Russia backs the US' plan to destroy the chemical warheads

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_12_10/Mutual-understanding-on-destroying-Syrian-chemical-weapons-at-sea-reached-Russia-diplomat-0127/

This article continues my last blog about the US' plan to use the FDHS on a naval ship to destroy the weapons. The plan was proposed to the UN. Its main issue was getting the support of Russia. The article is short, but extremely vital in reported that Russia does indeed support the US' plan to destroy the weapons. ""In this case, high hopes are on our US partners. They have a specially equipped vessel to implement such a task," Bogdanov said." This is a direct quote from Russia's Foreign Prime Minister. This issue begins to show more of the continued cooperation between the world to face such a heinous act of destruction. Oddly, in research, I have found Albania does not back the US' plan, but is honestly being mostly ignored by much larger nations of the security council. 

Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_12_10/Mutual-understanding-on-destroying-Syrian-chemical-weapons-at-sea-reached-Russia-diplomat-0127/

Obama/Syria Cartoon

This is a political cartoon from the US News online. I was searching through political cartoons to post and I thought this one was simple, but still comical. Obama has made multiple comments about Syria, but often has a confusing stance on it. He claimed before that military action WOULD be taking place, and then later said that he would try to get approval for military action. He made statements about what he wanted to take place, and then stood behind Putin and said that we are following his Syria plan. It is confusing when a country has a president that has made contradictory and confusing comments about something that much of the country has taken an interest in.

US plans for destroying chemical weapons

http://rt.com/usa/us-destroy-chemical-weapons-498/

This article outlines the basics of the US' plan to destroy Syria's chemical weapon stash. The crux of the plan is to deploy the US' new technology that known as the Field Deployable Hydrolysis System (FDHS). It is a 15 man operated system that can neutralize 25 metric tons of chemicals into a non-usable state each day. This system has not yet been deployed in any real situation though and has only been used under controlled environments. The plan is to equip a large US naval ship with this system, load it with all chemical warheads found and neutralize them in international waters. A very large issue with this is retrieving the weapons and warheads themselves. The US only has one month left to meet its deadline of neutralizing the deadliest of the weapons such as mustard gas and sarin. This presents issues of involvement. The US currently is relying mainly on Syrian rebel forces to create access to the weapons and allow UN inspectors to find them and begin transporting them to the US ship. It may seem that the US is, once again, overstepping its bounds in foreign policy, however I believe it to be an extremely important issue to become involved in with the mass destructive capability of these chemical warheads. I also believe it is the US responsibility as one of the security council members of the UN to enforce such a violation of the Geneva Accords.

Whos responsible?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/9/obama-lied-about-syrian-chemical-attack-cherry-pic/

For so long now, we have been told that we may never know who exactly is behind the chemical attacks and more so the reasoning behind it; but this article is rather opposite. Researches have been putting in countless hours trying to track this attack backwards and find the person responsible and just today the Washington Times came out saying they are getting closer to that answer. This is probably top ranking news with this event. The article mentioned that Syrian President Bashar Assad is at the top of the list; although not far behind him is an al Qaeda linked group and the al-Nusra Front are also being further looked into. If and when this information is figured out it will, one be a sigh of relief to finally know the answer to a longing question, but two  interesting to see their answers to the endless why questions they will receive.

European Citizens fighting in Syria

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/eu-security-officials-note-increased-flow-of-fighters-to-syrias-civil-war/2013/12/05/5226dbd6-5de2-11e3-8d24-31c016b976b2_story.html

This article described that E.U. security officials are noting a much higher increase flow of E.U. citizens to Syria. The exact intention of these people is not known, however, the article takes a heavy stand that it must be for nothing else aside from terrorism. It states that the officials believe these citizens are leaving to fight in the war along side Al-qaeda and other extremist groups. This seems to be quite the assumption. First it must be determined whether the rebels in Syria are indeed "rebels" and "terrorists" or the more honoring "freedom fighter". I feel that this article is horrendously biased in automatically assuming almost everyone going to Syria during the war has terroristic intentions and that they may even return to the E.U. with those same intentions. The article is quick to demonize those fighting in Syria against al-Assad's dictatorship and possible chemical weapon attack. The article ends with "The Interior Minister of the German state of Hesse, Boris Rhein, this week proposed a nationwide hotline and network of counseling centers to try to combat radicalization. He said a new government-sponsored study in Hesse had found that jihadist recruiters had begun to systematically target students." It's an odd note to end at, leaving the reader with more presumptions of complete terrorist motivations. 

