USA Secretly Attempts to Undermine Syrian Government, page 1

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 08:19 PM

link

Time Magazine reported that secret documents have been uncovered that show The Bush Administration has been covertly attempting to influence the outcome of the upcoming Syrian presidential election.

www.time.com
The Bush Administration has been quietly nurturing individuals and parties opposed to the Syrian government in an effort to undermine the regime of President Bashar Assad. Parts of the scheme are outlined in a classified, two-page document that says that the U.S. already is "supporting regular meetings of internal and diaspora Syrian activists" in Europe. The document bluntly expresses the hope that "these meetings will facilitate a more coherent strategy and plan of actions for all anti-Assad activists."

The document says that Syria's legislative elections, scheduled for March 2007, "provide a potentially galvanizing issue for... critics of the Assad regime." To capitalize on that opportunity, the document proposes a secret "election monitoring" scheme, in which "internet accessible materials will be available for printing and dissemination by activists inside the country [Syria] and neighboring countries." The proposal also calls for surreptitiously giving money to at least one Syrian politician who, according to the document, intends to run in the election. The effort would also include "voter education campaigns" and public opinion polling, with the first poll "tentatively scheduled in early 2007."

American officials say the U.S. government has had extensive contacts with a range of anti-Assad groups in Washington, Europe and inside Syria. To give momemtum to that opposition, the U.S. is giving serious consideration to the election-monitoring scheme proposed in the document, according to several officials. The proposal has not yet been approved, in part because of questions over whether the Syrian elections will be delayed or even cancelled. But one U.S. official familiar with the proposal said: "You are forced to wonder whether we are now trying to destabilize the Syrian government."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

While America has been one of the main mouthpieces in calling for Syria to cease and desist involving themselves in Lebanese politics, the Bush administration has been quietly and covertly involving themselves in theirs. The double standards we have been laying out are coming back and slapping us in the face over and over again. How do we expect others to follow our requests if we ourselves cannot resist the temptation of sticking our own noses where it does not belong?

The respect for America is waning , yet this administration drags the USA deeper into the mire rather then pulling us out of it.

Related News Links:
www.haaretz.com

iori_komei

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 08:49 PM

link

Well, I personally don't really have a problem with this, I mean
unless it's illegal in Syria to receive money directly from an out-
side source, or in case we mess with there election results, but
other than that, I don't see it as a big deal.

I mean I would'nt be surprised if a few of our won elected
officials had un/known funding from an outside entity themself.

ThePieMaN

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 08:58 PM

link

Originally posted by iori_komei
Well, I personally don't really have a problem with this, I mean
unless it's illegal in Syria to receive money directly from an out-
side source, or in case we mess with there election results, but
other than that, I don't see it as a big deal.

Understandable Iori, but how can we tell syria not to involve themselves in another countries politics , but yet we still involve ourselves in theirs? If this was standard then why use secrecy? If its legit then why not do it openly and not use subtrefuge? If we are trying to get Syria to work with us in Iraq will Assad want to help us if he knows we are attempting to undermine him? It seems counter-productive to me.

Pie

iori_komei

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 09:14 PM

link

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
Understandable Iori, but how can we tell syria not to involve themselves in another countries politics , but yet we still involve ourselves in theirs? If this was standard then why use secrecy? If its legit then why not do it openly and not use subtrefuge? If we are trying to get Syria to work with us in Iraq will Assad want to help us if he knows we are attempting to undermine him? It seems counter-productive to me.

I agree, we should'nt be telling them not to do it, if we oursleves
are going to.

Sorry, forgot to address that in my first post.

HimWhoHathAnEar

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 09:24 PM

link

by The PieMan
If we are trying to get Syria to work with us in Iraq

Is that what we're trying to do?

will Assad want to help us if he knows we are attempting to undermine him?

