LCCC ENGLISH DAILY NEWS BULLETIN
June 01/12

Bible Quotation for today/Spiritual Blessings in Christ
Ephesians 01/03-14: "Let us give thanks to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! For in our union with Christ he has blessed us by giving us every spiritual blessing in the heavenly world. Even before the world was made, God had already chosen us to be his through our union with Christ, so that we would be holy and without fault before him. Because of his love God had already decided that through Jesus Christ he would make us his children—this was his pleasure and purpose. Let us praise God for his glorious grace, for the free gift he gave us in his dear Son! For by the blood of Christ we are set free, that is, our sins are forgiven. How great is the grace of God, which he gave to us in such large measure!
In all his wisdom and insight God did what he had purposed, and made known to us the secret plan he had already decided to complete by means of Christ. This plan, which God will complete when the time is right, is to bring all creation together, everything in heaven and on earth, with Christ as head. All things are done according to God's plan and decision; and God chose us to be his own people in union with Christ because of his own purpose, based on what he had decided from the very beginning. Let us, then, who were the first to hope in Christ, praise God's glory! And you also became God's people when you heard the true message, the Good News that brought you salvation. You believed in Christ, and God put his stamp of ownership on you by giving you the Holy Spirit he had promised. The Spirit is the guarantee that we shall receive what God has promised his people, and this assures us that God will give complete freedom to those who are his. Let us praise his glory!

Latest analysis, editorials, studies, reports, letters & Releases from miscellaneous sources
We have sold our soul/Now Lebanon/May 31/12
Is expelling al-Assad’s ambassadors enough/By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat/May 31/12
What Does the Syrian Opposition Believe/By: David Pollock /Wall Street Journal/May 31/12
The regime’s rhetoric/By Diana Moukalled/Asharq Alawsat/May 31/12

More killings and ultimatum deepen Syria conflict
By Dominic Evans | Reuters
.BEIRUT (Reuters) - Syrian rebels on Wednesday gave President Bashar al-Assad a 48-hour deadline to comply with an international peace plan otherwise they would renew their battle to overthrow him.
The ultimatum was issued after U.N. observers reported the discovery of 13 bodies bound and shot in eastern Syria, adding to the world outcry over the massacre last week of 108 men, women and children.
The latest developments emphasized how the peace plan drafted by U.N.-Arab League envoy Kofi Annan has failed to stem 14 months of bloodshed or bring the Syrian government and opposition to the negotiating table.
Colonel Qassim Saadeddine of the rebel Free Syrian Army said its leadership had set a deadline of 0900 GMT Friday for Assad to implement the peace plan, which includes a ceasefire, deployment of observers, and free access for humanitarian aid and journalists.
If it fails to do so "we are free from any commitment and we will defend and protect the civilians, their villages and their cities," Saadeddine said in a statement posted on social media.
Both sides in the conflict have violated a tenuous ceasefire over the past two months but Assad's forces have been by far the worst offender, according to U.N. monitors.
Outrage at last Friday's massacre in the town of Houla, led a host of Western countries to expel senior Syrian diplomats on Tuesday and to press Russia and China to allow tougher action by the U.N. Security Council.
Major-General Robert Mood, the Norwegian head of the observer mission, said the 13 corpses found on Wednesday in Assukar, about 50 km (30 miles) east of Deir al-Zor, had their hands tied behind their backs. Some had been shot in the head from close range.Mood called the latest killings an "appalling and inexcusable act" and appealed to all factions to end the cycle of violence.
He did not apportion any blame but Syrian activists said the victims were army defectors killed by Assad's forces.
Video footage posted by activists showed the bodies face down on the ground, hands tied behind their backs, with dark pools of blood around their heads and torsos.
U.N. peacekeeping chief Herve Ladsous said in New York on Tuesday that the Syrian army and "shabbiha" militiamen supporting Assad were probably responsible for killing the 108 people in Houla with artillery and tank fire, guns and knives. The government denied any responsibility and blamed Islamist "terrorists" - its term for rebel forces.
The uprising began last March with street protests against Assad, who succeeded his late, authoritarian father Hafez al-Assad 11 years ago to perpetuate the family dynasty.
While initially a pro-democracy movement, the struggle has grown into an armed struggle increasingly involving sectarian rivalries pitting the Sunni Muslim majority against the Alawite sect, to which the Assad clan belongs. Assad's forces have killed 7,500 people since it began, according to a U.N. toll. The government, which says the unrest is the work of foreign-backed terrorists, says more than 2,600 soldiers or security agents have been killed.
