Reform Party of Syria Blog

Thank you Sarah and the Board of EMET for bestowing this honor upon me. Your work is of the utmost importance for the safety and prosperity of the Middle East. We need your efforts now more than ever and I am extremely grateful to be a part of your cause.

I also want to congratulate my fellow human rights advocates here today, Wafa, Zeyno, and Cal. It is an honor to be in the company of such passion and commitment.

Thank you Representative Saxton and Representative Berkley. Your support is very valuable to all of us.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is easy to start a speech by thanking the people who gave me the podium, but not as easy to express the principles that brought me to this moment. As a Syrian-American and a Muslim who loves my countries — the one I was born into and the one that gave me freedom, hope, and security — it was rather easy for me to decide that I am to dedicate my life in the service of both. By helping advance the cause of freedom and human rights in Syria, I am also helping to bring security to this nation. I am very lucky indeed.

Today, I am here to talk about my love for Syria, a country whose recent past has been dominated by violent men and whose future remains uncertain. Syria has been a victim of militant socialism and a resistance mentality that will inevitably render it weaker and more dangerous in time. Many Syrians have had to live in an oppressive environment that has denied them the basic rights that any human deserves.

But in order to impart upon you my passion for Syria, I must first express my wholehearted enthusiasm and appreciation for the Jewish people whom I have grown to know intimately during the last 33 years of my life here in America. I learned about the Holocaust at the age of 13 when I visited Dachau, a visit that shed light on facts in direct opposition to what I had learned in the Ba’athist schools in Syria about Jews in general.

In Syria, I was taught to hate the Jewish people. However, I saw a very different story unfold as I grew to understand their history and contributions to humanity the way we the people in the Ard al-Sham (Land of Damascus) contributed to history and humanity in a different era,.

What is not to admire about a people who have produced one third of all Nobel Prize scientists in the world with only a population of 12million worldwide?

What is not to admire about a people who, in 60 years, have developed their country to become world-renown in technology and sciences?

What is not to admire about a people whose mothers are treasured, wives are respected, and daughters are revered?

What is not to admire about a people who are willing to free terrorists just so they can pay respect to those Jews who died needlessly?

What is not to admire about a people who have never sent a suicide bomber against a German discotheque or a German train station even after six million of their own perished at the hands of the Nazis?

What is not to admire about a people who simply laugh at their own culturally sensitive cartoons instead of getting offended and expressing their rage through violent riots?

What is not to admire about a people whose history is laced with discrimination and hate by others, yet they continue to move forward seeking prosperity and peace?

It is exactly for these reasons and so many others that I find myself, as I fight for my country’s future, also in complete admiration of my Jewish neighbors.

After all, Syrians are Semites and so are the Israelis.

Syrians live in the same geographic conditions as Israelis, yet our lands are arid and Israeli lands are lush.

Syrians are as determined as Israelis in building a better future for their families and children, but, under a dictatorship, Syrians can only watch as a Democratic Israel moves so swiftly into the future.

Syrians want peace with all their neighbors but are not free to express such ideas. Israelis want it and are granted the natural freedom to express it.

Syrians want to respect all of humanity, but how can this be possible when the ruling system denies you your own humanity; when the education system teaches you to hate your neighbor instead of respect him?

Syrians want accountability from our leaders who control our political and economic lives but the reality is our government is accountable to no one, while the Israeli people are able to see the workings of and take part in their political and economic system in a vibrant democracy.

Syrians want sciences to be used to serve our people and not the aims of a violent dictator, while Israel already uses sciences to serve their people and humanity at large.

Syrians are not violent people because after 45 years of Ba’athist oppression we still cannot find the courage to rise against our oppressors, while Israelis change leaders frequently using the power of a free vote.

I encourage you to have compassion for a country whose people remain in the dark and who do not fully grasp the meaning of freedom until they are free. Living in their conditions, it is no surprise that Syrians have not yet realized their capacity to share peace with a nation like Israel.

Israel presents a threat to the Syrian regime because it has established an environment more conducive to equality and progress than the Syrian powers are willing to condone and learn from. I am not proud of the leadership of my country. It has proven itself to be afraid of change, neglectful of its peoples’ well being, and rooted in violence and greed. And that is why I am here today supporting Israel, a nation which is our neighbor, our friend and a model for building a peaceful and a progressive Middle East.

It is my dream that the people of Israel and the people of Syria will someday soon share peace together – unlike the peace negotiations going on today, which are not for real peace but rather an agreement between a government and a dictator- that children will be able to cross borders freely to play with each other, to learn from each other and grow up in an environment that focuses on knowledge and co- existence. It is my dream that the Syrian people will embrace their Israeli neighbors as brothers, and share food together as one family, in love and peace. Is this a pipe dream you ask? Is this man dreaming, you ask? Not if you ask all those who existed under oppressive regimes and lived to see their countries change, recover, build, and prosper.

Is it so strange then that I admire Israel? Is it strange that I want my country to be like Israel? Not at all, I admire Israel because I love Syria.

Thank you very much

Washington DC May 29, 2008//The NY Sun - Farid Ghadry// – The latest U.S. intelligence on Syria’s attempt to build a plutonium nuclear reactor with North Korea’s help and under the nose of the International Atomic Energy Agency shows that the Syrian threat is strategic.

Intelligence officials recently briefed American policy makers on Capitol Hill of Syria’s complicity in developing a hostile nuclear program in tandem with the North Koreans. This should have made it clear that regime change and democracy development is more important than ever in order to deter adversaries of global security.

The Syrian regime, long complicit in a variety of acts supporting terror in Iraq and the region has gone too far with the latest discovery of its effort to build a nuclear weapon with the North Koreans.

Diplomatic threats and entreaties liked by America, the European Union, and various Arab allies have done little to deter a Syrian regime that has long been set on a policy track hostile to Western security interests. The intelligence presentation shown to American officials included a ready nuclear reactor built on the banks of the Euphrates river deep in the Syrian Desert.

Syria’s nuclear program has been in the works since the late 1990s. Most damning of all the pictures shown was of the head of the Syrian nuclear commission with the North Korean manager of the Yongbyon nuclear facility. The U.S. intelligence brief made clear that the relationship between Syria and North Korea was deep and resilient.

