Almustaqbal Bends The Truth

The one thing I hate more than defending a mass murdering dictator is a newspaper that misquotes a respectable magazine for its own propaganda purposes.

On its first page today, Almustaqbal screamed:
“The Economist: Assad asks for Hariri Tribunal to stop”

First, how come they suddenly woke up to this article, which was written more than ten days ago?

Second, their quote is grossly deceptive. The Economist was speculating on the hush-hush visit of Nigel Sheinwald, a top British diplomat to Syria, and in the course of their speculative analysis, they were estimating what Assad demands COULD be.

For the purpose of clarity and because the article is premium content, I will once again abuse my subscription and paste the article in question below:
===================================

Syria

Sir Nigel goes fishing

Nov 2nd 2006
From The Economist print edition

Baathist dictator makes new friend

WOULDN’T it be neat if the West could somehow peel Syria away from its anti-American alliance with Iran and so help to stabilise Lebanon, calm Israel’s relations with the Palestinians and cut off some of the supply routes for Iraq’s foreign jihadists? That, presumably, was the reason why Tony Blair, Britain’s prime minister, sent a senior adviser, Sir Nigel Sheinwald, to Damascus this week for a meeting with the Syrian president, Bashar Assad.

There is only one fly in this plan’s ointment: Bashar Assad. Syria’s president may be less cunning and murderous than his late father, Hafez, but he is nobody’s pushover. Less than two years ago he looked weak and susceptible to pressure. Many people assumed that he ordered the killing of Lebanon’s former prime minister, Rafik Hariri, in February 2005. That prompted a UN inquiry and a popular storm in Lebanon that forced Syria’s army into a humiliating withdrawal. There was loose talk in Washington about making his the second Baathist regime to be toppled by America. And it was assumed that Mr Assad knew that in any military clash with Israel Syria would be swiftly routed.

Now all has changed. This summer has seen rising American fatigue in Iraq, a war in which Hizbullah, Syria’s protégé, made Israel look weak, and the tightening control of Damascus-based Palestinians over the Hamas government in the West Bank and Gaza. Iran, far from being cowed by American threats, is in a bumptious mood. Sir Nigel would have had to take some very tempting morsels to Damascus in order to entice Mr Assad out of Iran’s orbit.

Mr Assad would like the UN to stop investigating Syria’s role in the Hariri assassination, a guarantee that America will not try to undermine his regime, a return of Syria’s influence in Lebanon and the return of the Golan Heights, which Israel captured in 1967. Sir Nigel, a talented diplomat, is tipped to become Britain’s next ambassador to the United States. But it is hardly in his gift to proffer any of these enticements — unless, of course, this was a fishing trip conducted at America’s behest.

Mr Assad is not popular in the White House. But some in the State Department think the West has much to gain in Lebanon, Iraq and Palestine by splitting Damascus from Tehran. Both America and Israel knew in advance about Sir Nigel’s expedition — and it was the British, remember, who talked round Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi. Watch this space.