He doesn't want to help us. So if this works for an excuse, so be it. I don't think asking one's enemies for help makes sense in the first place. But limiting one's options via political correctness is foolhardy.

apc

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 10:13 PM

link

Wow this pushes even closer to treason than the NYT leaks. People are so concerned about free speech and press being threatened... and it's treacherous reports like this that are making it happen.

iori_komei

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 11:44 PM

link

Originally posted by apc
Wow this pushes even closer to treason than the NYT leaks. People are so concerned about free speech and press being threatened... and it's treacherous reports like this that are making it happen.

I don't see how this is treasonous.
Perhaps if they were printing maps of current and near future
troop positions, and instructions on how to attack them in arabic,
than it would be treason.

I consider freedom of information to be more important than
classified information, unless it's like above.

Plus, this may be purposefully leaked disinformation.

intelgurl

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 12:22 AM

link

Ah yes, irresponsible journalism at it's finest.

Irresponsible? Sure...

One has to wonder how many people Assad will knock off thanks to good ole Time Inc., the champion of freedom of information.

As far as the US interfering in the politics of another nation - I wonder how this compares to John Kerry sending his sister and money down to Australia in an effort to oust John Howard a couple of years ago.

WyrdeOne

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 12:53 AM

link

I think it's safe to say that most thinking people knew this was happening, without the NYT having to say anything.

And as far as Syrians learning about this for the first time through our press...

Laughable.

They have an intelligence service, yaknow?

Besides, it's not like we haven't done this exact same thing dozens of times in the past.

We train killers, fund terrorists (except when they're on our side we call them freedom fighters, remember that), and topple democratic governments to install despots. It's so ubiquitous, it should be our national sport.

Seriously, if you consider this treason, that's messed up. What's this definition of treason that you're working under - Treason: Pointing out the painfully obvious and embarassing truth?

ThePieMaN

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 01:03 AM

link

So people here are just going to condemn the messenger for the message and not the act itself. Strange world.

I wish people would be able to compare to the GOOD THINGS rather then the BAD THINGS being done, but this administration makes that very hard. If the best you can come up with is something with Kerry and his sister were doing, this is surely a desperate bid for comparison since its our government and our funds being used as well as probably the CIA, not Bushes sister.

Muaddib

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 02:05 AM

link

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
So people here are just going to condemn the messenger for the message and not the act itself. Strange world.

I wish people would be able to compare to the GOOD THINGS rather then the BAD THINGS being done, but this administration makes that very hard. If the best you can come up with is something with Kerry and his sister were doing, this is surely a desperate bid for comparison since its our government and our funds being used as well as probably the CIA, not Bushes sister.

First of all you and everyone else who thinks the U.S. is the only one doing this, should know that "pretty much every country does this"...

There are funds from other countries, including Syria to fund terrorist attacks, political violence and or dissent in other countries, including sponsoring people in the U.S. to stir things up, distort and outright lie to bring propaganda against the U.S. in our own soil.

If the U.S. provides funds to people in countries who opose the regimes they live in, some call this "imperialism and the U.S. trying to control the world".... if other countries do it and use other resorts, such as calls for jihad and violence, those same people want to claim "oh but those are really the freedom fighters fighting for the people".....

And BTW...read the report, it says the U.S. is supporting meetings of these people who opose that regime...wow.... The U.S. supports people who are against certain regime and suddenly some want to claim this is bad... I wonder what these same people have to say about such regimes sponsoring people in the U.S. to incite violence and jihad......

Anyone???......

[edit on 21-12-2006 by Muaddib]

rich23

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 06:11 AM

link

Originally posted by apc
Wow this pushes even closer to treason than the NYT leaks. People are so concerned about free speech and press being threatened... and it's treacherous reports like this that are making it happen.

That is hilarious. It's "treacherous" to reveal to the American people that their government interferes (again! yawn) in the democratic process of another country? That is precisely what the First Amendment is for. Treacherous, my foot.

In fact, toppling inconvenient regimes pretty much is the US national sport (thanks Wyrde One). Want a list?

Oh, Intelgurl... any sources for this?

As far as the US interfering in the politics of another nation - I wonder how this compares to John Kerry sending his sister and money down to Australia in an effort to oust John Howard a couple of years ago.