North Korean nuclear organization officials made a number of covert trips to Syria in 2007, and the Syrian government took the utmost pains to keep this activity hidden from the eyes of the world. The brief was explicit: Syria’s nuclear efforts and the pattern of cooperation with the North Korean nuclear developers were not indicative of “peaceful intentions.”

Two dictatorships have formed a symbiotic relationship across the vast distances of the globe. Pragmatic outreach to the hermetic regimes in Damascus and Pyongyong has paid little to no dividends.

Moreover the Syrian regime under the rule of Bashar al-Assad has cemented its role as an engine for instability, chaos, and terrorism in the Middle East. The core interests of America and democracy in Iraq and the wider region are threatened by the Assad regime’s shrewd strategies that have drawn it closer to Iranian hegemonic aims while separately accommodating Sunni extremist groups tied to Al Qaeda.

Syria’s role in terrorism faded to the backdrop of public consciousness following the Israeli strike against the nuclear reactor on September 6, 2007. But Mr. Assad’s regime was not content in facilitating the deaths of American servicemen and women. Instead, their vision of nuclear weapons showed the immediacy of its threat.

Those who have argued that Syrian acquiescence could be given the right “bargains” must now answer how Syria’s development of a covert nuclear program built by the North Koreans figures into such logic. Simply put, the Syrian regime remains implacable and dedicated to rejecting a peaceful world order.

A serious U.S. demarche on this issue is long overdue. While Iran is increasingly confronted in the public arena for its machinations in Iraq, Mr. Assad and company have been granted a free pass.

The Syrians are following a very familiar playbook once charted by Saddam Hussein. As uncovered regime documents have come to demonstrate, Hussein fashioned a complex foreign policy, which relied on terror and the threat of terror as the principle tools of statecraft. Calls for dialogue based on common interests with the West were merely an exercise in denial and deception.

Today’s case in Syria is no different. The Syrian threat is a perfect storm of the worst amalgamation of terror threats imaginable.

We and a slew of Arab states have tried bargaining and cajoling to no avail. A renewed policy imperative is needed; one which recognizes that the freedom agenda and American security in the region cannot be ignored.

Washington DC May 22, 2008//RPS Opinion - Farid Ghadry// – In winning battles, Vince Lombardi was quoted as saying something that befits what is happening today in the Middle East. He said: “Life’s battles don’t always go to the stronger or faster man. But sooner or later the man who wins, is the man who thinks he can.” Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria, and Iran think they can because the west and some of the Arab countries allowed them to think that way.

Hamas thinks it can because it attacks Israel and Israel is unable to respond being handicapped by lack of political will. Hezbollah attacks Lebanon and Saudi Arabia has shown how weak it is in the face of real danger when it comes to safeguarding its political credit. Worse even are the Saudis thinking peace in Lebanon, even if costly, would guarantee their safety. Syria and Iran will continue supporting terror that goes unpunished by tactical diplomatic errors coming from the US, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. Any wonder why Syria and Iran feel they can? If this continues, soon we will see Jordan negotiating for its Monarchy, Saudi Arabia negotiating for its oil, Egypt negotiating for its stature. Tune-in around 2012 during another US lame duck year.

The only bright spot in these small battles being waged across many cities in the Middle East is the Iraqi government systematic control of its destiny by winning smaller and decisive battles against evil forces; the latest being against al-Qaeda on the western and eastern fronts and against the Saddrists in South Iraq. But that is happening because real and brave men are fighting with their lives and appeasers have no role in these battles.

Against the evil of Hamas and Hezbollah, two armies stand unwilling or incapable of confronting them. On one hand, the Israeli army is remotely controlled by a government more interested in power than results. On the other hand, is a Lebanese army who was promised aid and support but received none and could not insure the safety of its lands against the onslaught of Hezbollah. In both cases, timidity and inconsistency produced evil men who can. The battles are ours to lose and ours to win and it seems we have opted to lose them all.

In Lebanon, there are those who are spinning the latest Doha agreement as a victory for the Lebanese when in fact Lebanon has fallen to the Iranian Mullahs with Syria’s support as Hezbollah continues to carry arms it has used against the Lebanese and the Israelis thus ignoring totally UN Resolution 1559. Furthermore, there are those who are trying to spin the complex relationship between Syria, Hezbollah, and Iran as factors that if played right can work to the advantage of the Lebanese and the Israelis, which is simply a justification for diplomatic failures. As standalones, Syria, Hezbollah, and Iran would have lost in Lebanon and Hamas would not have dared take over Gaza, so whomever thinks that Hezbollah can sustain itself without Syria and Iran or that Syria can sustain herself without Iran and Hezbollah or that Iran is as strong without Syria and Hezbollah or that Hamas would simply roll over for Iran and Syria is but a dreamer. Separating or “peeling” off, as diplomats have coined it, these countries from each other by explaining their complexities is a cop-out, plain and simple. They are “un-peelable” because of historic umbilical existence based not only on religion and the keen instinct for survival but on the doctrines of “resistance” sparked partially by pride and partially by land grab ambitions at any costs (Syria invading Lebanon, Iran invading the Abu Musa UAE islands and its attempt to control Iraq in addition to labeling the Gulf people as originating from Iran in an attempt at showing its fangs).

In Turkey, Syria and Israel are negotiating the sovereignty of Lebanon away and not the giveaway of the Golan Heights, which have remained and still remain calm for Israel to negotiate anything surrounding that piece of land. By negotiating Lebanon away and the impression it is willing to give-up on the Golan, Israel has given-up on the freedom of 23 million Arabs on its northern borders. If the US President’s call for democracy in the Arab world is a matter of principle, why is the US State Department standing idle while Israel sells the Lebanese democracy short and Syria’s future on the cheap? Do the 20 million Syrian citizens enter into the equation at all or should we wait for extremism to flourish inside Syria  or for poverty to reach inhuman proportions before we allow the people that luxury? Would it not be too late then?

There are many back slapping going on today in the corridors of power. In Lebanon, Hezbollah and Amal have won a decisive victory and are now in control of a Lebanon in need for calm after several years of tormented turmoil mainly caused by their murderous ways. In the pro-western camp of Lebanon, the back-slapping is due to the sense that another war has been averted, which is a remarkable achievement in and by itself until Iran and Syria decide the next steps in their battles for control of the Arab streets. Then these so called achievements would turn into immediate political liabilities against the next foe or the next country. Do not be surprised to see Syria and Iran fund the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan and Egypt, the way they funded the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood (Hamas) to accomplish similar goals in both countries. Does Saudi Arabia think it is safer today than prior to the Lebanese debacle? Hezbollah has hidden cells in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia that can control the flow of oil because Hezbollah has been given a free pass in Lebanon. They think they can and they will because there are no lives bravely defending against their terror.

