Tuesday, October 11, 2016

Like Talking to a Wall

One sided questions; unable or unwilling to see things from the other side; accepting government statements as fact; ignoring well-reasoned responses; inability to think logically or critically.  It isn’t just the American mainstream media….

Consider the words of Assad and consider the reaction of the interviewer; taken from an Interview of President al-Assad to Denmark’s TV 2:

President Assad: … actually, when you want to talk about the dire situation in eastern Aleppo, it’s not because of the government; it’s because of the terrorists. They’ve been in that area for years now, but we only heard about that “dire situation” in the media recently, in the Western media, because the situation of the terrorists is very bad.

The interviewer follows-up with a question that completely ignores this reality – the situation in eastern Aleppo has been hell for civilians for many years – it has become news only recently because the best publicity that the terrorists’ sponsors’ money can buy has been brought into play.

Question 5: So, if the Syrian Army didn’t attack hospitals, or maybe they did by mistake, you say, are you sure it’s not the Russian air force who are targeting hospitals?

President Assad: The question that you should ask when you have a crime: who is the beneficiary of that crime?

Does this response from Assad prompt any curiosity in the interviewer?  Does the interviewer pull on the string: who gains from such attacks?  No.  He continues to lay blame on Russia and the Syrian government.

President Assad: …the terrorists according to what you are saying, terrorists are not responsible, they are very peaceful people. The money of Qatar and Saudi Arabia and Turkey are something legal and natural, let’s say, and the agenda of the United States fulfilled the needs of the Syrian people, which is not realistic.

The response from the interviewer?  Crickets.

Forgive the lengthy cite, but this next portion is rather valuable:

Question 17: The United States, they stopped all bilateral talks with Russia about any kind of peace agreement, and the Russians they said that they actually regret this. Do you regret it as well?

President Assad: We regret it, but we knew in advance that it wouldn’t work…we had already known that the Americans didn’t have the will to reach any agreement, because the main part of that agreement is to attack al-Nusra which is, according to the American list and to the United Nations list, is a terrorist group, but in the Syrian conflict, it’s an American card.

Question 18: But isn’t it very difficult for the United States to separate the so-called “moderate rebels” and some of the more radical ones? This is very difficult, when you are attacking the moderate rebels all the time.

President Assad: You are right, do you know why you are right? Do you know the unicorn, the animal that’s like a horse, has a long horn? It’s a myth. And the moderate opposition is a myth. That’s why you cannot separate something that doesn’t exist from something that exists.

Does Assad fear further escalation between Russia and the United States as a result of these failed efforts?

President Assad: …actually that escalation has been happening for a while now. I mean, before that agreement, let’s say, failed, the Americans attacked our forces in Deir Ezzor…

… for the Americans, a hundred percent, they did it intentionally, because ISIS gathered their militants in the same place before the attack, and when the attack started, it took about one hour, and in the next hour ISIS attacked and took control of those hills. How could ISIS knew about this raid before it happened?

Regarding the puppet states of Europe:

President Assad: I’m sure not the Danish, not the British, decided which target they should attack. I’m sure the Americans said “this is our target, and this is where ISIS is.” …is it acceptable for the Danish people that your army is fulfilling military missions of other countries without verifying the target and knowing where is it heading? Do you take a bus without knowing where the bus is going to? You don’t.

…the Europeans implement and fulfill what the Americans want in every field without asking and without discussing…

…whole Europe now being absent from the political map at least since 2003 after the invasion of Iraq, just because they had to follow the Americans, and they don’t dare to take their independent, let’s say, path in politics.

Regarding the violation of international law:

President Assad: …the intervention in Syria, as part of the international coalition which is actually an American coalition, this is against the international law, this is against the sovereignty of Syria because this is not in coordination with the Syrian government, while the Russian came to Syria…after having an invitation from the Syrian government to support us in our fight against the terror.

An example of the futility of expecting someone from the western media or political establishment to consider how he might feel if the shoe was on the other foot:

Question 25: But what else should [the coalition] do? I mean, they are very much against what’s going on in Syria right now.

President Assad: The question is would you as a Danish citizen accept me as a foreigner to support opposition in your country with money and to tell them “go and kill, and that’s how you achieve your political goals?”


Regarding the diplomacy of the United States:

President Assad: [as opposed to the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis] …in the United States you don’t have superior statecraft. When you don’t have superior statecraft, you should expect anything, and you should always expect the worse.

This is the danger.  It is a danger either because someone in the US is in charge or because no one in the US is in charge.  Either way, the situation regarding two nuclear-armed powers is dangerous.

There is much more to the interview.  It is worth reading.


  1. It's not like talking to a wall, it's like talking to an avid sports fan. A wall can not ask stupid questions with obvious answers only to not be able to understand the obvious. But to a sports fan, no matter what you say, they will never accept your reasoning. And in this case that is exactly what happened, even when the behavior of the interviewer's team could bring about space based war or even nuclear war, they still would not back away from the Syria + Russian team = BAD and "Moderate Rebels" + EU + America + Saudi Arabia + Emirates = GOOD. And they could not understand that the people fighting the bad team were in fact much worse than the Syria team has ever been.

    I am glad that Assad did not bring up the fact that several members of the "GOOD" team are in fact much more tyrannical and brutal than the "BAD" team members. This would have rebooted the interviewer and would have required that the interviewer go immediately to a "SAFE SPACE" leaving dead air time.