Chemical weapons munitions destroyed

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/12/06/all-syrian-chemical-weapons-munitions-destroyed/3892017/

I found this article interesting because it is the U.S.'s perspective on the Syrian civil war and the chemical attacks on Damascus. The article states that Syria has already begun to destroy a lot of its munitions about 63% this is pretty substantial number and it is the first I have heard about this. Also, I found it interesting that the Syrian government is being so cooperative is because they want to 'ward off any possible U.S. military strikes.' And yet I have read in other articles that war was not on the table and this article was written two days ago, so the information is resent. I am happy that the chemical weapons are being destroyed I can only hope that the waste is properly disposed of after the chemicals are neutralized.

Birth of another war?

http://www.usnews.com/cartoons/syria-cartoons

This comic is showing the past wars we have had Afghanistan and Iraq and next could be Syria. We could be giving birth to another war and that "angle" could be Syria. Any way we look at it war could still happen even though the chemical weapons are being taken out of Syria. We have our eyes set on Syria and will not take them off. Mostly because of oil its possible that the colors of her two boys shirts represents oil they are "oil black" and she has red and blue for the U.S. or in this case the "mother of U.S. wars. They also show the death that occurred in both of those countries. The black hair and eyes are very representative of the darkness that occurred in Afghanistan and Iraq. The skull, the TNT and the knives with blood on them all clear indication of death and destruction. It also shows how we believe we are a great super power that we are but we have already have given birth to two other wars and now yet another possible "child" of war. The other comics on this site are all great they tell about Obama, Putin and Syrian Policy/Foreign Policy.

KWL

http://world.time.com/2013/08/22/the-known-knowns-and-known-unknowns-of-a-chemical-attack-in-syria/


While reading this article all I could think about was how Mother Agnes would agree with some of the statements made. By the end of the article I felt as if I had enough information to fill in a whole KWL chart, but with what is known to be true, what we think is true, and what is actually true. The article starts by saying the attacks may not have been targeted towards anyone that the chemicals can effect people different ways depending on different factors such as health and age. This reminded me of Mother Agnes' few of the kids not really being dead. Which goes along with the sub topic in the article of number of deaths, it mentioned how they have from 100- 1400 people on a death list but are not doing cross checking with names so it is unclear if that number is right or not. When I read that small section I was shocked, how do you not know the exact number of people killed, I feel like that should be something closely looked at.

whats going on today?

http://www.nationaljournal.com/defense/how-the-u-s-will-dispose-of-syria-s-chemical-weapons-20131203


I thought that since we had articles giving some general information about the attacks and some history on the civil war it only made sense to see what was going on now with the chemicals weapons in Syria; and after searching around a little I found this article that tied them all together. Being only published three days ago it has some of the newest information not only about what is going to happen in Syria with the chemical weapons, but also the United States involvement in that. After reading all the other post about what has been going on in Syria, I finally understood what all the craziness was and is about, so I was so happy to read at the start of the article that al-Assad said he would get rid of all the chemical weapons in Syria. The article gives you a basic understanding of how they are planning on carrying out this very dangerous and expensive plan.

The Write up!!!

For the reflective write up I would like each of you to analyze what happened within the blog as a whole. This analysis should include 2-4 ‘themes’ or ‘categories’--preferably, though not necessarily exclusively, themes from class. Trace your chosen themes through the posts on the blog. You can quote from the posts, or the media itself, but please cite it in the paper. Please discuss posts that are not just your own! Using comments as well as primary posts to support your themes is encouraged. In many ways I picture this project as a research paper without the final product. What I mean by this is that online you are discovering and interrogating sources—analyzing them as raw pieces of data. In this written (and more formal) portion, I want you to create/impose order on the chaos that is data collection. This write up is just the analysis or discussion portion of a ‘normal’ paper, with some ‘conclusionary’ remarks for good measure. This essay may include personal observations and will definitely show what you thought most interesting. The essays should be between 3-5pages long and are due on BB by 5pm on December 16, 2013 (our final period). If you need some help likely categories might include geopolitics, individual perspectives, Al-Jazeera vs BBC, how the US is involved, role of oil, regime change..... These are *just examples* you do NOT need to use these!!! I wanted to give you some clues as to the possibilities so it would be easier to see the themes for yourselves.

