[Marxism] This memo is being circulated online from Wikileaks re: Syria and ousting Assad.

Patrick Bond pbond at mail.ngo.za
Sat Jan 12 00:03:28 MST 2019


On 2019/01/12 6:09 AM, Stephen Shalom via Marxism wrote:
> ... Mintpress writer Whitney Webb has quoted from this document multiple times
> Sept 2018
> https://www.mintpressnews.com/new-russian-s-300-air-defense-system-to-make-syria-untouchable-but-israel-seems-ready-to-test-it/249774/,
> Feb. 2018
> https://www.mintpressnews.com/israel-preps-for-syrian-war-with-golans-oil-and-water-in-its-sights/237566/,
> and Sept. 2017
> https://www.mintpressnews.com/why-conflict-syria-was-always-israels-war/231532/
> implying but not explicitly saying it was written by Clinton.
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 9:24 PM mkaradjis via Marxism <
> marxism at lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:
> The article in the conspiracist tabloid Mintpress begins by saying that
> this Wikileaks "Clinton email" "has not gotten the attention it deserves."
> Small wonder, since anybody seriously interested at the time it was
> published would have done about 10 minutes research and found it wasn't an
> email by Clinton, but an email to Clinton, like 1000s of emails with policy
> suggestions and advice that circulate each year, the overwhelming majority
> of which wind up in obscurity or the trash.

Comrades, on this general point of whether material on Wikileaks is 
reliable, surely we start with that presumption?

On the general point of whether a U.S. State Department cable or email 
that Assange has opened up for the world to see is valuable, surely this 
is one of the great windows into contemporary imperialism? I use the 
State Dept cables and emails occasionally and encourage others in 
academia and anti-imperial activism to, as well (for some reason, most 
social scientists get squeamish and ignore Wikileaks as a source, as 
Assange has pointed out). We should all be enormously grateful to 
Wikileaks, via first Chelsea Manning and then second, whomever in 2016 
hacked the Clinton emails.

On the specific question of how to interpret a given State Department 
cable or email, this one on Syria looks quite frank and plausible. But 
sure, if there were competing interpretations from other forces within 
State, the Pentagon or Presidency, then please enlighten us.

I'm an opponent of conspiracy theory, just as much as you other 
structural Marxists. But are there ways to handle bits and pieces of 
evidence that would fit this kind of memo into some sort of bigger 
picture, rather than cast doubt on it?





More information about the Marxism mailing list