Post 170: Don't Call the Trans-Senator a Spy Again - 5.4.2026
- charitycolleencrouse
- May 4
- 5 min read
Updated: May 19
Yes...in this case "going British" is treason.
__________________________________________
Regarding interview with Abu Mohammed Al-Jolani (Ahmed Al-Sharaa) - 12.20.2024
It’s the BBC. I can read the subtitles into English translation. I understand these are BBC subtitles and not youtube subtitles?
1:43: Is says, “in the People’s Assemblies and the House of Representatives.” This “implies” a bicameral legislature (which is consistent with Syrian Constitutional history) but does not imply an “upper house” and “lower house” – it implies a distinction in terms of the functions of the respective houses.
[9:33 am CST – See right here at the library, “How the West Stole Democracy From the Arabs: The Syrian Arab Congress of 1920 and the Destruction of Its Historic Liberal-Islamic Alliance” by Elizabeth F. Thompson. See Appendix A and Appendix B in their own words. See Appendix C. I have read the first two but not yet completely read the third. See pps. 9 and 10 of the photographs for a photograph of the “Declaration of Independence” printed in May 1920 and a July 1919 draft of the Syrian Constitution.]
[2:12 and 2:35 – See Appendix A.]
2:37 to 3:03 (I am not the man who is being interviewed. But I cannot abide the reporter’s questions. I don’t want to watch the rest of the interview because I feel it is insulting to the Syrian People.) Would not it have been more prudent insofar as an attempt at a comparison with Afghanistan be considered, and in light of what he has put forth with what he has said already, it be asked if this is an effort to revisit the same or a distinct form of Pan-Arabism that would not involve the Assad regime and/or correct for the other concerns that had previously been invoked that were detracted from in the subsequent rise of the Assad regime?
See without positing it this way, there is a major problem with “accounting.”
Is it the job of a journalist – including one working for an official or semi-official state news agency – to obtain interviews with political leaders that put them on the record to hold to promises or commitments that made during the interview? THAT would not be “intelligence.” Would it be “security?” For both…because I do not want to “spend time” on watching Al-Sharaa’s time be wasted accounting for someone else’s concerns.
However…
3:39 - 3:43 – “...culture…” Is that an “evasion” of the political question? Was it a “political question” to begin with?
“Education, tolerance, drinking…”
What is the women’s delegation from the King-Crane Commission? Were they talking about “tolerance and drinking?”
Does it make a difference? Was not Crane British?
No. He was American. (ACRNE)
Is there a manner in which to compare the governments of the United States with the process ongoing in Syria?
Would not now be the time to ask?
So by 4:50 are you asking him if among those 60 percent enrollments there are going to be women on the legal committee and/or the Constitutional Drafting Committee?
Were there not already several efforts at a Constitutional Convention? Were not women included in those convention activities? Is this process going to be continued acknowledgement or is a “new” constitutional process going to be undertaken?
5:03 – Oh dear… “hijab…”
See the picture on p. 340 in Appendix A. There is a major portion of a chapter that describes this.
6:20 - Did you ever read the story about Barbara Walters and Arafat’s kefiya?
6:22 - Is he married? Is he unmarried? Are there concerns about persons who are or are not married and the contexts of considerations of the acclimation – materially and socio-spiritually – based upon their marital status and the conditions of their return?
I contend there is a reasonable expectation that the BBC would send an interviewer who would meet Standard 1.1. I contend there is a legitimate argument to be made that this interview does not meet standard 1.1 of the BBC’s Editorial Standards.
“This sanctions regime is aimed at encouraging the government of Syria to:
refrain from actions, policies or activities which repress the civilian population in Syria
participate in negotiations in good faith to reach a negotiated political settlement to bring about a peaceful solution to the conflict in Syria
“
Because he brought up the subject of sanctions, I contend it is reasonable that he would understand certain conditions. Is the reporter himself in violation of the sanctions? Does he provide an interview that demonstrates he is aware that he is speaking to someone under sanctions? Is he “negotiating” on behalf of or in the interest of the United Kingdom?
See here:
There is a significantly higher rate for persons seeking asylum from Syria (and Eritrea) than other countries. Why is that?
What is their contribution to the society of the United Kingdom? Are they required to wear hijab before being photographed with men who may be campaigning or organizing or providing audience or assistance in their communities? What about their education? What sort of political organs are available to them; what form of diplomacy are they being prepared to engage in this transition; what is to be their role in the legal and constitutional processes?
This says Sept. 9, 2024:
What is that in relationship to the regime’s demands regarding “Return” to Syria of refugees or persons displaced by the war in order to maintain their claim on their home? According to “United Kingdom” standards…Did the United Kingdom acknowledge that alleged “legal claim” by the Assad regime? Do they intend to provide legal support to “asylum seekers” that wish to return to their properties and have been until this time prevented from so doing? Are they permitted to obtain financing from financial institutions of the United Kingdom for their reconstruction or other investment in the country? As “citizens” of the United Kingdom or as restituted and reparated citizens of Syria?
According to this:
They say:
“While the Community Sponsorship Scheme will help resettle the 20,000 Syrian refugees promised by 2020, it will not increase the quota.xx”
Read the paragraph in which this is included. The item above says 30,000…what of the other 10,000?
The above is from 2018 – before COVID. Did they make any changes as a result of COVID?
How many “asylum seekers” from Syria in the United Kingdom have been provided with a “COVID vaccine?” Is the United Kingdom willing to provide the necessary support to Syria in assisting with safely reparating and aiding the return of Syrians, including in connection with the contexts of their vaccination and other attendant matters pertaining to their physical health?
Because the next question is – who are the providers of COVID vaccines for the United Kingdom? Which vaccines are administered to whom? What is the product information on these vaccines and any follow-up requirements? What were the full costs per vaccines and how were they billed? Are they considered paid at this time? In the event of return to Syria under what terms does the United Kingdom expect or anticipate consideration of its provisions of “medical treatment” for those who were granted asylum and in what duration?
Now…how long did that take?
It’s 10:21 am CST…I am 9:19 into a 31:04 interview…
That’s 68 minutes.
I will stop here now.
10:22 am CST
Dec. 20, 2024
Co-President Charity Colleen “Lovejoy” Crouse
_________________________________
Can you tell the difference today between the "murdered jewish woman" and the "murdered Irish-American transman?"
Why didn't you JUST ASK?
3:49 pm CST
May 4, 2026
CCC - "append child here"
_______________________________
"9:42 am CST
May 19, 2026
Co-President Charity Colleen "Lovejoy" Crouse
"Mike" you were not allowed to "lynch" him and "James" was not allowed to back you up.
Your "mother" was not allowed to be "treated" that way.
You lost. You got the wrong "Mary" involved.
9:45 am CST
May 19, 2026
Co-President Charity Colleen "Lovejoy" Crouse
Comments