Bombings in Lebanon and the hypocrisy of western media

Whenever a bomb detonates in a Shia area of Lebanon western press is quick to call the place an „Hezbollah stronghold“ and explain/justify the perpetartors malicious action by stating that this was a reaction to Hezbollah fighting alongside the Syrian army.

Thus an indiscriminate act of terror by entirely sectarian motivated perpetrators is almost whitewashed as just an exotic version of the war against (alleged) Iranian terror since Hezbollah is affiliated with the Iranian regime.

In the most recent case the bombers detonated their deadly cargo near to an orphanage and hurt Children:
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/beirut-orphanage-latest-victim-suicide-bombings

…but maybe these victims are also Assads „Shabiha“ and targetting them just another chapter in the very creative art of „freedom fighting“

 

 

In case you did not know: Iran is sending money and fighters to Al Qaida to kill Shias in Syria

Is this supposed to be a joke?

„Today the U.S. Department of the Treasury announced the designation of a key Iran-based al-Qa’ida facilitator who supports al-Qa’ida’s vital facilitation network in Iran, that operates there with the knowledge of Iranian authorities.  The network also uses Iran as a transit point for moving funding and foreign fighters through Turkey to support al-Qa’ida-affiliated elements in Syria, including the al-Nusrah Front.“
http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/jl2287.aspx

Give me a break: Is the department really claiming that Iran is now sending funds and fighters to al-Qaida in Syria, including the Nusrah Front?
The claim is not only shameless, it is totally sick.
The Nusrah has publicly and more than once taken „credit“ for having targetted and killed Iranians and Shias in Syria. They have proudly burned Husseiniyas and shelled Shia mosques. They have beheaded prisoners of war after having accused them of being „Iranian dogs“ or „Shia infidels“.

No person with a single functioning brain cell does believe this garbage, unless one finds it plausible to claim that Iran is simultaneously supporting and fighting each of Syrias warring factions . Why? Because according to the US and many pro-rebel (mainly arab) sources Iran is behind Assad, Hizbullah and Iraqi Shia militias as well as their most deadly adversaries Nusra Front and ISIS.

Is Homs under siege?

Reading the media about Syria one more than once reads about the city of Homs, „the cradle of the revolution“ being under siege by the Syrian army.
Taking a closer look it turns out that not the entire city, but only a relatively small portion of it, the „old city“ is under regime siege:
BBC map of besieged areas in Homs

No question, such a siege is a horror for the ordinary population and certainly it is an unjust act of collective punishment, but one should also keep in mind that the siege is not the result of an evil government simply hating its citizens. Rather the siege is a direct consequence of armed rebels abusing the local population by effectively taking them hostage and turning their houses to firing grounds, hideouts, tunnels, weapons depots and bomb making fabrics.

Why all these anti-regime disclosures in the middle of the Geneva talks?

„Syrian government ‚demolished thousands of homes'“
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25947345

While noone should justify or play down the extensive damage inflicted on entire blocks and neighborhoods, one should wonder why the disclosure of these „war crimes“ (HRW) happens just as the Syrian government and opposition are negotiating in Geneva.
The satellite images are dated from mid 2012 to mid 2013. Did HRW and co. really need 6-18 months to „analyze“ these images or is the timing of the publication no coincidence?

Interestingly at exactly the same time there was first the publication of the Qatari financed torture photos and then (today) the expression of „concern“ by the US regarding the slow progress of Syrias chemical weapons disarmament.

Is all this meant to prepare the ground for either the declaration of new „red lines“ or an accelerated and intensified arming of the (definitely all but) „moderate“ rebels?

US continues hypocrisy and double standard regarding Syria

„The US says only 4% of Syria’s declared chemical weapons has been surrendered and expresses concern at the lack of progress.“
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25968616

But at the same time the US has announced to resume the supply of weapons to Syrian rebels.
The same rebels have either laid storage facilities under siege or they control roads leading to or from such weapons´ sites.
Both are considered „succcesses“ that the usually pro-rebel western press hails as „blows against the Assad regime“.

