The „Hooligan theory“ and Syria

I have a „theory“, which I call „Hooligan theory“:

You can smuggle hooligans into a football stadium, bypassing the security personell or bribing them. You may think this is a good idea in order to counter-balance the guest teams hooligans or to contain them. But, once you got 5000 hooligans into an arena with even 80000 other spectators there is no way you can control those guys. It´s an illusion to think they listen to you or that you can predict or even determine their actions.
Eventually there is a good chance „your“ hooligans vandalize your own assets and harm your own team and fans.

What has this to do with Syria?

The Nato security council member states or „FUKUS“ (France/UK/USA) along with their regional allies Turkey and the Gulf states Saudi Arabia and Qatar decided that the ultimate goal of removing the pro Iranian Syrian State led by Bashar al Assad justifies literally each and every means.
Thus, everyone who volunteered to fight the Syrian government, no matter whether Syrian or not, no matter whether secular or radical Islamist, no matter whether criminal or „clean“ was supported directly and indirectly with arms, money, military training, intelligence, equipment, medical care, etc.
The myth of the „moderate“ opposition, supposedly fighting to establish a liberal, democratic, human rights abiding, „pro western“ state is long busted. The broad majority of „Syrian“ rebels are sectarian and radical Islamists. Many of them are not even Syrians, like the ethnically Turk (or Turkic) „Turkistan Islamic Party“ or „the Chechen Jaish al Muhajireen wal Ansar, the Moroccan Harakat Sham al Islam“.
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2015/04/turkistan-islamic-party-had-significant-role-recent-idlib-offensive.php

It is extremely delusional and childish to assume that tens of thousands of well-armed and battle-hardened Jihadists who have gotten accustomed to roaming their (and other people´s) country to kill „infidels“, „apostates“, „traitors“ (e.g. fellow Sunnis who fight in the Syrian army) or simply „Shabiha“ (a derogatory expression used to defame and dehumanize all kind of Sunni and non-Sunni militias and civilians who reject the rebels) would lay down their weapons and re-enter their ordinary civilian life on the day the Syrian government falls and Assad is killed.
This is pure nonsense. We have seen how this did NOT happen in Afghanistan after the Mujahedeen first defeated the Russian army and later the communist government of Najibullah.
We have seen what happened and is going on today in Libya, almost 4 years after the „revolutionaries“ liberated that country and killed Ghaddafi.

Afghanistan is an interesting case. The Russian army and it´s airforce did not kill as much people in 9 years as the Mujahedeen did in Kabul and some other cities through their daily shelling with mortars and artillery. Naive people argue that Assad must be removed to stop the killing, the barrel bombs etc. Look at Afghanistan. There, the distinction was not Shia bs Sunni but Pushtoons vs. Non-Pushtoons, but after the departure of the Russian everybody allied with everyone and fought against everyone else. There was cross-ethnic fighting as well as inter-ethnic (Pushtoon against Pushtoon) and „inter-sect“ (e.g. Sunni Tajiks against Sunni Pushtoons). The communist Uzbek commander allied with the mainly Tajik Rabbani government but earlier also with the Taliban. There was hardly a greater mess than the Afghan civil war which has not really ended to this date.
There is little reason to think something similar could not happen in Syria. Radicalized and violent rural based rebels, often uneducated and unemployed, but indoctrinated with hateful sectarian ideology preached by the Wahhabi Sheikhs and Imams, whose sermons are broadcasted on Arabic satellite channels are out to kill all those „Shia“ heretics and non-aligned pro-government Sunnis in what they consider „revenge“, although many of them coming from distant places such as Chechnya and central Asia, Northern Africa, the Gulf states, South East Asia or Europe definitely never suffered torture or any other repression in Syria which they did not know prior to their arrival for „Jihad“.

In all likelihood these „hooligans“ won´t stop „Jihad“. Rather they will export Jihad to the next place where they assume „infidels“, to the next „dar al harb“, for example to Lebanon, where they will declare war to the Shias who – although a minority – constitute the single biggest community in that country. These people are not „freedom fighters“ seeking to build a secular state. None of them gives a damn for any pro-western „Syrian National Council“ (SNC) living in Istanbul or elsewhere in comfortable safety. To pretend that any foreign-based Syrian expatriates wearing ties under their clean-shaven faces represent the myriad of militias fighting against Assad (and often against themselves) is to fool unknowing people. The militias are the hooligans those SNC people pretend to exert control over while the former not even take notice of them.

