"As’ad AbuKhalil, the author of the very popular Angry Arab blog, has refused to support the institutional elements of the Syrian opposition, alienating many longtime readers. But even he issues a constant streamof criticism against the regime itself." Alienating readers? I am not doing my job right if I don't alienate my readers. The last thing I want to do is the give my readers--whoever they are--what they want. But let me add this to the observation by Elias. Yes, he is right: there has been a shift in blogging on Syria from support of the regime to opposition. There were some who were apologists for the regime who became opponents. But I would add that based on Arabic writings on Syria: the other side (staunch support for the regime) is well represented but in the Arabic language. I argue with people in the opposition side this all the time: that they refuse to believe that there are Syrians who genuinely support the regime and who are not shabbihah or mukhabarat or henchmen for the regime. I see those people on my Facebook daily: if I write against the regime, they are quick to respond and defend the regime, just as the opponents of the regime are quick to respond whenever I attack the Syrian National Council. It is fallacious to think that the regime does not have bases of support--still. I still maintain that the sign of that (among others) is the fact that not a single person has defected from the government or from the diplomatic circle (I know, someone will mention that there was a a deputy to the assistant mayor of a little town near Dir`a etc). It is also partly due to the calculation made by those people that the regime is not falling yet--or not any day soon. The Syrian crisis is a very long crisis--even if the regime falls. Just think that there is Lebanon: half of Lebanon will provide shelter for the ancien regime from which it can fight for power or seek revenge. The notion that Lebanon won't be drawn into this--after the Hariri family declared open war on the Syrian regime--is folly.