There is a tendency not to hold accountable those policy makers and diplomats who come and go, as part of the cycle of elections in the US, to any standards that explains winning or losing battles. History gets written by those who choose to write widely marketed books to explain their side of the decision-making process and so lost battles get lost in our memory. This in fact saves many appeasers from the embarrassments of their failures and shield them from public scrutiny years after the fact. Had not Hitler invaded Poland days after he signed a commitment for peace with Chamberlain, even that failure would have been forgotten in the annals of history. Today’s diplomatic achievements, at any cost, as is happening in Israel and Lebanon, are tomorrow’s failures.

For Lebanon to be truly saved and for Israel to survive the onslaught against its very existence and for the US to continue leading the world into economic prosperity, real lives have to defend the values so cherished by all. Remote diplomacy and appeasement delay the inevitable, which in my humble opinion will be so costly as to warrant looking back on what went wrong in 2007 and 2008 and hopefully learn the hard lesson never to trust violent men ruling violent countries.

Washington DC May 16, 2008//RPS Opinion - Farid Ghadry// – To those who know about the history of the Assad violence not only against their own people (Hafez, Rifaat, and now Baschar) but against the peoples in the region were not surprised to see Hezbollah ravage Lebanon the week the way Hamas ravaged Gaza. Under the pretext of Resistance, Hezbollah has finally shown its true colors by turning its guns against the people of Lebanon. A Lebanese friend mildly opposed to Hezbollah carrying arms in the past because he believed in the concept of “Resistance” was flabbergasted to see Hezbollah’s actions of late and has turned against. That change of heart by some past supporters of the “Resistance” culture is the beginning of the end of Hezbollah’s support in the region resulting from their violence against the Lebanese.

Further to that erosion, the Syrian Druze community, at least one million strong, has joined the chorus against Hezbollah and the Assad regime for its complicity in the matter, because they witnessed their brothers and sisters defend themselves as best they can in the Shouf mountains of Lebanon. One such Syrian exiled Druze named Iyad Saab wrote a poem in Arabic sent to us by Ahed al-Hendi, a courageous Syrian Blogger and humanist.

????? ?? ?????…
???? ?????????????? ???????????? ???????…
?????? ??? ????? ??????..?? ?? ????? ??? ????…
?? ????????????? ??????
????? ??? ????? ???? ????? ??? ???????????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ???? ????..???????
??? ??? ??? ????? ???????????? ????????
??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?????? ?????????????
??? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ???????
??? ???????? ??????? ??????? ????? ?? ??????
??? ????? ????????? ????? ?? ??????
??? ????? ????????? ????? ?? ??????
??? ???? ???? ???????..??? ???? ????? ?????? ?? ?????? ????????
???? ????? ???? ????? ???? ??????? ???????
????? ???? ?? ???? ??????????????? ???? ?? ???? ????????
???????? ????? ?? ?? ????? ????????...
????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ???? ?????
????? ??? ??? ?? ?? ???
????? ?? ?????? ??????
????? ?????? ?????? ?????
?? ???? ????? ??? ??????? ???????
?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?????
??????? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ????? ?? ?????????????? ?? ????? ???????????????? ??? ??????? ?????????
????????? ???????? ???????? ??????…

???? ???

It starts by saying:

“We are in the midst of decisiveness..
Their aims are clear, their cards are open, the truth is out..”

It goes on praising the courage of the Druze and their history of defending themselves from invaders and other ill wishers. One sentence says:

“A Bullet of Treachery from the Master of all Perfidies [Master in Arabic means Sayyed, which is the title given to Nasrallah of Hezbollah],
a Bullet of Hate from the Nimble Murderer [Nimble in Arabic means Nabih in reference to Nabih Berri].”

With this poem, it becomes obvious that the Druze minorities have joined the Kurds and the Christians in defending themselves from the oppression of Assad and his terror proxies. This does not bode well for the region as Iran and Syria keep stacking-up their enemies one at a time, especially the precious minorities the region is in need to protect and celebrate.

From other stories coming in from Lebanon, one can assume that Hezbollah actions has three remarkable effects: 1) It has galvanized the Lebanese and past supporters as most see the fingerprints of Syria and Iran in Hezbollah’s actions, and 2) It has shocked those who believed that Hezbollah is part and parcel of a Lebanese community with the aim of resisting Israeli aggression only to discover that Hezbollah’s aims are much more sinister with grand designs aimed against Lebanon and fabricated by foreign elements, and 3) Hezbollah’s actions turned the conflict into a sectarian one because it showed a Shia South Beirut attacking a Sunni West Beirut. The majority of Lebanese in the wake of a Hariri Renaissance in the nineties, no matter their loyalties, object to sectarianism having lived it for many years in the late seventies and eighties.

The other effect this had on the Lebanese is the erosion of support for Michel Aoun, known for a single-minded goal, at whatever costs to Lebanon, of ascending to Baabda, the Lebanese White House. His calls for demonstration went unheeded two days before Hezbollah took action against West Beirut. Further proof of the erosion of Aoun’s support inside Lebanon can be summarized with a real incident that took place in a Lebanese household of Christian Lebanese Aoun supporters who upon seeing and hearing Nasrallah speak on Lebanese television prior to the attack, made the remark to friends of mine sitting with them “Nasrallah deserves to be Lebanon’s President”. The good news is: This is coming from Aoun’s supporters indeed. The bad news is: Nasrallah’s supporters are feeding his frenzy.

Syrians wishing for a better Syria know that a safer Lebanon is the pre-condition for their wish. It is an impossibility to separate the two wishes as long as the Assad clan remains in power. Most of the Syrian opposition is in agreement on this issue and some are languishing in jail today because of their support for a free and independent Lebanon. People like Michel Kilo and Anwar al-Bouni. Why would a Syrian risk defending Lebanon knowing well it could land him in jail? Because most know that wishing for a better Syria, Lebanon must be a safer country with an independent government accountable to its people and not Syria’s Assad. A safer Lebanon carries with it a responsibility to oppose the terrorizing Assad regime.

