,” she said.

“They accuse militias loyal to the government of carrying out all of the vandalism acts and the shooting.

“If you look at the government media and websites, they talk of sectarian violence inside the city and they speak of armed gangs that had been shooting, injuring and killing members of the security [forces].”

On Wednesday, troops commanded by Assad’s brother surrounded the Damascus suburb of Harasta, sealing of its dozen entrances as part of an ongoing crackdown on urban centres that have experienced protests on a daily basis.

“They are wearing combat fatigues, helmets, ammunition belts and carrying assault rifles. Water, electricity and phones have been cut,” a resident said.

Al Jazeera

By: Ian Black

Qatar lived up to its reputation as a maverick in Middle Eastern politics this week by suspending the operations of its embassy in Damascus. The emir of the small but fabulously wealthy Gulf state has already gone far beyond the Arab consensus by supporting the Libyan rebels, sending cash and weapons to help them in their fight against Muammar Gaddafi. The United Arab Emirates is doing the same, but in a lower profile way.

Qatari investments in Syria have also reportedly been frozen, but the emirate was not reacting directly to Syrian repression. The measures were taken in response to attacks on its diplomatic mission in the leafy Damascus suburb of Ein Rummaneh, which was pelted with stones, eggs and tomatoes in protest at coverage of the unrest by al-Jazeera TV. The satellite channel is owned by Qatar, based in Doha and watched by millions of Arabs.

Qatar’s moves, in the words of analyst Karim Sader, were “more like a shrewdly calculated divorce from the Syrian regime than a fleeting spat”.

Other, more discreet action, is afoot. Arab media circles are rife with rumours of financial support from Qatar, the UAE and the Saudis for Syrian opposition groups— paying for conferences, communications and perhaps more.

Crucially though, there is no sign that Arab leaders are ready to publicly abandon Bashar al-Assad, five months into one of the bloodiest and most unpredictable episodes of the Arab uprising.

Nabil Elaraby, the new secretary general of the Arab League, certainly stuck to the non-interference script when he criticised Barack Obama for saying that Assad had “lost legitimacy”. That was an issue that could be decided only by Syrians, he insisted – a diplomatic disappointment for some critics – after visiting the Syrian president and sounding supportive about his belated, half-hearted attempts at reform.

It was easier for Elaraby’s predecessor, Amr Moussa, speaking just before stepping down and launching his bid for the Egyptian presidency. Moussa first criticised Nato’s bombing of Libya – despite having being instrumental in providing cover for UN-sanctioned action against Gaddafi – and then spoke of Arab “anger” about the violence in Syria, winning a rebuke from Damascus that he was “unbalanced and politically motivated”.

The turmoil in Syria has paralysed other Arab regimes. The country that describes itself as the “beating heart of Arabism” may not be popular, but it is a powerful regional player with strategic ties to Iran and important relationships with Hizbullah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian territories – and it craves a better relationship with the US.

Saudi Arabia, Syria’s bitter rival, especially in Lebanon, does not want to see chaos if Assad is forced from power or uses overwhelming violence and repression to hold on. Saudi officials have said nothing in public about the Syrian crisis and have no sympathy for the Arab spring. But they would doubtless like to see Assad cut down to size as a regional actor.

Post-revolution uncertainty in Egypt is a powerful reminder to the conservative Gulf states of the potential risks if “stable” dictators like Hosni Mubarak are abandoned by the US and forced from office. And their fear of fitna, which translates as sedition or sectarianism, look not entirely unjustified – as the ugly events in Homs have shown in recent days.

Syria’s neighbours Iraq and Jordan are watching anxiously, but keeping quiet. Their assumption is that the cohesion of the Damascus regime, opposition divisions and above all the near impossibility of Libyan-style foreign intervention all mean that Assad is not about to fall.

Israel is also monitoring the Syrian crisis but keeping uncharacteristically quiet. Its listening posts on the occupied Golan Heights, less than an hour from Damascus, must be picking up some unusual intelligence from Syria’s telephone and radio networks – and YouTube is a handy source for tracking defections by army officers refusing to kill their own people. As Binyamin Netanyahu acknowledged in an interview with the Saudi-owned al-Arabiya TV – which, like its rival al-Jazeera is covering the Syrian uprising closely – anything Israel says will be counterproductive.