political cartoon

I find this cartoon to be both very interesting and also telling of peoples reactions when it came to the use of Chemical Weapons. This cartoon is trying to depict the fact that many people ignored what was going on in Syria leading up to these attacks. Once the term chemical weapons was used the issues in Syria gained a lot more awareness that they didnt previously have. I think this goes for many events that happen in the world. There are often many things that lead up to these big attacks and these things are the things that often go unnoticed. This political cartoon was posted on the website oatmeal.Com which post a number of political cartoons. This political cartoon was also found on a blog which included the reactions of many people. I believe this cartoon was drawn towards the western world to show how they react to middle eastern events. Do you think that Americans react this way when it come chemical weapons and other extreme weapon use?

aljazeera article

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/08/2013827531476414.html

I found this article particular interesting because it shows another view on the attacks and the United States Response to the Attacks. This article was written and posted on the Aljazeera website and its target audience are people that aren't American, and might not know to much about American policy. This article is saying That Kerry is blaming the attacks on Damascus and the people of Damascus. They used a direct quote to show what they believed. I dont think Kerry was attacking the city of Damascus itself, but so attacking the fact the Syrian regime wasn't cooperating with the UN investigation. He also was attacking the claims that the event may have been frabacated. It was also interesting to read the comments left on this article from individuals from multiple countries and see their take on the situation. Many believed that Syria should be left alone to handle its own problems without outside intervention. Do you think Kerry was blaming Damascus for the attacks?

Third Post!

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/directory/c/chemical_attack.asp

I found really interesting cartoons that are related to chemical attack in this website.I think these cartoons show how human beings are believing what they see on TV and how media hides the truth from people.Some of the other cartoons on here show how media comes up with different stories related to attacking so they could grab peoples attention.I hope you guys like this website. You'll see more of these cartoons If you click on "more cartoons" option at the bottom of the page.

Syrian civil war from the beginning

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DowaIjF5iE0

This video takes a look at why the civil war started and what has been done since the beginning.  I though it would be good to put on the blog to give a good over all perspective on the civil war. As i was looking through videos on chemical attacks in Syria I found this one on why the civil started in the first place. I kinda knew why but not the whole story about the who, what, why, when and how. After watching the video I have a better understanding on the events that happened to begin the civil war. Once protest started for and against the new President, security forces opened fire on the protesters. Some of these videos did reach the West. But could not be verified as authentic. The governments military tried to force the protesters to stop by using brute force on the places that they did not yet control. This raises a question if the government had a history of trying to take back control by using brute force, is it then also possibile that they would try and use any means necessary to take back control? Even going so far as releasing chemical weapons on civilians? Once the chemical attacks began fingers immediately where pointed at each other. The government at the insurgents and the insurgents to the government. Another question is raised why would insurgents attack civilians? To me it does not make much sense wouldn't they attack the government and military facilities not civilian people?    

Different View on the Attacks

http://www.globalresearch.ca/mother-agnes-mariam-footage-of-chemical-attack-in-syria-is-fraud/5348939

In the previous article that I posted, it mentioned a woman by the name of Mother Agnes Mariam who has very strong views toward the media's representation of the chemical attacks in Syria. She lives in Syria, not far from where the attacks took place and gives her opinion about how she thinks the media has misinformed viewers about the attacks. She does not believe that the footage shown is actually of those who were hurt in the attacks. It is an extremely interesting interview and I watched a couple of other interviews that you can find online if you search her name if you are interested in a different view than most sites represent. It is interesting to see where her ideas come from and how she thinks the media has shown the attacks in order to portray them as an attack by the Syrian government.

Second Post!

http://abcnews.go.com/International/t/story/us-offers-destroy-syrian-chemical-weapons-21056179?ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Furl%3Fsa%3Dt%26rct%3Dj%26q%3Dchemical%2520attack%2520in%2520syria%26source%3Dweb%26cd%3D1%26sqi%3D2%26ved%3D0CCsQqQIwAA%26url%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fabcnews.go.com%252FInternational%252FwireStory%252Fus-offers-destroy-syrian-chemical-weapons-21056179%26ei%3DGJCaUqDlLOTgsATsxYDQCQ%26usg%3DAFQjCNFCpT9_JrZhpwJ4J9mlIfR5r4vwOw%26bvm%3Dbv.57155469%2Cd.cGU


I first saw this article on twitter and thought that I should share it on here too.According to this article US and Russia are providing help to clean out the chemical weapons from Syria.I am very happy to hear that the weapons are being destroyed finally. Thank god that finally something good happens. I am beyond happy right now.If countries don't stand together and help these poor children, then what hope do they have right??