PEACE PLAN
Annan, trying to save his peace plan from collapse, told Assad in Damascus on Tuesday that Syria was at a tipping point.
The pro-opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said that more than 100 people were killed the same day. Syria's state news agency said pumping had been halted to an oil pipeline in eastern Syria after a bomb attack on Wednesday. Diplomats said the U.N. Human Rights Council would meet in Geneva on Friday to consider the Houla massacre, the fourth time Syria has faced such scrutiny since the anti-Assad revolt broke out in March 2011. Assad has so far proved impervious to international scolding and Western sanctions for his crackdown and has failed to return troops and tanks to barracks, as required by the Annan plan. However, the U.N. observers sent in to monitor a notional ceasefire were able to verify the horrors in Houla, which produced a wave of world revulsion.
Assad's heavyweight international allies, China and Russia, stuck to their rejection of any intervention or U.N.-backed penalties to force him to change course.
Asked if Western and Arab countries were pressing Moscow to change its position, President Vladimir Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday: "Russia is a country with a consistent foreign policy and any pressure is hardly appropriate." The West is itself averse to military intervention, although French President Francois Hollande said on Tuesday this could change if the U.N. Security Council backed it. But that is not possible unless veto-wielding members Russia and China allow it.
KICKED OUT
Turkey joined other countries including the United States, Britain, France and Germany in expelling Syrian diplomats in protest at the Houla massacre, saying unspecified international measures would follow if crimes against humanity continued. Stung by the expulsions, Syria told the Dutch charge d'affaires to leave. She was one of the few senior Western diplomats left in Damascus.
Despite the diplomatic deadlock, Annan, a former U.N. secretary-general and Nobel peace laureate, is pressing on with his mission. "It is important to find a solution that will lead to a democratic transition in Syria and find a way of ending the killings as soon as possible," he said after talks in Jordan on Wednesday. "With goodwill and hard work, we can succeed."It is hard to see where a breakthrough might come from. China reiterated that it opposed military intervention and did not support a forced change of government. Russia also reasserted its hostility to military action or to any further Security Council measures beyond a non-binding statement condemning the Houla killings. "We believe consideration in the Security Council of any new measures to influence the situation now would be premature," Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said. Russia and China have twice vetoed Western-backed Council resolutions condemning the crackdown. In New York, Annan's deputy Jean-Marie Guehenno told the Security Council that direct engagement between government and opposition was "impossible at the moment". He also expressed serious doubt over the Syrian government's commitment to the Annan plan, a diplomat with knowledge of the closed session said.(Writing by Alistair Lyon and Kevin Liffey; Editing by Angus MacSwan)

Connelly, Geagea discuss recent developments
May 31, 2012/The Daily Star
BEIRUT: The American ambassador to Lebanon Maura Connelly paid a visit to Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea Wednesday, according to a statement from the LF press office.
The meeting focused on the most recent developments in Lebanon and the region. Connelly has held multiple meetings with officials in the past few weeks and has voiced concern over recent violence in Tripoli and Beirut.

Disassociation and dialogue difficulties
May 31, 2012/By Antoine Ghattas Saab The Daily Star
The government of Prime Minister Najib Mikati has come in for heavy criticism for “disassociating” itself from the Syrian crisis next door, but the policy continues to garner respect abroad, according to diplomatic sources. A source familiar with the issue said foreign capitals were fully aware of the “complications” that have arisen as a result of the policy and of the various violations being committed by pro-Syrian groups in Lebanon. In this view, the policy remains the best possible one under the circumstances, as it is the only way to prevent seeing the Syrian crisis spread to Lebanon. However, they continued, it is also incumbent upon Mikati to adhere to his commitments to show concern for the humanitarian problems that have arisen from hosting Syrian refugees in Lebanon, as well as effectively control the Lebanese-Syrian border and prevent sectarian polarization from leading to destabilization.
Amid these developments, a Beirut-based European diplomat relayed the news that his country was happy with the performance of President Michel Sleiman. The diplomat noted that Sleiman did not represent a repeat of the experience of President Elias Sarkis, who relied on Syrian troops as a response to the country’s slide into civil war in 1976, or that of President Emile Lahoud, who pursued a policy of meeting the demands of Damascus as the best way to secure the interests and stability of Lebanon. The diplomat stated that Sleiman did not represent “Syria’s choice” when he was elected in 2008, and did not offer any concessions to Damascus in order to obtain the job of head of state. Syrian officials have expressed their reservations about Sleiman on more than one occasion, although the situation hasn’t led to a rupture in relations. According to these sources, Sleiman and President Bashar Assad have arrived at understandings on a number of domestic and foreign policy issues, and that their relationship can be described as good, though difficult – Sleiman is determined to play his role as a consensus president, while Damascus’ priority is to retain its influence in Lebanon as it suffers from an armed insurrection and popular civilian uprising at home.