But Syria’s crisis is mainly a problem for Arabs. This week the Arab Writers Union, meeting in Cairo, held heated discussions about the situation in Syria, Yemen and elsewhere in the region, but its final communique managed only to condemn the crushing of peaceful protests “in more than one country” – without daring to name which ones.

As Ahmed Asfahani, commentator for the pan-Arab daily al-Hayat, put it: “If even Arab writers can’t protest about what’s happening in Syria, what hope is there that their governments will do anything?”
Guardian

He added during an interview with the Mark :Social media is key to the uprisings in Syria, but activists who use it risk their lives.

THE MARK: In recent news articles, many young Syrian activists are quoted as saying that they are too nervous to use social-media sites like Facebook and Twitter. Can you explain the use of social media in Syria?

RADWAN ZIADEH: If we call the Egyptian revolution “the revolution of Facebook,” we can say that the Syrian revolution is “the revolution of YouTube.” The social-media networks have played crucial roles in showing the world what is going on in Syria. Since Day 1, the Syrian government has banned any media presence and kicked out all the reporters. This is how every Syrian citizen became an activist, and, at the same time, a journalist. This is the perfect model of citizen journalism. It has empowered more young activists, and has made many young leaders interested in journalism. Every day, I receive emails from young activists saying, “Radwan, look at that video on Al Jazeera – I did that!” And then these stories go on to be used in international media.

THE MARK: Do these young activists have reason to fear the government?

ZIADEH: Yes, they have much to fear. This is the reason the government has not completely banned Facebook: It has started intimidating and interfering within Facebook. It hijacks Facebook usernames and sends messages to the opposition figures inside and outside the country.

THE MARK: How does the government get the surveillance technology that is needed to be able to do this?

ZIADEH: Before the uprising started, the government depended on many experts, and all the expertise actually came from the Iranians. Iran has been expert in controlling the internet since the Green Revolution in 2009. Now, Iranians are trying to transfer this expertise to the Syrian government because it is so far away from learning the new technology. This is why the Syrian government needs to get its experts from outside. But a lot of activists have been overcoming obstacles and are much smarter than the government when it comes to using social media, even though there are still risks. The number of YouTube videos that are posted every day gives you a great example of that.

THE MARK: Why is it so risky to use social media to organize demonstrations in Syria, when so much of the revolution in Egypt was organized through Facebook?

ZIADEH: Because the number of Facebook users in Syria is a lot smaller. We only have about half a million users. This number is not significant. But, at the same time, Facebook came to be the main platform by which to pass information and post it online, and the people are following it. I admire everyone protesting against the regime, but, in the case of Syria, demonstrators know that if they are participating in anti-government protests, they are putting their lives at risk, because they can easily be looked up on Facebook.

THE MARK: Have you faced threats from the Syrian government for your Facebook activity?

ZIADEH: Before the uprising, I rarely used my Facebook account. Then, when the uprising started, my number of Facebook friends went from 100 to 5,000. I had to open another Facebook account because Facebook doesn’t allow you to have more than 5,000 friends. Facebook became my main channel for communication with the Syrian people (inside and outside the country) about my plans, or my statements, or my interviews with the media, or my ideas about the revolution or the opposition.

I get threatening messages every day – sometimes using very bad language – but what else can I expect from this kind of regime? Of course, I do get worried sometimes. Last month, I was communicating with two of my friends in Syria who I’ve known for a while. Suddenly, I started receiving threatening messages from their accounts, and I knew it wasn’t them. Eventually, I talked to one of them through Skype, and he told me that his Facebook account had been hijacked by the security. This is the way it is now: People are detained and forced to give their passwords and usernames to the security.

THE MARK: How do you respond when you get these threats?

ZIADEH: I ignore them. You can’t really do anything about it. But you do have to be careful.