Lebanon’s Constitution risks modification as a pre-condition to Hezbollah’s demure and retreat. Its spoils of war are no longer the inevitable retreat of the Siniora government over who heads the Beirut International Airport security or whether the private communications of Hezbollah is at risk of being dismantled, but rather there will be new demands Hezbollah will make upon meeting in Doha, to reconcile their differences with “March 14″, to strengthen its position and to render Iranian and Syrian hegemony over Lebanon a reality. It is obvious, from the defeatist rhetoric by the peaceful March 14 leaders, who have absorbed a blow to the head yet remain steadfast concerned about peace in Lebanon and the safety of their people, that the time for sanctions against Syria have long passed. This is a violent regime that understands but one language and we are reminded of the Turkish troops amassing in 1998 on the Syrian borders to which Hafez al-Assad responded to by relinquishing the head of the PKK, a terror group also of his own making (The Assads are responsible for the terror of the PKK, Hezbollah, Hamas, Fatah al-Islam, and a long list of prêt-à-porter groups ready to spring to action against any of Syria’s neighbors).

The Assad of yesterday, one that is malleable, pragmatic, can balance his interests with those of others be it the west, the Arab countries, or Iran, who is capable of standing by promises he makes and who was immortalized with countless books and the support of countless western leaders is long gone. In his replacement, we have a myopic son incapable of seeing but violence and terror as the solution to all his woes and who sees himself, through a number of small successes, as invincible and capable of defeating the United States and Israel combined. Assad’s sight, with Iranian encouragement and assistance, is set on more than Lebanon and the sooner we come to that realization, the less costly will become the next campaign to unseat him.

Washington DC May 2, 2008//RPS Blog - Farid Ghadry// – Yesterday the White House issued a press release under the title “Advancing Freedom And Democracy Around The World” as a token for May 3, the World Press Freedom Day.

The press release starts by saying: “May 3 marks World Press Freedom Day. We stand with journalists, editors, and bloggers who continue their work in spite of the risks. We call on all governments to guarantee the inalienable rights of their people, including, consistent with Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the right to freedom of speech and the press.”

RPS is thankful for the White House, and especially president George Bush, for remembering those who risk their lives in pursuit of freedom of expression and human rights. No other US President, or administration, has been as forthcoming as president Bush in supporting the free words uttered by journalists, bloggers, dissidents, and activists around the world working hard for a better future for their countries.

While the press release demonstrates without a doubt the White House commitment to the freedom agenda, one can also notice that almost all of the White House activities (With the exception of democracy budget increases) have taken place in 2005, 2006, and 2007. None has taken place in 2008, five months into a very decisive year not only because of the expanding of the influence of Iran in the region and beyond, the destructive policies of Syria with its support of terrorism, the bad influence of Venezuela in South America, and the spreading proliferation of N. Korean nuclear know how but also because of more oppression by countries around the world be it in Tibet, Myanmar, or Belarus.

In 2008, as in years past, Bloggers, journalists, and activists need the White House to continue on its path of forging new trails of freedom far and beyond the oceans of freedom surrounding America. Prisoners of conscience are being detained in record numbers and those who have been imprisoned have been forgotten. Human rights activists are under constant pressure when they highlight atrocities in their own countries or attempt to improve the situation and any support, no matter how minute, is a shot in the arm to those who feel forgotten by other countries and people that take freedom for granted.

For 2008, and as a sign of commitment to the freedom agenda, RPS urges the White House to gather, in the Rose Garden, all the people that fight for freedom in their respective countries to celebrate their work and to show the world that this US administration is as committed as it has been in the past. If July 4^th is a celebration of freedom in the United States, let July 5 be a celebration of the freedom dissidents pursue around the world.

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

___________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release May 1, 2008

Advancing Freedom And Democracy Around The World

U.S. Pursues Freedom Agenda By Strengthening Support For Democratic Dissidents, Helping Build Democratic Institutions

“Today, America speaks anew to the peoples of the world: All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for liberty, we will stand with you.”

– President George W. Bush, 1/20/05

May 3 marks World Press Freedom Day. We stand with journalists, editors, and bloggers who continue their work in spite of the risks. We call on all governments to guarantee the inalienable rights of their people, including, consistent with Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the right to freedom of speech and the press. During Fiscal Year 2007, the United States provided $78 million in approximately 40 countries to promote media freedom and freedom of information. President Bush has met with many journalists and editors who are struggling against forces that seek to suppress media freedom. We salute these courageous individuals, and we recognize the importance of the right to a free press in spreading freedom around the world.

The United States is committed to the advance of freedom and democracy as the great alternatives to repression and radicalism. The most powerful weapon in the struggle against extremism is the universal appeal of freedom. Freedom is the best way to unleash the creativity and economic potential of a nation, the only ordering of a society that leads to justice, and the only way to achieve and permanently protect human rights.

Ø Expanding freedom is more than a moral imperative - it is the only realistic way to protect our people. The 9/11 attacks were evidence of an international movement of violent extremists that threatens free people everywhere. Nations that commit to freedom for their people will not support extremists; they will join in defeating them. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/06/20070605-8.html

The Administration created a Human Rights Defenders Fund in 2007, which provides grants for the legal defense and medical expenses of activists arrested or beaten by repressive governments. This fund began with $1.5 million and will be replenished as needed: http://www.state.gov/g/drl/p/c22903.htm

Since December 2007, the Secretary of State has presented awards annually to recognize those striving to advance human dignity.

Ø Freedom Defenders Award: This award recognizes a foreign activist or NGO that has demonstrated outstanding commitment to advancing liberty and courage in the face of adversity. http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2007/12/96688.htm

Ø Diplomacy For Freedom Award: This award honors the U.S. Ambassador who best advances the President’s Freedom Agenda by working to end tyranny and promote democracy using the full array of political, economic, diplomatic, and other tools. http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2007/12/96688.htm

Under The Freedom Agenda, America Is Helping Emerging Democracies Build The Institutions That Sustain Liberty

The President has more than doubled funding for democracy, governance, and human rights programs since taking office, and his Budget continues to increase funding in these areas. The Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Request strengthens governance and the rule of law and fosters independent media, democratic political parties, voter education, election monitoring, and human rights. The Fiscal Year 2009 Budget requests $1.72 billion for these activities, up from approximately $1.36 billion in Fiscal Year 2008 and $650 million in Fiscal Year 2001. In addition, the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Request provides $80 million for the National Endowment for Democracy, up from $31 million in 2001.