The sources said that Sleiman and Mikati continue to enjoy popular support, along with the backing from countries inside and outside the region; any attempt to bring down the current government, whether through constitutional or other means, is still a “red line” that should not be crossed.
Based on meetings between officials from Western countries and Sleiman, the president is determined to convene a session of national dialogue on June 11 in a bid to remove the “climate of civil war” that exists in the hearts of national leaders. After getting these leaders to meet around the same table, only then can discussions tackle the thorny issue of nonstate weapons, which has several different aspects, as Sleiman has said. While some political sources believe that March 14 parties will end up attending the national dialogue session, after prompting from the United States and Saudi Arabia, the event is likely to see three key figures stay away. One is Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, for security reasons. A similar reason is likely to be offered by Samir Geagea, the leader of the Lebanese Forces, following an assassination attempt on him last month. Finally, former Prime Minister Saad Hariri, who has been outside Lebanon for more than a year, is expected to be a no-show if the dialogue takes place.
While some political sources believe all three men might be represented by other figures, March 14’s eventual acceptance of the invitation to Baabda Palace remains unlikely, in the view of sources who stress that any such meeting will only serve the interests of the rival March 8 camp

What Does the Syrian Opposition Believe?
David Pollock /Wall Street Journal/May 30, 2012
There are increasing calls for international intervention in Syria after this weekend's massacre in Houla, where Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces murdered more than 100 civilians. Obstacles to intervention remain, however, especially concern that the opposition to Assad's regime is dominated by religious fundamentalists. Until recently, for example, the Syrian National Council, a group of exiled opponents of the regime, was led by Burhan Ghalioun, whose unwillingness to counter the Muslim Brotherhood was widely viewed in the West as a troubling sign of Islamist influence.
But a confidential survey of opposition activists living in Syria reveals that Islamists are only a minority among them. Domestic opponents of Assad, the survey indicates, look to Turkey as a model for Syrian governance -- and even widely admire the United States.
Pechter Polls, which conducts opinion surveys in tough spots in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, completed the Syria opposition poll in December 2011. Respondents were contacted over a secure Skype connection by someone they could trust -- all native Syrians -- who asked them to fill out a short questionnaire anonymously in Arabic. Interviewers were selected from different social and political groups to ensure that respondents reflected a rough cross-section of overall opposition attitudes. To ensure confidentiality, the online survey could be accessed only through a series of proxy servers, bypassing the regime-controlled Internet.
Given the survey's unusual security requirements, respondents were selected by a referral (or "controlled snowball") technique, rather than in a purely random fashion. To be as representative as possible, the survey employed five different starting points for independent referral chains, all operating from different locations. The resulting sample consisted of 186 individuals in Syria identified as either opposition activists themselves (two-thirds of the total) or in contact with the opposition.
What do these "inside" opposition supporters believe? Only about one-third expressed a favorable opinion of the Muslim Brotherhood. Almost half voiced a negative view, and the remainder were neutral. On this question, no significant differences emerged across regions.
Most of the survey's questions asked, "On a scale of 1 to 7, where 1 means the most negative and 7 the most positive, how would you rate your opinion of X?" Answers of 1 to 3 were considered negative, 4 as neutral, and 5 to 7 as positive.
While many respondents supported religious values in public life, only a small fraction strongly favored Shariah law, clerical influence in government, or heavy emphasis on Islamic education. A large majority (73%) said it was "important for the new Syrian government to protect the rights of Christians." Only 20% said that religious leaders have a great influence on their political views.
This broad rejection of Islamic fundamentalism was also reflected in the respondents' views on government. The poll asked each respondent what country he or she would "like to see Syria emulate politically," and which countries the respondent "would like to see Syria emulate economically." The poll listed 12 countries, each with a scale of 1 to 7. Just 5% had even a mildly positive view of Saudi Arabia as a political model. In contrast, 82% gave Turkey a favorable rating as both a political and economic model (including over 40% extremely favorable). The U.S. earned 69% favorable ratings as a political model, with France, Germany and Britain close behind. Tunisia rated only 37% and Egypt 22%.