    1. To me this is stunning? The Ruskies are going to fight this out intending to risk a lot to win in Syria and the Ruskies will risk nuclear war over the Crimea. It is amazing that the reporters all over the Western World seem to just dismiss this as Putin playing some sort of game.

      What can you say to resolve this? Putin is going to be killed by his own people if he relents on the Crimea and gives up too easily in Syria. It is all done. The Russian People have spoken and Putin wanting to stay in control and keep breathing is going to comply.

      The USA can and will have to create a lot more misery and arm hundreds of thousands of terrorists to have any chance not losing. And not losing means hundreds of thousands of terrorists get weaponry and training.

  2. TBP reposted this and I already commented there, but I guess I'm not done. I want to reiterate my respect for Assad and Putin, for their calm manner and patient careful action, given this precarious situation, to say nothing of the total ongoing violation of Assad's country. He will get what Saddam and Gaddafi got if he loses this. The rest of us are in clear danger if Russia has to step up to help him out, so we're forced to pray they can remain levelheaded and stave off the US. If they win, all Syria gets is a wrecked country and future US ill will, certainly no justice. If they lose, everyone loses, and all because of a few thousand western elite bureaucrats and media.

    It's insane, but that's not new and ranting does nothing.

  3. What of all the "principled libertarians" that oppose Trump because of his "bigotry", while effectively being propagandists for Hillary Clinton?

    The world won't be safe until the American Empire is utterly destroyed. Trump is a step forward in that happening, especially since he won't owe his position as president to anyone. His opponents are all major war criminals like Mitch McConnell, John McCain, and Paul Ryan. The libertarians opposing Trump are as evil or dimwitted as the journalist in your post.

    What America needs desperately now is to hold these evil people to account. We need a war crimes tribunal and a anti corruption effort. And yes, there should be public hangings. It's the only way to fix this problem because reform is now impossible.

    1. Trump is not going to do any of this. And Trump has a lot of baggage that needs opposed, his support for Socialized Healthcare and the Police State and Domestic Spying are several.

  4. unbelievable interview. A total western nitwit interviewing a very intelligent very patient foreign leader. amazing what passes for journalism these days. brainwashed drones

  5. This is precisely how non-Austrians and non-libertarians respond to us. Always. There is never any engagement whatsoever regarding (for example) a) the implications of the NAP; or b) prices as information/economic calculation/miscalculation; or c) the lack of evidence of market failure as the cause of the 1920 or 1929 depressions where the problems were clearly caused by central bank shenanigans regarding the financing of WWI. We need to acknowledge and respond to this phenomenon.

    Individual Democrats flatline in response to clear evidence of Obama’s and the Clintons’ war crimes while Republicans respond (inappropriately) by insisting that Obama is a weenie who is laying down in the fight against “radical Islam”. Democrats flatline regarding any Obama or Clinton crime while Republicans flatline about Israel’s crimes. Since Obama, Hillary AND Israel support Al Qaeda in Syria, the truth can never be spoken. And never is.

    At the 2nd debate, it appeared to me that Martha Raddatz asked Hillary what the U.S. should do if the head-chopping Sunni rebels were driven from Aleppo by the Syrian government and the Russians. Hillary said she’d send in U.S. special forces. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  6. Hello bionic,

    This is a good interview. It recalls one from a few years back in, I think, Der Spiegel. Attempts at undermining Assad's reasonableness appear forced. Like anything in that part of the world, it is difficult to get a picture on what's going on when you have to rely on biased reporting.

    On another note: I wanted to drop a book rec off.
    John Keegan "The Face of Battle"
    He acknowledges many of the problems with history and historiography and explains that the problems come essentially from ignoring the individuals experience in historical events. He then goes on to try and recreate what an individual soldier must have experienced in three battles: Agincourt, Waterloo and the Somme. Very unique look at military history.


  7. The state school system has indoctrinated its' subjects well. Obey at all costs. It also helps if your paycheck depends on it! Never mind World War 3 between two nuclear powers. Nothing to see here!

    "Trump is a step forward in that happening, especially since he won't owe his position as president to anyone".

    I am not sure he will not have his own debts to pay. While I have no evidence for this, I hold the suspicion that there is a segment of the establishment that support him. Surely some must balk at the prospect of "World War 3 Hillary". She was thwarted once before with Barack Obama and I believe that was no coincidence (granted she is such a mediocre candidate, Donald Duck might have had as good a shot).

    The conspiracy theorist in me sometimes thinks that all this overt bias against Trump is the elites trying to preserve the perception of the legitimacy of the state. He is being marketed as the outsider in an attempt to restore some credibility and pacify a segment of the population that is getting dangerously close to losing faith. A sort of "We stuck it to those establishment types! We do have a say and can exercise some power!". I think it is too little, too late. The elites have gone too far and gotten too drunk on their power. This is the last gasp of the American empire regardless of whether Trump wins.

    As for war tribunals and hangings, that will never happen. Trump is much more of a politician than people give him credit for. He just happens to be one that has his pulse on the mood of the people. You do not become a success in probably the most regulated industry after healthcare (real estate) without knowing the political game and how to play it. Especially Las Vegas. He will let Hillary (and the warmongers before her) all go free if they exit quietly. Perhaps he will surprise me though.