It is the responsibility of those who enjoy the blessings of liberty to help those who are struggling to establish free societies. America is working with its partners through multilateral organizations to advance freedom and liberty. This includes:

· Providing support for the UN Democracy Fund, proposed by President Bush at the 2004 UN General Assembly and inaugurated in 2005 by Secretary General Annan, President Bush, and Indian Prime Minister Singh. Through this fund UN members are working to help nations that want to join the democratic world. The Fund has raised $85 million, and the United States has granted almost $26 million to the Fund to date. The number of proposals submitted increased from 1,300 in 2006 to 1,800 in 2007 and projects are being identified for a second round of grant-making. A priority was funding projects to support the efforts of NGOs in emerging democracies, such as that of Hungary’s International Center for Democratic Transition, and to support civilian participation in the Broader Middle East and North Africa Initiative. Every free nation has an interest in the success of this Fund - and every free nation has a responsibility to advance the cause of liberty and, through it, the cause of peace.

· Launched a Roundtable on Democracy in 2005 at the UN General Assembly. Since then, the President has participated every year in this Roundtable to advance freedom by strategizing with leaders from around the world who are willing to take the steps necessary to spread liberty.

· Supporting the G-8 in its Partnership for Progress and a Common Future with the governments and peoples of the Broader Middle East and North Africa. This partnership is based on seeking genuine cooperation with the region’s governments, as well as business and civil society representatives, to strengthen freedom, democracy, and prosperity for all.

· In June 2007 the President traveled to Prague to attend a conference of dissidents and democracy activists organized by former Czech President Havel, Natan Sharansky, and former Spanish President Aznar. In addition to his address, the President met privately with those gathered to hear their stories and discuss how to help other dissidents and activists. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/06/20070605-8.html

America is also using its influence to urge valued partners like Egypt and Saudi Arabia to move toward free political systems. These nations have taken action to confront extremists, yet they have a great distance to travel to expand liberty and transparency. The U.S. will continue to press nations like these to open up their political systems and give a greater voice to their people.

Under The Freedom Agenda, America Is Strengthening Support For Pro-Democracy Dissidents and Activists

On June 7, 2007, The President announced he had asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to direct every U.S. Ambassador in an un-free Nation to seek out and meet with activists for democracy and human rights.

The President has met personally with more than 100 dissidents, democratic and human rights activists, and independent journalists and their family members, including:

· Afghanistan: Mohammed Nasib, Sakeena Yacoobi, Sarwar Hussaini, 7/13/2005

· American Islamic Conference: Zainab Al-Suwaij and others (meeting with Iraqi-Americans and free Iraqis), 4/4/2003; Zainab Al-Suwaij, 6/5/2007

· Belarus: Irina Krasovskaya, Syvatlana Zavadskaya, 2/27/2006; Natalia Bourjaily, 9/19/2006; Aliaksandr Milinkevich, 6/5/2007; Aliaksandr Milinkevich, Anatoliy Lebedko, Sergey Kalyakin, Anatoliy Levkovich, Pavel Severinets, Dmitriy Fedaruk, Enira Bronitskaya, 12/6/2007

· Bolivia: Jose Brechner, 6/5/2007

· Burma: Charm Tong, 10/31/2005, 4/7/2008 (meeting with Mrs. Laura Bush)

· China: Li Baiguang, Wang Yi, Yu Jie, 5/11/2006; Junning Liu, Rebiya Kadeer, 6/5/2007

· Cuba: Isabel Roque and others (roundtable discussion with Cuban dissidents), 5/20/2003; Caridad Roque, Eleno Oviedo, Emilio Estefan, Luis Zuniga, 5/20/2005; Elias Amor Bravo, Rafael Rubio, 6/5/2007; Shirlen Garcia, Yamile Llanes,10/10/2007; family members of political prisoners Ricardo Gonzalez Alfonso, Jose Luis Garcia Paneque, Omar Pernet Hernandez, and Jorge Luis Gonzalez Tanquero (before his speech on Cuba, 10/24/2007); Elsa Morejon (wife of Medal of Freedom recipient and political prisoner Dr. Oscar E. Biscet), 1/24/2008; Miguel Sigler Amaya, Josefa Lopez Pena, 3/7/2008

· Democratic Republic of the Congo: Immaculee Birhaheka, 6/27/2006

· Eastern Europe: 21 democracy activists from 13 countries (during Bratislava visit), 2/23/2005; Natan Sharansky, multiple times

· Egypt: Engy El-Haddad, 9/19/2006; Saad Eddin Ibrahim, 6/5/2007; Hisham Kassem, 9/18/2007

· Iran: Azar Nafisi, 11/2/2005

· Iraq: Ghassan Atiyyah, Kanan Makiya, Mithal Al-Alusi, Nibras Kazimi, 6/5/2007

· Kosovo: Veton Surroi, 6/5/2007

· Libya: Mohamed Eljahmi, 6/5/2007

· North Korea: Chol-hwan Kang, 6/13/2005; Gwang-Cheol Kim, Gwi-Ok Lee, Han-Mi Kim, Seung Min Kim, 4/28/2006

· Pakistan: human rights activists (civil society roundtable during visit), 3/4/2006

· Russia: 15 human rights activists (side event at G8 summit), 7/14/2006; Yuri Dzhibladze, 9/19/2006; Garri Kasparov, Karinna Moskalenko, Ludmilla Alexeeva, 6/5/2007; Elena Milashina, 9/18/2007

· Saudi Arabia: Jafar Alshayeb, Sami Angawi, 6/5/2007

· Sierra Leone: Zainab Bangurra, 6/27/2006

· Spain: Edurne Uriarte, Jon Juaristi, 6/5/2007

· Sudan: Mudawi Ibrahim Adam, 3/8/2006; Simon Deng, 4/28/2006; Alfred Taban, 6/27/2006;

· Syria: Farid Ghadry, Mamoun Homsy, 6/5/2007; Mamoun Homsy, Ammar Abdulhamid, Djengizkhan Hasso, 12/4/2007