THE MARK: What does the security do to intimidate people into giving over their usernames and passwords, and to stop them from using social media to talk about what’s going on?

ZIADEH: Sometimes they cut off the internet, and sometimes they make the internet very slow, which means you can’t upload YouTube videos … just generally making everything very difficult. At the same time, they are forcing some activists to give them their Facebook usernames and passwords by beating them and torturing them. There have also been many stories about people creating fake Facebook accounts for the opposition, as a way to get information and find out who is becoming “friends” with the opposition. This has been the case for many activists, including myself: The Syrian security created a Facebook account saying that they are collecting one million signatures against Radwan Ziadeh. But it’s been a month and only five people have signed it.

THE MARK: What should Canadians and the Canadian government be doing to help?

ZIADEH: I think it’s important to work with the United Nations Security Council to watch the revolution. At the same time, activists need training on how to really secure their Facebook accounts, and how to use the internet and social media to challenge the government. Right now, social media plays a key role in the revolutions in the Arab Spring.

the Mark

As a former journalism student at Wayne State University, located a few miles outside of the city’s downtown, I’ve seen and heard of a lot of talented writers and reporters who’ve walked those halls as students. But as great as many of them have gone on to be, no journalism alumnus at my alma mater has been more heralded than the now-embattled Helen Thomas.

Each year, in fact, the school hosts the Helen Thomas “Spirit of Diversity” Awards and Reception, usually drawing some of the biggest names in the news business, both locally and nationally. The program honors the achievements of media trailblazers whose work reflects the spirit of diversity.

All in the name of Thomas, WSU Class of ‘42, who ended her legendary career yesterday in the wake of backlash created by her comments during an interview with a rabbi, comments where she urged Jews to “get the hell out of Palestine” and suggested they “go home” to Poland, Germany, America “and everywhere else.”

“I think her comments represent the vilest form of blatant anti-Semitism,” said Richard Nodel, president of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Metro Detroit. “Did she mean we should go back to the gas chambers? The concentrations camps of Germany and Poland?”

But that’s just it, says a friend in the WSU journalism department whom I talked to earlier today about the controversy: Instead of simply condemning Thomas’ remarks, perhaps we should take a closer listen to what she was trying to say, even if, in her outrage, you think she said it poorly.

“We need to be able to ask people what they mean when something like this comes up,” says Alicia Nails, a journalism instructor at WSU and director of the school’s Journalism Institute for Media Diversity.”I think that (the situation) show our inability to have a conversation when we’re confused or when we’re offended. Black people, we do this all the time, too. First thing we want to do is have somebody fired. That’s ridiculous. There’s this sense of ’swift justice’ and then it’s over and done with. A lot of heat — but no light.”

Alicia, who teaches a course on race, class and gender in journalism, says she fears that larger issues fueling Thomas’ outburst — on-going strife in the Middle East and social conditions in Israel — will go unexamined in the rush to condemn the journalist.

Still, I ask Alicia straight out whether she thinks Thomas’ remarks — for which Thomas herself has apologized — were anti-Semitic. “I don’t think it matters whether I think it’s anti-Semitic or not,” she says. “I’m not in a position to make that call, to tell someone that they shouldn’t be offended. I teach that in my class. I can’t tell you whether getting slapped hurt you or not.”

She notes how black folks hate to be told what we should and shouldn’t find offensive and says everyone else is equally as entitled to their own assessments. Still, she doubts that Thomas was making references to the horrors of World War II when she mentioned going “home” to Germany and Poland, noting that Thomas also mentioned the U.S.

Rather, she thinks Thomas was speaking from the context of another type of history — her own. Thomas is the daughter of Lebanese immigrants who brought her to Detroit when she was a child. From her POV, Israel is occupied land. And even brief conversations with many in metro Detroit’s vibrant Arab-American community tell you Helen Thomas is not alone in this belief.

“In my class on reporting on race, gender and culture, we might have an Arab-American group in; we might have a Jewish group in,” says Alicia. “They have completely different perspectives on what moment in time ownership of that land should be considered. It is no surprise that Helen Thomas, an Arab-American, would view the situation from the perspective of her people.”