How Iran is (NOT) „destabilizing“ the Middle East

„Take the New York Times…It’s a thinkpiece, by Peter Baker, one of their main analysts. He discusses in it the main reasons to distrust Iran, the crimes of Iran. It’s very interesting to look at. The most interesting one is the charge that Iran is destabilizing the Middle East because it’s supporting militias which have killed American soldiers in Iraq. That’s kind of as if, in 1943, the Nazi press had criticized England because it was destabilizing Europe for supporting partisans who were killing German soldiers. In other words, the assumption is, when the United States invades, it kills a couple hundred thousand people, destroys the country, elicits sectarian conflicts that are now tearing Iraq and the region apart, that’s stabilization. If someone resists that tact, that’s destabilization. “
http://rt.com/usa/250729-complete-chomsky-rt-interview/

Did Assad free Islamists who then created IS to destroy the „Syrian revolution“ from within?

Many opponents of the Syrian government, mainly western and Arab mass media and politicians frequently claim that the „Islamic State“ (IS; formerly ISIS or ISIL) is in fact a creation of the Syrian intelligence services.
Hence, the Syrian government established IS to destroy the „Syrian revolution“, both the latters „reputation“ and its fighters. This was allegedly achieved by releasing Syrian Islamists from prison who later joined IS.

The entire claim is as much hollow and baseless as it is ridiculous for a variety of reasons:
1. It is not that IS is the only sectarian and radical Islamist militia of the Syrian war:
https://radioyaran.com/2014/09/11/the-vetted-moderate-rebels-of-the-free-syrian-army-who-and-where-are-they/

2. IS has inflicted heavy casualties on the Syrian army. To continue to claim that the army and IS are „secret partners“ is absurd: https://radioyaran.com/2015/03/07/supported-by-no-evidence-the-telegraph-revives-the-assad-isil-cooperation-myth/

3. Interestingly, those Islamists who were freed by the Syrian government became the „heroes“ of some of the most influential rebel factions that fight against the Syrian armed forces AND – at least on some occasions – against IS:
– Hassan Abboud, (in the meantime assassinated) leader of Ahrar al Sham
– Abdul Qader al Saleh, (also assassinated) leader of Liwa al Tauheed
– Zahran Alloush, leader of Jaish al Islam and a leader of the major umbrella group „Islamic Front“
and many others (none of whom joined IS!):
http://www.thenational.ae/world/middle-east/in-pictures-former-saidnaya-prisoners-turned-rebels

4. IS which went by the name of ISIS/ISIL until 2014 originates from Al Qaeda in Iraq:
„Al-Qa‘ida in Iraq (AQI), also known as the Islamic State of Iraq (ISI) and more recently the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), was established in April 2004 by long-time Sunni extremist Abu Mus‘ab al-Zarqawi, who the same year pledged his group’s allegiance to Usama Bin Ladin.“
http://www.nctc.gov/site/groups/aqi.html

Zarqawi „achieved notoriety in the early stages of the Iraqi insurgency for the suicide attacks on Shia Islamic mosques, civilians“
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29

Why is the Yarmouk camp suffering? The true reasons, not western propaganda

After posting the article below I found this very recent (April 6th, 2015) 2minute video clip containing interviews with Palestinians from inside the camp. Hear for yourself how two of them explicitly thank the Syrian Army:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2015/apr/06/yarmouk-refugee-camp-ruins-fighting-between-isis-syrian-rebels-video

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Reading through western (and probably Gulf states) media these days one could think that Syrian President Assad and „his“ army (otherwise known as the Syrian Arab Army) from one day to the next simply decided to destroy the Yarmouk refugee camp and kill its Palestinian inhabitants through a siege and bombardment.
The same sources go as far as claiming that the recent take over of the mostly abandoned camp through the IS militia even serves Assads interests.
The silly and easily refutable fairy tale of Assad secretly collaborating with IS is achieving sort of an „evergreen“ status among many of the above mentioned media:
https://radioyaran.com/2015/03/07/supported-by-no-evidence-the-telegraph-revives-the-assad-isil-cooperation-myth/

It´s time to shed some light on what has been going on in the Yarmouk camp since the beginning of the Syrian civil war.