Syria's neighbors on their civil war

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/11/20121112193038751565.html

I chose this article because it gives the perspective from the countries neighboring Syria and how they are being affected by the Syrian civil war. I though that this would be good for the blog to show that the civil war in Syria is affecting a lot of people and countries. Turkey, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq are all being affected in some way because of the civil war in Syria. Iraq has been directly involved Sunni and Shia fighters have been joining the Syrian civil war which i found very interesting. Sunni are for the opposition and Shia siding with al-Assad's regime. Israel was the second country that has fired its own weapons on a Syrian armored vehicle because shells from Syria exploded in Israel occupied Golan Heights. The location of Syria and how instance the civil wars is is putting the countries around Syria at great risk of all at war with each other.

General Information About the Attacks

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23927399

I figured since this is only the third post on the blog that it would be a good idea to put in a little bit more general information about the attacks. Some people probably do not know the background information about the Chemical Attacks so I wanted to include something like that. This is something that I read a while ago regarding the attacks when I still knew very little about the happenings in Syria. This article is great because it attempts to be unbiased, but is definitely trying to get the reader to think that the Syrian government was behind the attack, although there is no definite way of knowing who was behind the attacks. The author puts a lot of things in quotation marks like "definitive evidence" which I liked because it makes the reader think more and realize that the things some articles will claim is definitive evidence and fact is actually just speculation. 

Article I found interesting about Chemical attacks in Damascus

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303914304579194203188283242


I wanted to post this link, because while reading it I learned somethings about the chemical attack in Damascus that I didnt know before. This is an article published by the Wall Street Journal outlining the actions that took place prior to the attack. It tells of the miscalculations by the Syrian regime as well as opposition groups and the United States government. After reading the article I raise the question of if this could have prevented of the death toll significantly lessoned if calculations were correct. If more antidotes were received on time would the attack have gone completely differently? I believe this arguments were written for people like me who had no idea about the research that was being done prior to the attacks. This article is written by writers who have done extensive work and have many other  articles about Syria.

First post!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oGNT3f02XsE

I wanted share this video with my group because I think it shows a better understanding of what is really going on in Syria.  I have seen the news channels talking about the chemical attack in Damascus before but I was never able to put the pieces together to understand the true story behind it.  However, after watching this video on YouTube, I can now picture wha has been going on and how people are reacting to it.  According to this video nobody has accurate information from the attacking and this makes people very confuse and upset.  It was kind of hard to watch the video because we all love kids and my heart goes out to anyone who is out there in this situation.  But this video makes me think that; “What if they are not dead? What if they are pretending to be dead?  But I don’t think people should only blame Obama because, what are we supposed to do as a country?? I don’t think, United States should stand for this alone because it needs to be a collaborated effort by the international community!! We cannot allow this happen to children no matter where in the world!!But my group can judge what they see with their own eyes by watching this video because nobody has accurate information. However, this is a bad situation but people are not going to know how to react without knowing to true story behind it!!

Project Outline and Timeline

In this online blog project you are being asked to search the web for information related to the chemical attack on civilians that happened in the summer of 2013 as a part of the Syrian civil war. I would like you to look at sources of media surrounding this particular instance of violence in Syria (before, during and after) to see how the country, combatants, 'the Middle East', human rights, democracy, etc were being portrayed. What can we learn about the place of Syria from this differing coverage of the attack and its outcomes? What can we learn about those who are writing about the countries from this coverage? In other words, how is media-even global media-place based? You will need to do 3 posts over 3 weeks. You can chose to structure your posts chronologically, or regionally, or just jump into whatever aspect excites you the most--this is YOUR blog. Timeline 11/14-12/05 post to the blog (original posts and responses) by 12/07 all posting and replies end 12/16 turn in write-up