I’ve read some strong condemnations of Thomas over the past day and some classy attempts to forgive her. But one of the very few defenses of her that I’ve seen goes to the same point that Alicia was trying to make during our conversation: That Thomas’ comments were drawn from her personal concerns about the policies and politics of the Middle East, not to play on race-hatred or the Holocaust.

To liken Helen Thomas’ comments about Israel’s occupation of the Gaza strip, to comments telling African-Americans to “go back to Africa,” demonstrates a terrible misunderstanding of the plight of both the occupied Palestinians and the kidnapped African-Americans. A more apt comparison may be to telling Americans to get out of Iraq, a land they occupied, battered, and controlled because of a manufactured threat.

And…

Realize that what Helen was recommending was that the occupiers return to their country of origin. Helen Thomas is making a statement against a nations foreign policy, not against individuals because of their ethnic group or race. Helen Thomas was not being anti-Semitic or racist.

A lot of people think it was well past time for Helen Thomas to retire anyway, believing she’d become shrill and over-the-top. There’s truth there, although, personally, I always admired the bulk of her career and her willingness to ask the tough questions — especially among a White House press corps that often places decorum above real journalism. Her voice will always be appreciated.

Too bad that it went out on such a sour note.
Detroit blogs

Walid Jumblatt cannot be taken seriously any longer. You just cannot tell whether he means any of the things that he speaks about or whether he is just trying to please who is on top. Once one becomes that unprincipled then it is time for him to just fade away from the public sphere. He has lost all credibility once he decided to become a chameleon. That trait of adapting to ones environment is a great survival attribute but that is all what can be said in its favour. At times survival is not a great accomplishment and definitely it is not a leadership criterion. A chameleon manages to survive by blending in, being a yes person and hiding behind others whose colours he is always willing to raise provided they throw his way some scraps.

Does Mr. Jumblatt really expect others to listen to his meaningless utterances when the best that he can come up with is an echo of the demands of a regional dictator? Who does Walid Jumblat think is being deceived by his silly empty utterances about the need to discuss only the strategic defense plan and not the illegal weapons of Hezbollah?  Individuals paint their own portraits and write their own history through their acts and utterances over time. Measured by such an exacting metric Walid Jumblat turns out to be an amateur who does not deserve to be listened to not because one might disagree with him but simply because he is not worth it. There are more important things in life than to take semi seriously the pronouncements of a dilettante who is a spoiled brat, one that inherited a feudal position of leadership when in reality he would not have been able to rise to the level of any responsible position on his own. Who wants to spend time and effort listening to the blatherings of a corrupt and unprincipled individual who is willing to change positions twice a day?

Walid Jumblatt ought to be ashamed of himself and should just whither away. I am not a fan of either sectarian structures or feudalistic regimes but since that is the order of the day in the current Lebanon then the Druze community will be served so much better by going with a known quantity such as Talal Areslan with whose ideology and mores I am in total disagreement,  but who is willing to take a stand for what he believes in. Heck even Mr. Wahab, who I consider to be a Syrian agent, will be an improvement on Walid Bey.

An  individual ought to be free to take any stand and support any cause that he/she likes  and that is fine but to claim a mantle of leadership when the best that one can do is to adapt to the ideology of who is on top is utterly despicable. That is a far cry from the idea of “give me liberty or give me death”. It is in essence a cry to allow own to survive even in a hole as long as one is spared.  The” good life” as seen by Plato ought to be more valuable than this; he turned down the offer to spare his life if he would accept to tell a lie. I wish that Walid Jumblatt can live by such standards. But since he obviously cannot then the best thing that he can do for his clan, for his country and for socialism is just to fade away. He has earned a retirement in a far away island where no one would have to be subjected to his daily hallucinations.

To listen to the above go to: ramblings11.mypodcast.com

A copy of the above has been posted to  rationalrepublic.blogspot.com

As-Safir newspaper also reported on Thursday that Harb asked Berri before Wednesday’s cabinet session “to withdraw his proposal to forming a committee to abolish political sectarianism, because it is a contentious issue.”