Iran was rated lowest of any country included in the survey, including Russia and China: Not even 2% of respondents had positive views of Iran as a political model. Fully 90% expressed an unfavorable view of Hezbollah, including 78% with the most negative possible attitude.
One of the surprises in the results is the scope of the opposition's network inside Damascus, despite their difficulties in demonstrating publicly. One-third of the respondents, whether activists or sympathizers, said they live in the Syrian capital. (To protect their privacy, the survey did not ask for more precise identification.)
This "inside" opposition is well-educated, with just over half identifying as college graduates. The ratio of male to female respondents was approximately 3 to 1, and 86% were Sunni Arab.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, they were ambivalent about Syrian Kurdish demands for "political decentralization" (like autonomy). Views of "Kurdish parties" were evenly divided among negative, neutral and positive. (Such feelings are evidently mutual: In the six months since the survey was completed, Syrian Kurdish organizations have increasingly decided to go their own way, separate from the other opposition groups.)
Based on a statistical analysis of the survey, most secularists among the respondents prefer weak central government, presumably as a way to safeguard their personal freedoms. On the other hand, the one-third of respondents who support the Muslim Brotherhood also tend to have a favorable view of Hamas, despite the latter movement's previous association with the Assad regime.
The survey demonstrates that the core of the Syrian opposition inside the country is not made up of the Muslim Brotherhood or other fundamentalist forces, and certainly not of al Qaeda or other jihadi organizations. To be sure, a revolution started by secularists could pave the way for Islamists to win elections, as has occurred in Egypt. But the Syrian opposition is solidly favorable to the U.S. and overwhelmingly negative toward both Hezbollah and Iran.
*David Pollock is the Kaufman fellow at The Washington Institute and a consultant to Pechter Polls.
 

Is expelling al-Assad’s ambassadors enough?
By Tariq Alhomayed/Asharq Al-Awsat
If this storm of expulsions of al-Assad regime ambassadors and diplomats had taken place 8 months ago, then this would have affected or perhaps had implications on the al-Assad regime, however the expulsion of al-Assad diplomats and ambassadors from western capitals today, nearly 14 months into the Syrian revolution, and after the death of more than 13,000 Syrians, is not helpful.
The expulsion of diplomats and ambassadors is something that should take place in order to isolate the regime of the tyrant, and remove its legitimacy, however this – of course – is something that was already a reality more than 8 months ago. We must also not forget that the Gulf States have already taken the initiative and implemented this step, along with some other Arab states. Whilst the Arab League – with all its faults – has already frozen Syria’s membership, however now after all this we see the major Western countries, along with Turkey, taking this step today after a torrent of Syrian blood has been shed. So, of course, this is something that is not helpful, because it has come too late! As a senior Arab diplomat told me, the step taken by the western states to expel al-Assad’s diplomats also means that the international community does not intend to take serious steps towards the tyrant of Damascus, despite all these successive massacres. Indeed, the world is now waking up to a new massacre, and just days after the Houla massacre.
Therefore, if the international community is unwilling or unable to carry out genuine military operations to stop the al-Assad killing machine, particularly as the US president is preoccupied with the forthcoming elections, then the West and the Arab world must do their duty and confront the Russian support being given to the regime of the tyrant of Damascus. What is happening in Syria must not be blamed on al-Assad alone, but also Moscow, because Russia’s support of al-Assad has transgressed all lines, to the point that even the Russians themselves are aware of this, and their diplomatic language defending al-Assad is now weak and confused. The best example of this can be seen in the statement issued by Russian First Deputy Foreign Minister Andrei Denisov who justified his country’s position towards the situation in Syria by saying “there is a medical term ‘do not harm’ and it is time to remember it. The most important thing is to be realistic about what is happening in Syria.” The reality is that anybody who is keen on peace in Syria, as well as the survival of the Syrian state as a whole, not to mention the security of the region, is now aware that the only solution for Syria is to topple the rule of Bashar al-Assad, and as soon as possible, otherwise we will pay a very steep price, and this is what we – and all rational people – have been saying for quite some time.
From here, if the international community does not want to take a military position, or impose buffer zones or humanitarian corridors on Syrian territory in order to provide safe zones to protect Syrian military defectors, as well as Syrian political symbols who may want to defect, by establishing – in other words – a Syrian Benghazi, then they – as well as the Arabs – must take a serious position towards Russia in order to stop its support of the tyrant of Damascus and his killing machine. As for expelling ambassadors and diplomats, this is something that is not helpful today, and it is completely insufficient, particularly as it will not stop al-Assad’s killing machine, which is the most important thing.

