Sunday, April 17, 2016



By Ghassan Kadi
16 April 2016


Russian Advanced Weapons for Syria Unrevealed Secrets of Vladimir Putin's Recent Visit Visit to London.
Translation by Ghassan and Intibah Kadi
18 January 2013


Ghassan Kadi's introduction to a media report to The Syrian Revolution; The Untold Story
23 October 2013

So now Bandar is threatening of turning away from the USA. Who does he think will support him? A pseudo-nation like Saudi Arabia cannot stand on its own feet. It will sink in its own quagmires of quick sand, and it has a lot of it.
This declaration on the part of Bandar can mean one of two things; utter anger and disappointment with the USA, or telling the USA in particular that he will now be shifting closer to Israel.
Bandar is already an ally of Israel. Will their alliance be overt in the near future? No one knows. But if banking and counting on Israel as his new ally and supporter, he would only be changing seats on the Titanic.
President Bashar said to Al-Mayadin 2 days ago that America does not make friends and cannot be trusted. Bandar is finally realizing that the USA was never his ally and never considered him as a friend. He is still refusing to accept that he was a puppet.
Eat your heart out Bandar. You are nothing more than a puppet.


*Note: This was an aticle written for the membership of the Facebook group The Syrian Revolution; The Untold Story. Within the group was a Syrian who expressed very strong, negative views about Russia and with his small following continues to this day to express that

16 November 2013
There have been a lot of speculations recently about the role of Russia in the Levant, especially after the Syrian Chemical Weapons (CW) deal.
The issue has caused quite a bit of controversy ranging from supporters for the whole Russian intervention including that of the CW deal, to utter rejectionists who regard the deal as tantamount to Syrian surrender and a total Syrian sell-out to Russia.
In some instances, the differences escalated to a level that seems to be increasingly becoming divisive even amongst the ranks of the pro-Syrian camp. This can become a serious matter unless debated openly and rationally. At the moment, this issue seems to be ignored, perhaps in fear of creating divisions. The anti-Russian camp is perhaps feeling marginalized because those who do not support this view (who are by the way the majority) are not debating the matter. In an attempt to clear the air and bolstering solidarity, I suggest that we debate this matter and invite those who have different opinions to make their contributions.
There is no doubt that Putin is an aspiring world leader and that he sees that Russia has interests in Syria, but to regard the current Russian role as an act of treachery against Syria is totally and utterly ill-founded and there is no evidence to support. In fact, if anything, the evidence points exactly in the other direction.
To be brief and straight to the point, I will outline in dot point the reasons that make me adopt the “pro-Russian” side (if I can refer to it as such):
a. Russia is regaining and restoring its global role. Its first stand was in Georgia back in 2009.
b. Russia made it clear in the UNSC time and time again that it will veto any anti-Syrian resolution, and it did.
c. Russia made clear to NATO that attacking Syria without a UNSC resolution is a red line that will not be tolerated.
d. Russia has never put boots on the ground in foreign nations, not even in Vietnam. Not helping Syria directly is a Russian tradition.
e. The US thought that Russia was bluffing and launched 2 missiles heralding an all-out attack on Syria in early September. Russia thwarted the attack and destroyed one of the missiles, and hacked into the other one and had it diverted.
f. The Syrian CW’s were already an ageing liability.
g. The purpose of weapons CW’s included is protection. Syria’s CW’s performed without having to be fired. They served their role to the highest expectation.
h. The CW deal was a face-saving exercise for the USA and an attempt to find a political resolution, Russia’s and Syria’s way. It was a deal that America was forced to accept, not the other way around. Never before did the USA huff and puff about attacking a country to back off later until Syria. This is the greatest joint Russian Syrian victory ever, and those who do not see it as it is do not have a proper vision of global politics.
i. Russia and Syria want to go to Geneva II when war on the ground is fait accompli. Even Kerry said to Lavrov recently what is the point in going to Geneva after the Syrian Army scores more victories.
j. If Putin is a con man as his adversaries describe him, Assad is not a fool, neither is Nasrallah.
k. For Russia to step up the global ladder, it needed and found strong regional allies. It support for Syria is because Syria proved to be strong.
l. On the other hand, the US allies proved to be weak and worthless and America found itself having to justify to its own people its support for Al-Qaeda.
m. Even without the 2-missiles saga, that is still largely denied, America was very reluctant to strike Syria. It is a nation that is already bankrupt and engaged in many expensive wars.
n. The Anti-Syrian alliance is breaking up. The Emir of Qatar abdicated and his powerful man Hamad had to go with him. Egypt is out of the grip of the Muslim Brotherhood, Qatar and Turkey. Turkey is witnessing internal turmoil and is having second thoughts about its involvement in Syria. The USA knows it cannot strike Syria. Israel is disappointed that the US is having talks with Iran. It is only Bandar who is still trying to pull a trick out of a hat and hope for a miracle that gives him some bargaining edge in Geneva II. None of this would have happened if the Syrian Army didn’t have enough time to deal with the situation on the ground. Had Russia not vetoed the UNSC resolutions against Syria, history would have taken another course.
o. The US and its allies are in a total loss in Syria. They have lost the ground battle, they are divided, and they have lost their initiative and long-term policy. They simply do not know which way to go.
"Arabi Souri", in a recent article, argued that all of the above is a façade and that it would be impossible to see Saudi Arabia standing on its own without America. I agree with the second part of this statement. Saudi Arabia cannot stand up on its own and America has no allies left in the region except Israel which will not go into an all-out war with Syria to please Bandar.