· Thailand: Kavi Chongkittavorn, 9/18/2007

· Uzbekistan: Nozima Kamalova, 9/19/2006

· Venezuela: Maria Corina Machado, 5/31/2005; Carlos Ponce, 9/19/2006; Ewald Scharfenberg, 9/18/2007

· Vietnam: Cong Thanh Do, Diem Do, Nguyen LeMinh, Quan Nguyen, 5/31/2007

· West Bank: Bassem Eid, Issam Abu Issa, Rami Nasrallah, 6/5/2007

· Zimbabwe: Reginald Matchabe-Hove, 6/27/2006, 9/19/2006

Washington DC April 29, 2008//RPS Opinion - Farid Ghadry// – To those who know the history of Assad’s violence not only against his own people but against many of the people in the region, including American troops in Iraq, were not surprised to hear about the revelation in last Thursday’s intelligence briefing to Congress by the NSC and the CIA that Syria was building a plutonium reactor with the assistance of the North Koreans. The question today is: What will the US administration do about it beyond simply exposing the regime for its endless foray into terror?

Conventional wisdom dictates more than exposure and public pressure. The US policy on Syria has been and remains one of pressuring Assad but keen on not risking his downfall, which we know to be relatively easy given the inside job into the killing of Mughnieyeh and the sensational video and photographs we saw of the Syrian nuclear reactor destroyed by Israel some 7 months ago. The Assad regime has been penetrated to the point that should the US and Israel decide it is no longer in their best interests to defend it, its demise would not pose any serious difficulties.

The policy of continued but ineffective pressure on Assad for his violent behavior in Iraq and in Lebanon, as well as his support for the terror of Hamas and Hezbollah, has left many wondering where it will all end. Few days after the nuclear reactor disclosure, the media has almost died down on the subject leaving many Syrian experts and oppositionists scrambling for answers and believing that confrontation with Assad will have to wait for a more serious breach. One almost wonders what does Assad have to do to relinquish the free passes his regime keeps earning in spite of the knowledge of how destructive his terror has been against an Iraq ready to stand on its feet, a Lebanon eager to retain its democratic values, and an accelerated form of social Genocide against Israel through a precise policy of causing mass emigration.

This crescendo of US public pressure against Assad that we witness every other month, while his misbehavior in Iraq and Lebanon is as steady as a rock, makes one wonder what purpose it serves. Its effectiveness can be debated since we have seen, over the last five years, multiple actions by the US administration, including sanctions, yet Assad continues unabated and unfrazzled. In fact, we believe it is exactly this policy of increasing and decreasing pressure that is feeding Assad’s violence because he knows no matter what he does, whether killing Americans in Iraq, Israelis in Israel, Lebanese in Lebanon, Syrians in Syria, or even arming himself with a nuke, the international community will not act against a regime viewed as untouchable. There is no international will for regime change in Syria and that gives Assad the Carte Blanche to terrorize and kill.

Hope for a better Iraq will remain an issue if this US administration cannot concoct a more effective method of dealing with Assad’s terror once and for all. The new faces expected in a new US administration in 2009 will pick-up where the others have left thinking and hoping they can be more successful, and after exhausting all venues to reason with Syria the vicious cycle will continue with violence unabated and posing clear and present danger to the three democratic nations bordering Syria. There is no end in sight to Assad’s violence and that is the dilemma the US will continue facing as long as its policy towards Syria remains murky with not even a hint of regime change on the table, which could have immediate and positive repercussions for Iraq and Lebanon. For maximum effect, the hint must be backed by a Reaganesque action like the one we witnessed against Libya in 1986.

The latest peace initiative proposed by Erdogan of Turkey between Assad and Israel is being viewed by many Syrians as a reward for the violence perpetrated by Assad against the Jewish State; not exactly a lesson our young Syrian people need to learn from considering the geography and the continuous feeding of extremism in our schools by a regime whose survivability is measured by how potent is its dissemination of its Nazi-like culture of hate. Israel must confront Assad by luring our Syrian youth to a public diplomacy campaign built around the economic miseries they suffer under his rule rather than the heroism of his violence.

We believe that the timing of the peace initiative is simply an Assad ploy planned to exact less pressure on his regime because of the nuclear discovery. Nothing will come of it simply because Assad, who has built his stature on a pillar called Resistance, cannot afford to be a man of peace. Does any Israeli really expect Nasrallah of Hezbollah one day to have any kind words about the peace struck between Syria and Israel? Or Ahmadinajead simply to rollover and accept Assad’s betrayal? Imagine the contradictions to Hezbollah’s very existence if that should happen. Imagine Hamas just giving-up on Sharia’a, which calls for an Islamic Khalifa, to please Syria and Iran. That is why peace between Israel and Assad (but not Syria) is an impossibility as long as Assad rules Syria; in fact, wars and violence will be prevalent in the region for the remainder of Assad’s life and he is only 42 years old. This is not to dash the hopes for peace one day but it will not happen as long as Iran and Syria are ruled by violent men stoking the fires of wars and Hezbollah and Hamas casually causing the killing of their own people as an excuse to kill others.

Washington DC April 19, 2008//RPS Opinion - Farid Ghadry// – The direct and indirect effect of president Jimmy Carter visit to Gaza, Egypt, and Damascus to meet with members of Hamas sends chills down the spine of every Arab and Muslim working for reforms in the Middle East because it legitimizes terror and violence and dilutes all the efforts that peaceful Arab reformers have committed themselves to. One such reformer told me: “Why are we working so hard for peace if the Americans prefer to deal with terror?.” I could not utter but words of encouragement knowing deep inside that he is right.

It is simply fascinating to watch how the foreign policy of one like president Carter impacts negatively the in-roads of moderate Arabs. Under the auspices of “seeking peace”, president Carter is reversing years of hard work by many Palestinians and Israelis who see the road to co-existence paved by true peaceful acts. For president Carter to meet with individuals with blood on their hands not only legitimizes terror but it also encourages it in two ways: It sends the signal to Hamas that its violence pays off but also inspires those who vacillate between violence and peace to surrender to violence.

Even at the expense of peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians, which can never happen with Hamas whose interpretation of Sharia’a entitles it to practices outside the realm of the international law, Syria and Iran can now claim that their policies were successful and further violence means more success. When that happens, we will see again president Carter, or someone else, visit the region and provide more concessions and the vicious cycle of violence never ends.