Of course, it's well known that Kissinger brought down Gough Whitlam in 1974 for threatening to expose the extent to which the US was financing the right-wing opposition. He had to go because apart from anything else he was thinking about revoking the US lease on Pine Gap.

Oh, Muaddib... "pretty much every country does this". There are almost 200 countries in the world. Most of them are dirt poor. I'd like to see you post some examples, and I'd make a little bet with myself that the US does this more than any other country in the world by a long, long way. I'd expect that the closest behind is Russia, and the next closest... is a long way behind. It wouldn't surprise me that the US did more of this than all the other countries in the world put together.

Agit8dChop

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 06:17 AM

link

I always took TIME Magazine to be influenced by the republicans.

Am I wrong?

If So, what purpose does this have in being released for the repubs?

apc

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 08:01 AM

link

That is hilarious. It's "treacherous" to reveal to the American people that their government interferes (again! yawn) in the democratic process of another country? That is precisely what the First Amendment is for. Treacherous, my foot.

Intentionally publishing classified information in attempt to undermine a war effort (IMO, arranged coup/regime change is a war effort)? Yeah... if I had it my way, Adam Zagorin would be executed in the street (I'm sure many are glad that I do not get these things my way). It doesn't matter that anyone with a brain knows we are doing this in Syria. We're also doing it in Iran. Duh. Publishing classified information with the obvious intent to incite resistance and encourage rebellion against the administration is a pretty serious act.

trea·son /ˈtrizən/
–noun
1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

I don't care what people think about Bush and his ilk. It really doesn't matter. This does though. This reporter has acted in a manner that expresses desire to harm his own country. This is not freedom of speech or information. This is sedition.

FlyersFan

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 08:54 AM

link

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
The Bush Administration has been covertly attempting to influence the outcome of the upcoming Syrian presidential election.

And that's a surprise because .... ?

Seriously .. OF COURSE we are trying to influence the outcome of the elections. The leader of Syria is a spoiled brat who is a huge destabilization factor and a major resource for insurgents in Iraq. He was buying oil illegally from Iraq before the invasion. He is adversely involved in the government of Lebanon which in turn adversely affects Israel.

Syria is a terrorist nation. You betchya we are attempting to influence elections there.

And don't ya'll get all holier-than-thou. Foreign governments are always trying to influce AMERICAN elections as well. Foreign donations to politicians here are staggering. We could start with that whack Cynthia McKinney taking Arab money donations and work our way up .... Al Gore and the Chinese anyone???

FlyersFan

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 08:55 AM

link

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
I always took TIME Magazine to be influenced by the republicans. Am I wrong?

really? I always thought Time and Newsweek (and most of the rest of those type of 'news' propaganda rags ... um ... I mean news magazines ... were influenced by the dems and the liberal agenda.

forestlady

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 09:19 AM

link

If you think about who owns all these media corporations, they are conservatives such as Rupert Murdoch, etc. If you talk with progressives, you'll find that the media is not publishing anything with a progressive news slant, it's all conservative. Look at what informationdoesn't get printed in the mainstream news.

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 21/12/2006 by Mirthful Me]

loam

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 09:48 AM

link

Too bad we didn't pursue more aggressively this approach in our Iraq policy...

Many lives might have been saved.

intelgurl

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 10:38 AM

link

Originally posted by forestlady
If you think about who owns all these media corporations, they are conservatives such as Rupert Murdoch, etc. If you talk with progressives, you'll find that the media is not publishing anything with a progressive news slant, it's all conservative. Look at what informationdoesn't get printed in the mainstream news.

How on earth do you figure that?
You've gone down the list and done your research?
Love to hear it~

BTW, Is Mr Pearlman, Editor in Chief @ Time Magazine a conservative?

No.

rich23

posted on Dec, 21 2006 @ 11:00 AM

link

More hilarity ensues...

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The leader of Syria is a spoiled brat who is a huge destabilization factor and a major resource for insurgents in Iraq.

EXACTLY true of the leader of the US.