"Syrian Girl Partisan" goes in her anti-Russian rhetoric to the extent of attacking the wisdom and intelligence of President Assad. This is improper, demoralizing and harmful. Again, Syrian Girl has been a very active pro-Syrian activist and she too has played a big role in spreading the truth about Syria. However, her stand on Russia and on President Assad is quite vicious and needless.

My call to Arabi, Syrian Girl and their anti-Russian camp is to have a debate about this subject if they wish. Thus far, this issue has not been handled properly. As a matter of fact, there has recently been a public display of discord among members.

Just because they do not seem to understand the changes in the geo-political order of the world and the rise of Russia (and the BRICS axis in general), some anti-Russian advocates have made some comments about those who support Russia’s role in Syria and branded them as being irrational and naïve. This has been going on for some time and I was hoping it would simply fizzle away, but it only got worse.

This is inappropriate to say the least and should not continue. Any rational discussion is something that we should welcome on this group and any other group provided that it sticks to rationality and refraining from throwing insults and making personal attacks.

SAUDI FOR DUMMIES By Ghassan Kadi 26 November 2013

By Ghassan Kadi
26 November 2013
Rumours are spreading that Saudi Arabia is planning to have nuclear weapons.
For the benefit of those who do not know much about Saudi Arabia, this short and intensive course, “Saudi for Dummies”, might be helpful.
Almost the entire workforce in Saudi Arabia is foreign. Initially the influx of foreign expertise was meant to be of interim nature. It was meant to help develop the country as the sudden financial development fuelled by the oil wealth was not mirrored in peoples’ levels of education and expertise.
In other words, instead of waiting until Saudi Arabia had its own engineers, doctors, craftsmen etc… it imported them and spent billions of dollars on building universities and sending young Saudi men overseas on government-sponsored scholarships. In the meantime, the country was serviced and developed by foreign experts and workers.
A few decades on, little has changed. Saudis refuse to work, full stop. They all want to be big-shot business men. They will take on professions as pilots, engineers, doctors, and they may have titles that present them as the people who make the decisions in the corporate world, but in reality they are just a façade intended to make Saudi Arabia look and feel good. Behind them, stand teams of foreign advisors who do all the designs, calculations, risk management, project management, etc… and all the Saudi “experts” do is to endorse with their signatures and parade in front of journalists as great national heroes.
Saudis also take the most unrealistic and stupid endeavours. They are currently irrigating wheat with desalinized sea water. Their whole objective is to see the kingdom turn green and the desert bloom at any cost. The photo is of such Saudi wheat field comprised of tens of "central pivots", each totally more than 100 Hectares.
Their arrogance leads them to believe that they can buy anything and anyone, and they will always be able to afford to buy any expertise to construct any dream; feasible or otherwise.
When Juheiman Utaibi claimed to be the Mehdi and occupied the Haram (Mecca’s Shrine) back in 1980, the Saudis had to ask the Turkish government for the design of the buildings as they were built by the Ottomans and the Saudis did not have copies of the design. They used mostly Pakistani troops to recapture the shrine, but of course, it was Saudi generals who paraded themselves later as the victors.
The Saudi army may have state-of-the-art arsenal of tanks, fighter jets, you name it, but the big question is, who is manning them?
Furthermore, the average lifespan of a motor vehicle in Saudi Arabia is 2-3 years after which it gets dumped. One wonders, are they applying those same principles to their military hardware?
Cornered, isolated, beaten and angry, Saudi Arabia now wants to raise the bar and decides to have its own nukes.
How can a failed state, a nation that cannot build a house or fix a flat tyre without the use of foreign expertise build an Atom Bomb?
If the Saudis decide to subcontract Pakistan to do the job, how much control will they have on the whole project?
Most importantly, this decision raises two pertinent questions:
1. Will the Saudis not be giving Iran the excuse to build its own? Who will be able to stop Iran from building a nuke if Israel and Saudi Arabia are nuke-ready and poised to strike it?
2. Why is it that the international community did not respond to the Saudi threats of attaining nukes?
Saudi Arabia has got to realize that the international community pays little or no attention to its huffing and puffing, because the international community knows well that Saudi Arabia is a state without any substance, a flame waiting to burn out.
The bottom line is this. Approximately 2 years ago Saudi Arabia (in an alliance with Qatar) convinced the West that it is a regional power and that it was able to get rid of Bashar Al Assad and replace him with a pro-Western puppet regime that served the interests of Saudi Arabia and the West.
The West was so taken by this scenario to the extent that it agreed to foster Islamists and Jihadists, exactly the same people it is fighting now in Afghanistan and Mali. The West took the gamble and the gamble was on the credibility of Saudi Arabia and specifically prince Bandar. It be must remembered that Bandar lived for over 2 decades in America as an ambassador to his country. He has always portrayed himself to the West as being different from the irrational Saudi royals. He gave about himself the image of a Western-educated shrewd and calculated Saudi royal, someone they can rely on as a true partner, unlike the rest of his clan.
Bandar flunked abysmally and has lost his credibility. Saudi Arabia is now getting marginalized and isolated. The Iran deal has been the latest nail in its coffin. Even if Saudi Arabia is able to clinch a deal with Pakistan to buy an existing mail-order nuke within the next few weeks or so, there is nothing it can do which can make it restore its position of a year ago, let alone change the events on the ground in Syria.