I predict that as a result of president Carter meeting with Hamas, thousands of moderate Arabs, and especially moderate Palestinians, will lose their lives in the next 10 years. Like cancer or a decease, one has to isolate terror and eradicate it forever or it will spread to other regions and other peoples as substantiated by the fact that in the eighties, Hezbollah was just starting to grow and Hamas did not even exist. There is no room for appeasement or negotiations with groups or organizations bent on destructive policies no matter what the outcome is. Making peace with terrorists is a mirage, getting results from those negotiations is a fallacy.

The damage president Carter is administering to moderate Arabs today reminds me of the damage he delivered in 1979 when, as president of the US, he allowed Khomeini to return to Iran by convincing Shah Pahlavi to cede his power to a new era of terror; incidentally, one of the costliest decisions to the prestige of US foreign policy for its ramifications as thousands of Iranians perished from the violence of the fanaticism prevalent in today’s Iran and thousands of Americans were killed in Beirut, Iraq, and elsewhere. Back then, it was not Carter’s appeasement that freed the American hostages taken under his watch but rather the strength and resolve of president Ronald Reagan that the Iranians feared, which caused them to free the hostages on the day Reagan entered the White House.

Part of the blame for Carter’s trip falls on this administration as well. The policy of “no policy” towards Syria and Iran has fostered this sense of mid-air suspension that inevitably encourages people like president Carter to apply the laws of physics. Had the US foreign policy been more forceful than simply attempt to isolate Hamas and Syria, the US may had seen faster pace to peace than what the molasses isolationist policy can deliver. There will never be peace as long as Iran and Syria are left to roam the lands brandishing Hezbollah and Hamas as sidekicks while they secretly arm themselves with nuclear weapons. Instead of going to the source, we are left toying with marginal forces and forgetting the source of evil and a firm policy to deal with that evil once and for all.

President Bush has an opportunity to conclude his mission by affirming his legacy as the president who fought terror until his last day in office rather than revert back to Scowcroftiism coming a bit too late and a tad too soft. If it is not appeasement, it certainly is not isolationism for today we see Iran getting stronger and still on the verge of becoming a nuclear threat with Syria closely following in tow. The antidote to violence, as history is our witness, is not the feeble appeasement of Carter or the patient containment of Bush, but rather the strength, this nation deserves, of Ronald Reagan.

Washington DC April 13, 2008//RPS Opinion - Farid Ghadry// – Everyone was abuzz about Assef Shawkat, head of the Syrian Military Intelligence and the stitch that binds the Assad regime, after Abdul Halim Khaddam claimed on al-Mustakbal TV that he has been under house arrest for his participation in killing Mughnieyh and that his fate will mirror that of Ghazi Kanaan, another high Syrian official, who committed suicide in October of 2005. Other Arab and western media picked the story and the race was on to find Waldo Shawkat.

The rumors of his demise or house arrest were circulated fast on the Internet. In the opposition world we live in carried against a militant Syrian regime taught well by the Russians, fast rumors are a sign that something is not Kosher. Two days into the first statement by Khaddam, the Syrian opposition started hearing more rumors about sighting of Shawkat in Paris, his wife Bushra seeking political asylum in Dubai after being refused political asylum in France, or the one that takes the cake which pegged Shawkat as having gone to live in Aleppo, a city that is most unwelcoming to the oppressive rulers in Damascus. That is when a red flag was raised by many in the Syrian opposition who could smell an Op-Sys of sort either by the regime to flush the credibility of the Syrian opposition or by the Saudis as a preventive measure against the accusatory fingers of Iran as to who killed Mughnieyh, which was first disclosed by Khaddam who also happens to hold a Saudi citizenship.

Which is true is still anyone’s guess but for a short period today, Syrian TV audiences were treated to seeing Assef present in a ceremonial academy graduation of military cadets with Assad not too far away. One of three scenarios are plausible: The Syrian intended Op-Sys accelerated pace, given the speed of the Internet, may have gone too far for the regime’s comfort so here pops Waldo Shawkat, or the Saudi effectiveness in making Waldo Shawkat disappear by telling the world he was behind the killing of Mughnieyh, has forced the Assad regime to respond, or Waldo Shawkat was shown off and immediately hauled to jail or house arrest as has been claimed. All are possible but none is verifiable with the least plausible the last scenario.

If Assad is the head on a coin, Assef is the tail. His continued presence in support of Assad is the difference between surviving and collapsing for the regime. So any rumors surrounding Assef Shawkat has crucial implications for Syrians and for its regional neighbors, which explains the keen interest, over the last two weeks, of what fate is awaiting or has befallen the violent and Assad-indispensable Shawkat.

Out of that spaghetti of rumors and counter-rumors, there are several facts one is able to ascertain now that Waldo Shawkat has been sighted. The first one deals with the credibility of the Syrian opposition, which may have been tested by this story. Between its limited capacity to extract valuable and verifiable Syrian intelligence information and the regime’s capacity to promulgate elaborate and complex misinformation campaigns, it is no small feat when we capture the right information and we are able to stand behind it. Similarly, it becomes quite problematic when the opposition falls prey to misinformation intended to crucify its credibility.

The second fact deals with the complex relationship between Hariri, Mughnieyh, and Shawkat. Two are dead and it could be that Shawkat himself is being targeted for the sake of less violence between two regional giants who despise each other: Iran and Saudi Arabia. Sacrificing Shawkat actually is in the best interests of both countries but not for the same reasons. The Iranians are betting that if Shawkat is incapacitated, Iran can fill the void thus control its influence in and of Damascus and the Saudis are betting that with Shawkat out of the way, they can force Assad to maneuver his ship closer to the Arab shore long abandoned by him. Who will be right and who will win this battle may have been already determined with Shawkat planted firmly next to Assad.

Washington DC April 10, 2008//RPS Opinion - Farid Ghadry// – Two days ago, FARS, the Iranian-backed news agency, reported a story, which has not seen the light on any mainstream Arab media such as al-Arabiya or even the tightly-controlled Syrian media famous for news fabrication rather than news coverage. FARS said that a Saudi diplomat, on orders from Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi National Security Advisor, has been arrested by the Syrian authorities for his implication in Mughnieyh’s murder in Kfar Soussa. The diplomat was reeled back to Syria using a complicitous Syrian woman who also played a role in facilitating the murder.