The Directions

One of the themes of this course is how do we learn about other places, and particularly places in the Middle East. In this blog you will be discussing the coverage of, assumptions about, and [expected] outcomes of the chemical attack of civilians near Damascus in the summer of 2013. What can we learn about Syria? The combatants? The civilians caught in the middle? About geopolitics? Chemical weapons? And of course how our geographic imaginations of Syria are shaped by what is said about it in the wide world of media Here is what I will be looking for in your online participation: Regular participation!– I expect you to contribute your thoughts to your groups’ blog regularly throughout the 9 days of the project. Don’t just drop in once or twice and expect a good grade. You are expected at a minimum to upload 3 items (with a discussion of what you see) and respond to at least 3 posts by your groupmates. This level of participation, if done well, can earn you a B, but more is needed for that coveted A. Interesting and diverse postings—are you only looking at CNN? Not that CNN is wrong, their articles should be on the blog too, but try also looking farther afield. This could be news sources from around the world, or different types of media (cartoons, Youtube, mashups, flickr, etc) Depth of reflection and analysis– once you have found an item to share with the group, don't just state an opinion and stop, develop your ideas, show why you view the item the way you do. Don’t be afraid to share experiences where relevant, but always keep your tone and content respectful; A willingness to examine your own assumptions –the best way for YOU to get credit for examining your assumptions is if others (graciously and respectfully) point out the assumptions you are making. Thus don’t be afraid to disagree with each other. Or even if you do agree, can you find a source that wouldn’t? What are the assumptions that separate the two? Direct references to reading material when called for. Here is what to avoid: 1. Attacking another point of view or person; disagreeing is fine, but be respectful and give your reasons, simple yes or no responses; 2. Long winded responses in most cases a few well developed paragraphs should do, 3. Late responses be sure to participate in the dialogs during the time period in which the topic is up for discussion.

What to do

For every post, you will need to complete one of two following types of tasks keeping in mind the directions above. TASK ONE - ORIGINAL THOUGHTS, ORIGINAL POSTS The first task is to create at least three new threads (starting messages) over the project timeframe that pose significantly different points than those already offered. This is where you upload or post your media source and your original analysis of it. These must be completed by April 15th in order for your peers to have an opportunity to reply back to your ideas. It will be to your benefit to contribute your first thought early (to avoid having to read all other messages in order to see what points have not yet been made). TASK TWO - CARRYING AN IDEA FARTHER The second task is to make at least three new replies to blog threads started by other members of your group. The responses to others can answer questions posed, amplify and support points (with evidence and observations), or question and pose counter-arguments to points made by others (with evidence and observations). You can make your replies in text alone or add media your replies. These responses can diverge, reflect or support other statements already offered. However, each contribution must offer significant additional information (i.e. -- an "I Agree!" message will not earn points). When you are presenting any media, fact, or statements that state a conclusion, you are responsible for properly citing your sources so that the statements can be verified or clarified. This is particularly important with the media—let us see it, even if you just upload a picture from a news story include the link so that we can follow it back and see the image in its original context. You can link this information to the title of your post and/or list it in the "List of our Sources" widget at the bottom of the page. If you are using yourself and your personal experience as the source, then you must make this obvious, such as "based upon what (Iranian) friend's father told me, the city of Tehran is full of coffee shops where people talk about politics. This helps explain this sentence in my article_________." Or "After my mom explained how she felt when the American hostages were taken, this __________ sentiment made more sense to me." You are encouraged to bring your personal experiences into the discussions. The purpose of discussions within the course is to share experiences and backgrounds, as well as perceptions and ideas, so that we can learn in a peer-to-peer manner. Please realize that my role as the instructor is to monitor the discussions but I will generally refrain from participating unless the conversation needs guidance into another direction. Comments to the class will reflect the entirety of the discussions observed and your grade will be based on your successful completion of the requirements (specified above).

Questions to consider when looking at media sources

Some questions that you may wish to consider as you look at the various texts include: a) What are the primary concerns of each author as revealed in the representation/text? b) Who or what are the author’s sources? How did he/she obtain the information? c) For whom is the author writing and how does this affect the themes discussed and the overall presentation? d) What is the general impression given? Can you identify a master metaphor? e) What kinds of details are given, what details are excluded, and why? f) Are the various representations consistent with one another? If not, why not? g) How has the representation of this place evolved over time?

Code of Conduct: The Rules

You are expected to treat your instructor and all other participants on the blog with courtesy and respect. Your comments to others should be factual, constructive, and free from harassing statements. You are encouraged to disagree with other students, but such disagreements need to be based upon facts and documentation (rather than prejudices and personalities). Students will need to contribute in intelligent, positive, and constructive manners within the activity. Unprofessional or disrespectful conduct will result in a lower grade for this assignment. Behaviors that are abusive, disruptive, or harassing will result in being denied further access to the blog and may result in further disciplinary actions. Warnings will not be given; part of the learning process in this course is respectful engagement of ideas with others.