YOU AIN'T SEEN NOTHING YET By Ghassan Kadi 1 July 2014

By Ghassan Kadi
1 July 2014
When the war on Syria started over 3 years ago, many people who know the history and the people of the area, and I think I can humbly put myself in this group, made a point to "educate" others about the grave consequences of stirring up the hornet’s nest.
Many people indeed believed that there was an uprising in Syria and a call for reform. There was some of this initially, and I for one, have always acknowledged this. However, I and many others warned people of the grave consequences and how far and wide this volcano can erupt.
Some people understood and heeded the warnings straight away, others took time, and others like Mary Rizzo never did and continue to support this so-called revolution in Syria.
I don’t have a crystal ball, but with all what is now obviously seen in Iraq, let me say it one more time to the remaining cynics…you ain’t seen nothing yet.
Many in the West probably do not know that in the Sunni Muslim World, many are flagging the events in Iraq as a war of liberation and playing down the role of ISIS. To some extent, this is probably true because ISIS is following the same Syria strategy in Iraq. There is quite a bit of anger amongst Iraqi Sunnis against Maliki, and ISIS is using this dissent in order to serve its own agenda; just like it did in Syria. It will initially sponsor the public anger and use it to gain popularity and support, and then once this has been achieved, ISIS will turn against the people who supported it.
The Sunni/Shiite divide is a huge dormant demon that many activists, especially some well-intentioned Western activists, have absolutely no idea at all about .
But again, you ain’t seen nothing yet. This can get a lot worse, especially that the conflict has now reached the soil of Iraq.
Just look at the developing scenarios:
1. Jordan is being threatened, and Israel made subtle comments that it will help Jordan.
2. The Kurds have expanded their territory and have come closer than ever to creating their own independent state.
3. Israel blesses the formation of Kurdish state and will support it and help it see the light.
4. Turkey, Israel’s ally, is headstrong against the establishment of a Kurdish state.
5. As ISIS keeps pushing south in Iraq, it will eventually come in contact with the Shiite region. Sectarian clashes will ensue, and if the Shiites need help, Iran will lend a hand.
6. Whether or not ISIS manages to claim any victory in Southern Iraq, as it has declared the restoration of Islamic Khilafet, it will soon be seeking to control Mecca. It will have to find a corridor into Mecca from Western Iraq/Eastern Jordan.
7. ISIS will also make a push into the West of Arabia, even if it doesn't win over Southern Iraq. It will want to capture the oil fields and topple the Gulf Royals. This is already on ISIS's declared agenda.
8. ISIS will clash with the Saudis, the very people who created it, and Iran may also get dragged into a war with the Saudis in Southern Iraq. This may result in the Saudis fighting Iran on one front and ISIS on another.
9. In Lebanon, the Sunni-Shiite divide will find for itself a huge number of supporters.
Do we need to contemplate more scenarios?
Who can win this at the end? Only governments with stable and national-secular policies and strong armies will be able to stand against the proliferation of such a war. Syria will be tipped to spearhead this resistance. If Maliki manages to hold on to power, he will join Syria and possibly even seek the logistic support of Iran. To foresee that even the Saudis will ask for the help of the Syrian army would not be unrealistic. This will be the "Security Arc" that Sharmine Narwanihas predicted a few months ago and long before the recent developments in Iraq.
If this goes out of hand and ISIS faces no substantial opposition, millions of Sunnis and Shiites will be killed, mostly civilians. Neither side will win, they will eventually stop fighting after realizing that there will be no winners. The Middle East will be left with no Christians. They will be either killed or forced to flee, including the Lebanese Maronites, some of whom were and continue to support the rebels in Syria.
Without effective resistance, ISIS will control the Fertilie Crescent and Arabia, and Israel will find itself surrounded by a fundamentalist monster that it created, and it will all happen because Bush and Blair wanted to topple Saddam and Bandar spearheaded the American Israeli plan to topple Assad.