The regime’s rhetoric
By Diana Moukalled/Asharq Alawsat
Last year, the number of friends I have on Facebook doubled.
I do not know most of them personally; however the Syrian revolution, with its momentum and character and tragedies has served as a basis to connect with Syrian youth and writers and other figures that we do not often hear from, thanks to the complexities in the Lebanese and Syrian situation. The walls of Facebook are full of opinions, pictures and comments on the situation in Syria, and Facebook has served as a space to get to know others and discuss issues and put forward views and opinions. The walls of my Facebook friends’ now serve as a space to monitor inter-Syrian discussions on the revolution. These discussions sometimes turn tearful or angry, whilst at other times they burst with laughter and sarcasm.
After every massacre or bombardment or arrest or video depicting death and torture, Facebook is filled with fierce debates that were timid or conservative during the first weeks of the revolution, but which have become fiercer and more violent with the escalation of the violence and brutality of the Syrian regime.
Such debates see Syrians trade comments like: “I am not saying this because I am a Sunni”. “The Alawites have nothing to do with this”. “The sect must decide”. “What do you mean? Have you now understood the issue!” and even “you are partners in the crimes that are taking place, and you must now pay the price for this!”
Day after day, the discussions on Facebook are being overshadowed by an atmosphere that is full of mutual suspicion and fear of the other.
This is something that is perhaps understandable, for what is taking place in Syria is beyond any reason, logic or conscience. There can be nothing worse or more brutal than the massacre that took place in Houla, particularly as this served as a clear and frank message [from the regime]. We were then told: Alawite pro-regime Shabiha militia attacked Sunni families and completely destroy them, whilst the worst thing they did was take part in the wholesale slaughtering of children!
Does this not represent a clear and frank inciting of civil conflict in Syria?
This was an open message implemented and promoted by the regime, and it has, unfortunately, been taken up by many section of society, including the Syrian elite.
In reality, this incitement has intensified and Facebook is now the scene for exchanging angry sectarian views and opinions by those who previously swore they would never reach this level of division and incitement. Whilst it is true that this is due to the anger and rage that has been incited by the slaughtering of children, still…
Despite the horrifying brutality that we witnessed in Houla and Hama, and prior to this in Karm el-Zaytoun, this does not justify such discourse, particularly as we are talking about civilians with high – or at least middling – levels of education and culture.
Cracks have begun to appear in once strong friendships, whilst in reality all parties are the victims of this regime and its discourse, which has convinced everybody, and which portrays the revolution as the intransigent party.
The Syrian street may have seen individual sectarian events alongside the deliberate practices that are being carried out by the regime, but there is something that is beginning to creep into discourse, culture and relations, and this is the mixing of religion and politics. Therefore slogans and discourse have become sectarian, whilst those who should have addressed and responded to this are falling into its trap!

11-year-old played dead to survive Syria massacre
31/05/2012
http://www.asharq-e.com/news.asp?section=1&id=29816

BEIRUT (AP) — When the gunmen began to slaughter his family, 11-year-old Ali el-Sayed says he fell to the floor of his home, soaking his clothes with his brother's blood to fool the killers into thinking he was already dead. The Syrian boy tried to stop himself from trembling, even as the gunmen, with long beards and shaved heads, killed his parents and all four of his siblings, one by one. The youngest to die was Ali's brother, 6-year-old Nader. His small body bore two bullet holes — one in his head, another in his back. "I put my brother's blood all over me and acted like I was dead," Ali told The Associated Press over Skype on Wednesday, his raspy voice steady and matter-of-fact, five days after the killing spree that left him both an orphan and an only child. Ali is one of the few survivors of a weekend massacre in Houla, a collection of poor farming villages and olive groves in Syria's central Homs province. More than 100 people were killed, many of them women and children who were shot or stabbed in their houses. The killings brought immediate, worldwide condemnation of President Bashar Assad, who has unleashed a violent crackdown on an uprising that began in March 2011. Activists say as many as 13,000 people have been killed since the revolt began.
U.N. investigators and witnesses blame at least some of the Houla killings on shadowy gunmen known as shabiha who operate on behalf of Assad's government.
Recruited from the ranks of Assad's Alawite religious community, the militiamen enable the government to distance itself from direct responsibility for the execution-style killings, torture and revenge attacks that have become hallmarks of the shabiha.