Egypt: Islamists shoot down army helicopter with MANPAD

Islamic militants have shot down an Egyptian army helicopter with a heat seeking shoulder-fired missile:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25915607
The BBC article seems to express „grief“ about this. Probably because the Egyptian regime (and army) is considered pro-western.

Interestingly western press reports of the Syrian rebels´ successes in shooting down Syrian army Migs and helicopters and killing hundreds of personell have been accompanied enthusiasm and joy.
Note: If you are a radical sectarian Islamist fighting a pro-Iranian or pro-Russian state you are good, you are probably a „freedom fighter“ and the US congress will somehow find a way to declare you „moderate“.
If you are however fighting a pro-western state you are a terrorist and one has to be worried if you have acquired and applied deadly weapons.

 

 

Congress Secretly Approves Arms for Syria Rebels

After all the embarassing and shocking revelations about the Syrian rebels, after the broad majority of the rebels either openly declare themselves as part of Al Qaeda or strongly sympathize and ideologically identify with Al Qaeda, the US has begun resupplying the rebels with arms.
How can an honest government officially endorse peace talks but at the same time arm a warring faction that is opposed to peace talks and will certainly feel emboldened and encouraged to fight on after getting further arms?
To justify this appalling decision the US has once again resumed reinvigorating the myth of the „moderate rebels“, no matter how ridiculous and incredible such claims have become in the mean time:

„One close observer of the  opposition, who recently returned from travelling in the rebel-held areas of northern Syria, says that “you could go an awful long way talking to these jihadi groups before you met any fighters who did not thoroughly approve of 9/11 as a well-deserved blow against the US”.“
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/01/27/return-to-damascus/

http://news.antiwar.com/2014/01/27/officials-congress-secretly-approves-arms-for-syria-rebels/

How moderate are the Syrian Rebels fighting ISIS?

The so called „Army of Mujahedeen“ is the group being most active in fighting against ISIS in Syria. Some mainstream western and arab media tried to imply that this group – as it is fighting „Al Qaeda“ (ISIS) – is (and must be) „moderate“.

Here one can read which specific rebel battalions belong to the „Army of Mujahedeen“:

„The Army of the Mujahideen was formed out of the following factions: the 19th Division of the FSA, the group known as Fastaqim Kama Umirt, meaning “Be Upright As Ordered,” the Nur al-Din al-Zanki Islamic Brigades, and al-Noor Islamic Movement…Meanwhile, the influence of the Nur al-Din al-Zanki Brigades covers areas in the northwestern countryside of Aleppo, such as Anjara, Hour, Mansoura, and Kafr Dael. These brigades are believed to be the strongest among the constituents of Army of the Mujahideen.“
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/syria-army-mujahideen-challenges-isis-gains

It is quite interesting to know who „Nur al-Din al-Zanki“ was in order to get a clue about the ideology and mindset of the fighters of such a rebel militia:

„In 1146, Nur ad-Din massacred the entire Christian population of the city [Edessa]“
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nur_ad-Din,_atabeg_of_Aleppo

Is Monsieur Hollande really so naive?

Read the following excerpt from Al-Hayats interview with Francois Hollande to see just how ignorant or naive this president of a major western country is:

Al-Hayat:  We constantly hear that Assad remaining in power is a better option, according to some people, than radical Islamists governing Syria. Do you think this is realistic?

Hollande:  There is no political solution if Assad stays. His insistence on pursuing oppression by all means will only prolong and exacerbate the Syrian crisis. Assad is not fighting Islamists. He is using them to put pressure on the moderate opposition…“
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/politics/2014/01/france-hollande-interview-syria-geneva-iran-egypt.html

So, basically he says that all the ISIS, Jabhat al Nusra, Islamic Front and other clearly sectarian and Salafi Jihadists fighting the Syrian regime are a myth, non-existent and only a creation of the evil EVIL Syrian government propaganda.
So, the long Salafi beards, the Al Qaeda flags, the burnings of Shia mosques, the vandalization of churches, the beheading of opponents (civilian or military), the mass executions of prisoners, car bombs, suicide bombs…in short, all the „success tools“ of the insurgency applied by the military effective islamist rebels are only a minor event of an irrelevant minority that Assad is using, while the non-visible „moderate“ majority is a victim of Assad AND the Islamists.