Note: Written for the membership of the Facebook group "The Syrian Revolution; The Untold Story

The talk about an imminent American strike on the Government of Syria and the people of Syria is ridiculous to say the least.
The word “ridiculous” has been used herein in reference to the use of the term “imminent” or similar strong words in such reports.
This is not to say that an American strike on Syria, its government and people is in the realm of impossibility. As a matter of fact, the history of the last five to six decades proves without any shadow of doubt, that America does not think much before deciding to bomb any country of its choosing, with or without a reason.
However, at best, an American attack on Syria, its government and people, during this particular phase, is only speculation, and analysts making such claims should report them as speculation and not as facts.
One can be a PhD in Political Science without mastering the art of political analysis. Political analysis, just like writing skills, art, sporting prowess etc., is a skill and a talent that can be nurtured and improved. However, it cannot be taught. You can teach someone to sight read and play “Fur Elise” faultlessly, but you cannot teach any person how to be a composer.
In this distinguished group of ours, over the last three years or so, we have seen many sorts of over the top, irrational theories come and go. The story of the alleged “imminent” strike on Syria will be one of those stories, but perhaps not the last.
Political analysis has no real rules and regulations, after all, a lot of it can be biased and underpinned by favouritism and thus using what is meant to be objective and informed pieces of analytical literature as a means of spreading propaganda. Fox News and its protégé Al Jazeera are perfect examples of this category.
Another less vicious form of improper political analysis is one that is based on charged emotions. A political analyst cannot make proper assessments of situations if he or she is allowing his/her passion, fear, pursuit of vengeance, patriotism, political or religious indoctrination and similar mindsets to mask his/her rationality and allowing them to stand in the way of perceiving facts as they are.
This is when strategic thinking comes into play. An army general wants to win a forthcoming battle he is about to enter. His emotions are involved. His political, national, perhaps even religious affiliations are all involved, but for him to win the battle he has to think strategically, with his mind and not with his heart.
A political analyst should not be any different, even if he/she has specific preferences. In this respect, as Syrian patriots and supporters of Syria, its people and its government, we have to think with the mind of that army general going into battle before we put our thoughts on paper.
I have great respect for many of the analysts from the West  who have supported Syria. However, I feel very dismayed, to put it mildly, when I see their followers mirroring their thoughts on this topic in this group with a passion that I hate to admit is quite irrational. Even if we reduce these analysts’ theories to mere speculations, a proper analysis of the situation clearly indicates that those speculations are far from being tenable.
Ironically, in the Arab world, there is no such talk in the media or at the tables of cafes. The only outspoken cynics to this new direction of a possible Syrian-US collaboration, if there is indeed any, is coming from the mouths of Islamists and their supporters who are saying that the truth has finally come out and that Syria, America, Iran and Hezbollah have all along been colluding to wipe out Sunnis and that they are no longer capable of hiding their collusion.