In many ways, the shabiha are more terrifying than the army and security forces, whose tactics include shelling residential neighborhoods and firing on protesters. The swaggering gunmen are deployed specifically to brutalize and intimidate Assad's opponents.
Activists who helped collect the dead in the aftermath of the Houla massacre described dismembered bodies in the streets, and row upon row of corpses shrouded in blankets.
"When we arrived on the scene we started seeing the scale of the massacre," said Ahmad al-Qassem, a 35-year-old activist. "I saw a kid with his brains spilling out, another child who was no more than 1 year old who was stabbed in the head. The smell of death was overpowering."
The regime denies any responsibility for the Houla killings, blaming them on terrorists. And even if the shabiha are responsible for the killings, there is no clear evidence that the regime directly ordered the massacre in a country spiraling toward civil war.
As witness accounts begin to leak out, it remains to be seen what, exactly, prompted the massacre. Although the Syrian uprising has been among the deadliest of the Arab Spring, the killings in Houla stand out for their sheer brutality and ruthlessness.
According to the U.N., which is investigating the attack, most of the victims were shot at close range, as were Ali's parents and siblings. The attackers appeared to be targeting the most vulnerable people, such as children and the elderly, to terrorize the population.
This type of massacre — even more than the shelling and mortar attacks that have become daily occurrences in the uprising — is a sign of a new level of violence. By most accounts, the gunmen descended on Houla from an arc of nearby villages, making the deaths all the more horrifying because the victims could have known their attackers.
According to activists in the area, the massacre came after the army pounded the villages with artillery and clashed with local rebels following anti-regime protests. Several demonstrators were killed, and the rebels were forced to withdraw. The pro-regime gunmen later stormed in, doing the bulk of the killing.
Syrian activist Maysara Hilaoui said he was at home when the massacre in Houla began. He said there were two waves of violence, one starting at 5 p.m. Friday and a second at 4 a.m. Saturday.
"The shabiha took advantage of the withdrawal of rebel fighters," he said. "They started entering homes and killing the young as well as the old."
Ali, the 11-year-old, said his mother began weeping the moment about 11 gunmen entered the family home in the middle of the night. The men led Ali's father and oldest brother outside.
"My mother started screaming 'Why did you take them? Why did you take them?'" Ali said.
Soon afterward, he said, the gunmen killed Ali's entire family.
As Ali huddled with his youngest siblings, a man in civilian clothes took Ali's mother to the bedroom and shot her five times in the head and neck.
"Then he left the bedroom. He used his flashlight to see in front of him," Ali said. "When he saw my sister Rasha, he shot her in the head while she was in the hallway."
Ali had been hiding near his brothers Nader, 6, and Aden, 8. The gunmen shot both of them, killing them instantly. He then fired at Ali but missed.
"I was terrified," Ali said, speaking from Houla, where relatives have taken him in. "My whole body was trembling."
Ali is among the few survivors of the massacre, although it was impossible to independently corroborate his story. The AP contacted him through anti-regime activists in Houla who arranged for an interview with the child over Skype.
The violence had haunting sectarian overtones, according to witness accounts. The victims lived in the Houla area's Sunni Muslim villages, but the shabiha forces came from a nearby area populated by Alawites, an offshoot of Shiite Islam.
Most shabiha belong to the Alawite sect — like the Assad family and the ruling elite. This ensures the loyalty of the gunmen to the regime, because they fear they would be persecuted if the Sunni majority gains the upper hand.
Sunnis make up most of Syria's 22 million people, as well as the backbone of the opposition. The opposition insists the movement is entirely secular.
It was not possible to reach residents of the Alawite villages on Wednesday. Communications with much of the area have been cut off, and many residents have fled.
Al-Qassem, the activist who helped gather corpses in Houla, said the uprising has unleashed deep tensions between Sunnis and Alawites.
"Of course the regime worked hard to create an atmosphere of fear among Alawites," said al-Qassem, who is from the Houla area, although not one of the villages that came under attack over the weekend. "There is a deep-seated hatred. The regime has given Alawites the illusion that the end of the regime will spell the end of their villages and lives."
He said the army has been pouring weapons into the Alawite areas.
"Every house in each of those Alawite villages has automatic rifles. The army has armed these villages, each home according to the number of people who live there," he said, "whereas in Houla, which has a population of 120,000, you can only find 500 0r 600 armed people. There is an imbalance."
Days after the attack, many victims remain missing.
Ali can describe the attack on his family. But al-Qassem said the full story of the massacre may never emerge.
"There are no eyewitnesses of the massacre," he said. "The eyewitnesses are all dead."