This explosive news item, which has not been covered elsewhere or confirmed by either Syria or Saudi Arabia, cannot be ignored because of its implications for the region. It is obvious that the Iranians, if the story is fabricated, are trying either to conduct the Syrian orchestra from Tehran whether Assad likes it or not, especially given the strategic inter-dependence of Syria on the will of the Mullahs, or Iran is leaking the story to force Assad’s hands further by moving him beyond the six-degree of separation between Syria and her Arab brethren. Either way, Tehran, with this leak, is upping the ante against Riyadh and at the same time forcing Assad to read from the same sheet of music.

But if the story is true, it will have far reaching repercussions in cementing the notion that the Middle East is divided in three rather than two camps. It used to be the majority of Muslim countries in the Middle East against Israel and Israel against the majority of them but today, it looks more and more that the enmity is divided along sectarian lines with Sunni and Shia represented by Saudi Arabia and Iran fighting for control of the region with the Iranian building and using proxy armies and violent militias while the Jews of Israel try a balancing act by fighting off a campaign of violence from the same Syrian and Iranian supported militias ordered to demonstrate that loyalty by attacking Israel. Is it strange that Israel finds in the Saudi camp a temporary ally while it protects itself from a Syrian-Iranian onslaught? Not at all. However, Iraq is the only hope that this 3-way division will not last a long time.

Fashionably sitting on the sideline is the ex-Ambassador of Saudi Arabia to the US, Bandar bin Sultan, the man accused by Iran of masterminding the murder with this story leak by FARS. In the mid-nineties, I owned a news organization covering the Middle East called Compass Media. Compass was run by a very able man with a knack for great and accurate stories and one of the stories that came Compass way was that Mughnieyh has been given the task to kill Bandar bin Sultan who was active in his post in Washington. Today, and about twelve years later, and because Tehran is accusing Bandar of killing Mughnieyh, one cannot but tie personal history to the killing. Was this a Saudi tit for tat? Hezbollah and Syria murdered Hariri and Saudi Arabia jumped on the opportunity to murder Mughnieyh, in Damascus to embarrass Assad, for not only the Khobar Towers bombing but also for threatening Saudi officials? Is it probable that both Israeli and Saudi intelligence services coordinated to rid the world of their common enemy Mughnieyh? One cannot but wonder about the purpose of the secret trip Bandar made to Israel about a year ago and what was discussed in that meeting.

One thing for sure, the action/reaction speaks volume about what language violent Middle Eastern leaders understand and more so the Mullahs. If the story is true, two things will surely happen not entirely controllable given the resolve of all parties. The Saudis and the Iranians will duke it out using the same techniques absorbed and accepted during the Cold War era and the next target will either assimilate another Mughnieyh-type rather than the peaceful and constructive Hariri or will be on the grand scale of the Khobar Towers bombing and will take place in Saudi Arabia rather than Israel. If the latter is successful, with all the precautions the Saudis are taking, Tehran would have created Mughnieyh 2.0 and the cycle of violence will continue abated. If Iran fails in its mission, it will be time to take out the Assad regime to put a stake in the heart of evil emanating from the Iranian Mullahs and end the suffering of both the Syrian and the Iranian peoples.

Washington DC April 9, 2008//RPS Opinion - Farid Ghadry// – Fox News reported yesterday that President Jimmy Carter, the 39th President of the United States, is embarking on a trip to Syria to meet with Khaled Meshaal, a Hamas leader with a streak of violence worthy of an international tribunal à la Milosevic. For President Carter, this is an opportunity not only to shore-up a murderer of innocent Palestinians and Israelis but also to acknowledge Baschar al-Assad who is a murderer of American troops fighting extremism in Iraq.

As an Arab-American who has seen his share of spreading blame by his people everywhere except where it counts the most and who has seen immense Arab resources go to waste because of a self-destructive resistance mentality, Carter’s trip will have two distinct effects none of which are beneficial to Arabs or Muslims in general.

The first effect will be to embolden those who embrace resistance as an ideology and a political choice and the second would be to encourage the policies of destruction cradled by the Meshaals of the world. In a sense, appeasement work with those who look for solutions to problems but has the exact reverse effect for those who try to impose their will on others. As an example, Meshaal will view President Carter’s trip as an affirmation of Hamas policy to destroy Israel and Assad will view it as an affirmation that his choice of violence does pay off at the end. How can one reconcile these two views with any of the reasoning we have become accustomed to from the far left, which uses diplomacy as a tool of engagement? The oxymoronic state between both doctrines with resistance on one side and engagement on the other renders the trip a failure before it even starts.

Without even touching on the issue of rewarding Syria for its terror against its own people or other neighboring countries, President Carter will legitimize the actions of Assad and will weaken those who truly work for peace by stripping the tools of violence and resistance bare before any real and meaningful engagement is carried on. The foundation for real peace are two partners speaking the same language with the same goals and not one using violence to intimidate the other to submit to his demands as Syria’s Assad has been doing ever since he ascended, by hereditary means, to his unwelcome position as president of Syria. We Syrian-Americans also object to Meshaal taking refuge in Syria while our Syrian people suffer from a regime that protects him. If he cares so much about Palestinian human rights, are not the Syrians suffering from oppression worthy of the same support? Why should we Syrians support the Palestinian cause when their leaders turn a blind eye to our fate and hopelessness by cozying-up with the regime that oppresses us?

I do not expect this Blog to be read by President Carter for he may not believe in my arguments of what it takes to create the globalization peace of the 21st century. President Carter does not believe that it is no longer sufficient to have peace between two heads of state in a world where communications affect and lack of it afflict millions of people. The peace of this young Internet and trade generation is one that connects the people together through prosperous economic ties and common values and not through a Rose Garden event carried by the only 3 TV networks. The real peace of the 21st century is one where acceptance and co-existence come naturally because of higher goals and purpose. It is one where there are no Shia or Sunnis, no Catholics or Protestants, no Jews or Muslims, no minority or majority but rather leaders, across many borders, playing a symphony of plenteousness that benefit their people and which transcend DNA structure let alone religious beliefs. Today, we are far from that kind of peace because Arabs are still governed by violent and selfish leaders who cannot wait for an ex-president of the United States to visit them to justify their murderous ways.

.