There is absolutely no talk in the Arab world and Arab media about a possible US strike on Syria, its government and its people. Here one has to stop and wonder as to what level of “inside information” those non -Arab alleged experts of the politics of the Levant and region have. Do they believe that eminent Arab journalists, analysts and the like, are unaware or perhaps too incompetent to foresee such a strike and write about it ? or do they think that they have all the information at their fingertips without having to read what their Arab counterparts are saying and, more importantly, what they are not saying? This is indeed arrogance at its worst.

President Obama has said that he doesn’t yet have a strategy to fight ISIS. It is indeed difficult to have such a strategy, especially one that is meant to be effective on the long term. It is possible, and again, I would not say probable or definite, as I not jump to the level of turning my speculations into facts, but, I will say, that it is possible that President Obama has finally woken up to realise that the world has got one billion Muslim youths and that, each and every one of them is a potential ISIS recruit.

Logic implies that any which way America dealt with Islamic Jihadists in the past, up until very recently it had the false impression that it could wield them. When Bandar went to Putin last year he bragged about his ability to turn the Jihadists on and off at will. It didn’t take long after that for Bandar to fall on his sword, showing the rest of the world that he is nothing more than a buffoon and an idiot who is totally unable to have any control on the monster that he helped to create in conjunction with the Americans.

If Obama has suddenly woken up to this and realised that with Bandar out of the picture in that capacity and with the rest of the Saudi royals begging Obama to keep ISIS at bay, then he will have to change strategy and tactics, and do this fast.

In such an event, the last thing on Obama’s mind will be a regime change in Syria.

In politics the shades of grey are the determinant factors, not the black and white. A political analyst should have the knowledge and understand military strategy and human nature and then apply to this common sense. It would seem that those unwritten rules have been compromised in this new craze, sending fear and doubts, especially within this group. This is not a call for censorship, it is a call for reason. Finally, I beg to excuse the repetition, but analysts and their followers who are fearing an American attack on Syria at this point should be responsible enough to say that they are reporting their own speculation and not facts.

A comment from an eminent Syrian is posted below as it adds to the subject.
Thanks Ghassan for this work. Your rational analysis demonstrates the value of indigenous subject matter experts. Not to discount the traditional global analysts, who have a relatively good record in analysing the 'big global picture', and whom we hear/see daily given airtime and/or forums to inform people of their perspective, however, when it comes to the complexities of the Middle East, specially in the Levant, analysts would be viewed as living in a parallel bubble looking into events in the region and seeing chaos that only the affected locals can accurately describe with accuracy and void of emotions.

Most Arab analysts are not captive to either Eastern or Western narratives, rather, they are either Islamist or Secularist. These days, the majority of them are just in awe when it comes to the Syrian crisis and the way Syria behaved throughout with the ISIS-JaN aliance on one hand, and the international community on the other.

A senior Syrian diplomat informed me a couple of days ago (after 2170) that even the Qatari and the Tunisian diplomats are now talking about the correctness of Syria's stance since day one. What does this mean to these observers? Well, the objective among them (and there are many) expect that the US would ultimately be obliged to see it President Assad's way. Seeing that its tired strategy of supporting terror by proxy has failed miserably and has generated more of a threat to its interests and those of its allies than it did Syria.

Finally, I would like to state that the US as a superpower may shoot itself in the foot and make mistakes because of its confrontational foreign policy, but it has enough intelligence and common sense not to shoot itself in the head by going to war against Syria and its many strategic allies such as Russia, China and Iran. That is why the US would complete the U-Turn on Syria, sooner than we think."

WHICH UNTOLD STORY By Ghassan Kadi 31 October 2014

By Ghassan Kadi, 31 October 2014

Introduction: Written for the well-known and respected  Facebook group "The Syrian Revolution; The Untold Story". Ghassan from 2011 until late 2014 wrote specially for the group which comprised of mainly non-Syrians who had joined  to learn about Syria and support her. From 2011 until late 2014  his wife Intibah Kadi had been an administrator of the group.