Media to consider (links on BB)

Partial list of resources (includes only Internet-searchable resources) General World newspapers (sources list) Local media around the world (sources list) Arab Net TradeArabia.com Om al-Dunya (Arabic and English) Country by country profiles Commentaries Café Arabica Mid East Web (Multilingual Israeli site) Arabia.com Selected institutions Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies L’Institut du Monde Arabe (Paris) Khalil Sakakini Cultural center (Palestine) Newspapers and news sources Regional Al-Jazeera (English) As-Sharq al-Awsat (Arabic) Arabic News (English) Middle East Online (Arabic & English) Al-Hayat (Arabic) Dar al-Hayat (English) Algeria Al-Khabar (Arabic) El-Moujahid (French) El-Watan (French) Al-Youm (Arabic) Horizons (French) La Liberté (French) Le Matin (French) La Nouvelle République (French) Bahrain Al-Ayyam (Arabic) Gulf Daily News (English) Bahrain Tribune (English) Akhbar al-Khaleej (Arabic) Djibouti La nation (French) Egypt Al-Ahram (Arabic) Al-Ahram Weekly (English) Akhbar al-‘Ummal (Arabic) Al-Gumhuriyyah (Arabic) Al-Wafd (Arabic) Middle East Times (English) Al-Ahali (Arabic) Cairo Times (English) Al-Masa’ (Arabic) Ash-Sha’b (Arabic) Iraq Electronic Iraq (English) Iraq Press (English & Arabic) Iraq Today (English) Baghdad Bulletin (English) BBC Iraq (English) Institute for War and Peace Reporting (English) Kurdish Media (English) Kurdistan Democratic Party (English) Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (English) Jordan Jordan Times (English) Ad-Dustur (Arabic) Al-Ra’y (Arabic) The Star (English) Kuwait Al-Rai’ al-Aam (Arabic) Al-Watan (Arabic) Kuwait Daily (English) Lebanon The Daily Star (English) As-Safir (Arabic) Al-Anwar (Arabic) Al-Liwa’ (Arabic) An-Nahar (Arabic) Al-Mustaqbal (Arabic) L’Orient le jour (French) Libya Al-Fajr al-Jadeed (English) Al-Fajr al-Jadeed (Arabic) Al-Fateh (Arabic) Al-Jamahiriyyah (Arabic) Al-Shams (Arabic) Al-Zahf al-Akhdar (Arabic) Morocco Al-Anba’ (Arabic) As-Sabah (Arabic) Morocco Today (multi-lingual) Palestine The Electronic Intifada (English) Palestine News Agency (WAFA) (English, Arabic, Hebrew, French) Jerusalem Media and Communication Center (English) Al-Ayyam (Arabic) Al-Hayah al-Jadidah (Arabic) A-Quds (Arabic) Al-Manar (Arabic) Fasl al-Maqal (Arabic. Israeli-Arab) Qatar Al-Rayah (Arabic) Al-Watan (Arabic) Gulf Times (English) Saudi Arabia Aj-Jazirah (Arabic) Al—Mojaz (Arabic) Ar-Riyad (Arabic) Arab News (English) Al-Yaum (Arabic) Muheet (Arabic) Okaz (Arabic) Sudan Al-Ra’y al’Aam (Arabic) Al-Mehairah (Arabic. Islamist) Syria Syria Times (English) Tishreen (Arabic) Al-Thawra (Arabic) Al-Ba’th (Arabic) Tunisia Akhbar Tunis (Arabic) Al-Hurriyah (Arabic) La Presse (French) Le Renouveau (French) United Arab Emirates Gulf News (English) Al-Khaleej (Arabic) Khaleej Times (English) Dubai News (English) Yemen Yemen Times (English) 26 of September (Arabic) Al-Thawrah (Arabic)

Think Tanks to look into

Think Tanks that might have Policy Papers to look at: Stanley Foundation Media Think Tanks Poynter Institute World Journalism Institute Robert C. Maynard Institute for Journalism Thompson-Reuters Foundation International Institute for Journalism World Press Institute (right in your own backyard!) Center for Public Media Non-Press Think Tanks Council on Foreign Relations Center for Strategic and International Studies Middle East Institute International Crisis Group Center for American Progress World Affairs Councils ISIS Woodrow Wilson International Institute for Strategic Studies

This Blog is for Jasmine, Serin, Bowen, Christina SAN, Lauren, Jenna, Zachary, and Nick