First time visitor? Learn more.

American Ambassador to Syria is attacked by Assad’s thugs, Obama and Clinton remain silent

by Mojambo ( 113 Comments › )
Filed under Democratic Party, Dhimmitude, Islam, Islamic Supremacism, Leftist-Islamic Alliance, Progressives, Syria at September 1st, 2011 - 11:30 am

My first question is why do we even have an ambassador in Damascus ? During his 2009 world apology tour, as a slap to the previous administration Obama made a great show of reaching out to Syria and returned the U.S. Ambassador who had been withdrawn due to Syria’s support of terrorism. As in the case of the Iranian protests of 2009, it is clear to me that Obama and his foreign policy advisers lead by de facto Secretary of State Samantha Power and future NSA adviser (if he wins a 2nd term) Susan Rice sympathize with the oppressors.

by Christian Whiton

Pro-regime thugs in Syria harassed and set upon the U.S. ambassador just over a week ago. The event was not publicly reported in Washington until Tuesday, when a journalist discovered a propaganda video exploiting the attack.

The episode reveals an American diplomat with more fortitude and canny than his boss in the White House.

U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford has distinguished himself by symbolically standing with the brutalized people of Syria as they seek freedom from the dictator Assad. Ford has done so through a radical and seldom-used diplomatic technique in the annals of the U.S. Foreign Service: showing up and talking to ordinary people.

Ford’s July visit to the city of Hama, where two generations of Assads have filled the streets with the blood of dissenters, won him the ire of the regime.

His welcome there was perhaps the most heartfelt and significant for a U.S. ambassador since Mark Palmer joined anti-communist protestors in the streets in Hungary as they brought down that regime in 1989.

Ford has since calmly defied regime orders to stay put.

On August 23, Ford was observing a peaceful sit-in by Syrian lawyers opposed to Assad and waiting to see if regime supporters would attack them. Thugs swarmed him and tried to envelope him a in banner with a pro-regime slogan. He was ushered away by U.S. Diplomatic Security personnel who performed admirably.

The event is outrageous because it amounts to a regime-condoned attack on the U.S. president’s envoy to Damascus. Syria is a police state and U.S. officials, especially the top one, are closely monitored by Assad’s men. It is difficult to believe that an attack on the U.S. ambassador would occur without at least a nod from them.

[…..]

Dissidents and pro-freedom protestors often say how support from the outside world—and especially the USA—is helpful to their causes. Just knowing someone cares of their plight, and would notice if they disappeared, can be a shot in the arm. A rarity in the Foreign Service, Ambassador Ford should be commended for sticking with the Syrian people and having guts.

The same cannot be said of his boss man in the White House. President Obama was on Martha’s Vineyard vacationing the day his envoy was attacked. The president did not utter a word of protest in public, nor has he since the incident. It does not appear his administration has taken even the minimal but useful step of summoning the Syrian ambassador for an explanation.

[……]

Furthermore, the paean to the fabled “international community” strikes at the heart of the Obama problem.
From the beginning of his presidency, President Obama has refused to see as his job advancing U.S. interests abroad—a goal generally held by his forty-three predecessors. Were this the case, defining the objective would be simple enough: helping the good guys or the lesser of two evils—depending on whether one is an optimist or pessimist on the Arab Spring—in their quest to topple foes like the terrorist-sponsoring Assad regime.

But instead, Mr. Obama’s priority remains on not being seen advancing U.S. interests. Hence his apology tours through the Middle East regretting supposed American sins dating from the 1950s, and having a florid, humanitarian-only rationale for war in Libya (that commanders luckily wiggled around). It also permeates his administration’s statements implying the United States is but one among harmonious equals in an “international community” that all wants the same thing.

This delusion is a comfort to those who instinctively dislike American power and coalitions of the willing that group governments by values instead of alphabetical order, but it does nothing to help those fighting for freedom in Syria and elsewhere. The power of outsiders to help them is not infinite. But free and confident nations expressing support can be a welcome help—as Ambassador Ford has demonstrated in Syria.

You can call it smart power. Or call it political warfare. Or call it nuance. Or even call it diplomacy. But whatever you call it, President Obama doesn’t know it when he sees it—and evidently appreciates it not.

Read the rest – Our Ambassador in Syria attacked by thugs, but Obama says nothing

Tags: , ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

Comments are closed.

Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By All of Us