When the “War On Syria” started, the world media were reporting that there was a revolution in Syria, a revolution that was inspired by the so-called “Arab Spring” seeking reform, democracy and freedom of expression, among other things that the West considers as “hip”. Syrian patriots and their friends knew well from the very beginning that Syria was neither having a revolution nor a civil war. They realized that Syria was under a vicious attack that was targeting its people, secular system, economy, history, infrastructure, and sovereignty with the ultimate purpose of destroying its central role in the Axis of Resistance. That attack was concocted by a myriad of nations and organizations of diverse backgrounds and interests; united only by their hatred to Syria.
That was the untold story then, and it had to be told for the world to hear.
But the untold story of Syria is a dynamic on-going saga that should be retold in accordance with the changes in and within Syria’s enemies.
As the “War On Syria” unfolds and reshapes itself, Syria faces new enemies, and the major new enemy today is the Islamic State (IS). And even though Islamic fundamentalism was one of the original major elements in the Anti-Syrian Cocktail that started the “War On Syria” in 2011, the monster is changing its form and reach. For Syria to win its new/old fight, it would need more than military prowess; it needs updated information strategies.
The turn in the war is due to the fact that “War On Syria” did not proceed in accordance with the plot of the Anti-Syrian Cocktail.
Owing to the great achievements of the gallant Syrian Army, the coalition broke apart by the individual interests of its members, some of whom are now fighting each other. United by hatred, dismantled by individual greed, members of the original Anti-Syrian Cocktail are scrambling, each trying to scavenge a win while he can, if he can. A quick and brief look at the developments of the last three years can clearly reveal at least all of the following:

1. The Qataris and the Saudis are at odds and in a conflict that may escalate.
2. The FSA is now almost non-existent and fighting Al-Nusra and ISIS.
3. The Syrian Army continues to score victories in the Damascus, Hama, and Aleppo Provinces.
4. The Syrian Army continues to fight the Islamic State in Deir Ezzur
5. There is a growing division within the ranks of the Saudi royals
6. There is a world-wide awakening that the Islamic State is a global danger
7. The Americans, British and French are bombing the Islamic State
8. Even the Saudis and Qataris are bombing the Islamic State
9. Turkey is refusing to come to the party of global effort against the Islamic State.
10. There is growing dissent within Saudi Arabia against the royal family and its recent involvement in the war against the Islamic State.
One would wonder what unity is realistically left in this once united coalition.
The obvious strategy behind the American strikes on the oil refineries and other infrastructure that has fallen under the Islamic State is a means to cripple the IS by cutting off its lifeline and supplies that give it independence. The strikes also attempt to coerce the Islamists back into submission. These are the simple and most plausible reasons behind the strikes on IS. However, most of the analyses seem to avoid the obvious and focus on theories that make the Americans appear as acting “according to plan”. This cannot be further from the truth, because reality clearly reveals that nothing has happened according to plan.

With all of the changes and Syria’s achievements, one could argue that the untold story of three years ago has already been told. There is little strategic gain in continuing to retell it in its original form.
The world is now boiling and raging with anti-IS passion. The IS is now seen, worldwide, as a vicious and rather primitive force that is threatening humanity. And whilst no one wishes for more terrorist attacks akin to the recent Ottawa attack, such actions are bolstering the Western Anti-IS resolve and moving public opinion more and more towards confronting it.

Furthermore, if we keep reiterating that the “War On Syria” is all conducted according to a stepwise elaborate plan that is fully orchestrated by the USA and executed to the finest detail by all members of the Anti-Syrian Cocktail, we would be portraying the enemies of Syria as the winners, and clearly they are not. As a matter of fact, the enemies of Syria are neither smart enough to conjure up such a plan nor capable of fulfilling it.
America can neither control nor guarantee what will happen tomorrow; let alone next year or decade. It is ridden with huge economic crises, decaying infra-structure, failed foreign policies and wars; among other serious problems.
This is a rather golden opportunity for Syria friends to use in order to put a concerted effort on portraying the true image of Syria as THE state that has been and continues fight terrorism for nearly four years. A proper pro-Syrian propaganda campaign can even rightfully make the proclamation that Syria’s war with the Islamists is 40 years old, thereby making Syria the forefront expert of dealing with this mode of terrorism. In reality however, little is done in this regard and the message is definitely not reaching the globe.
In this respect, telling the new untold story to the English-speaking world should now be a much easier job than the one that English-speaking Syrian support groups embarked upon some three years ago. Three years ago Syria’s untold story had very little in common with the general knowledge and interests of Westerners, and yet, members of such groups worked relentlessly and successfully managed to rally up a great deal of awareness and support for Syria.
Three years ago, I humbly embarked on this journey of telling this untold story and I was privileged to join the ranks of many much more informed and intelligent people than myself. I now feel that this narrative has run its course and that it is time to move on. I have done my utmost to reason with some old comrades, but it is obvious that they do not recognise the change. It is time for me to move on and leave this group and bid it farewell.
Chapter Two of the untold story is upon us. The world seems ready to listen. It is up to us to choose to do the telling of the new story, and this is what I intend to do with a lot of help from my old and new friends.



By Ghassan Kadi
6 February 2016