Whenever western media reports of any places being shelled in Syria the impression is created that this can only have been the work of the Syrian Army. This is an early case of such shelling hitting the Yarmouk camp:
Two mortar shells struck the camp in the early hours of Thursday from the nearby Tadamun distinct. The Syrian government said armed „terrorists“ were behind the carnage...An alleged opposition battalion, Saif Al-Islam, reportedly claimed responsibility for the attack, saying that the Palestinians in Yarmouk camp are in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2012-08/03/c_131759789.htm

So, at first the rebels attacked the camp claiming that it´s Palestinians are „guilty“ by being supporters of Assad. Then they infiltrated the camp and began „arming sympathetic Palestinians to fight a pro-Assad faction in a Palestinian enclave in Damascus„.
It is clear that the rebels, the so called „moderates“ of the FSA brought trouble to the camp:
„Residents at Yarmouk…said gunmen had been seen in the streets and some people kidnapped in recent days, eight of whom had been killed. It was not clear who was responsible.
A bomb exploded on Wednesday under the car of a Syrian army colonel in Yarmouk, although he was not in the vehicle, the opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said. A Syrian rebel commander claimed responsibility, calling it a „gift to Jibril’s people which will be followed by others“.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/31/us-syria-crisis-palestinians-idUSBRE89U1I320121031

Another resident confirms the assertion regarding the FSA being the harbinger of problems, devastation and suffering:
„Muhammad Tamim and Iptisam and their two adult children fled their home not far from the Palestinian Yarmouk camp in Damascus four months ago. Their parents and three elder children are still there.

“As soon as the FSA enters an area, the combat units follow and engage in action.  There’s no way we can live in the middle of a battlefield. Syria is headed towards a catastrophe,” said Muhammad“
http://rt.com/news/syria-people-home-rima-831/

Thousands of Islamist fighters invaded and occupied Yarmouk on December 17, 2012 and Palestinians and Syrians alike fled the camp, literally beginning the next day. The militants, they say, systematically destroyed the camp, killed people, looted homes, hospitals – anything they could get their hands on. They insist that the rebels could not have captured Yarmouk without the help of Hamas“
http://mideastshuffle.com/2014/11/17/stealing-palestine-who-dragged-palestinians-into-syrias-conflict/

The same article reports that as of January 2012 many members of the pro-Syrian government Palestine Liberation Army (PLA) were assassinated.

As early as January 2013, foreign fighters were seen in the camp
hiding among civilians in order to attack the Syrian forces:
„Foreign nationals are using the Palestinian refugee camp of Yarmouk in Damascus as a base to fight the Syrian government, a former adviser to late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat said Saturday.

“We’re calling committees in the camp and people there told us that foreigners are shooting at anyone that moves,” Bassam Abu Sharif told Palestine’s Ma’an news agency.

“They’re using the camp and the people of the camp as shields to attack government forces.”“
http://english.al-akhbar.com/content/foreign-fighters-using-damascus-refugee-camp-base-ex-arafat-aide

Another report from the same time (and more than 2 years ago from now) mentions the presence of Al Qaedas Syrian affiliate, Jabhat al Nusra (Nusra Front):
„Some fleeing Palestinians refugees at the Maznaa crossing mention that they fear that al-Qeada affiliates are taking over Yarmouk camp and want to establish an Islamic emirate…But there are sections where the Al Nusra Front is very much in control and are actively setting up social service centers and training bases for arriving recruits from a number of countries as well as, regrettably, some Palestinians…“
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/01/04/notes-from-damascus/

A further confirmation from January 2013: „Nusra was at the forefront of fighting in that city’s Yarmouk district.“
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/01/10/179548/al-qaida-linked-nusra-rebels-about.html

Accusing the Syrian Army of systematically starving the Yarmouk camp people are misleading. Due to its vicinity to the center of Damascus and the heavy presence of Al Nusra and other radical groups the Syrian Army has cordoned off the northern entrance to the camp, while the rebels control the southern entrance and the adjacent districts such as Tadamon, Yalda or Hajar al Aswad. Yarmouk is thus a huge risk factor for the government. Under such circumstances every army has to take strict measures to minimize the danger of attacks, infiltration and weapons smuggling into the capitals inner ring.
Nevertheless the Syrian Army has on several occasions evacuated people from Yarmouk to safe areas and attempted to bring in aid convois which was prevented and sabotaged by the REBELs:
„The convoy was cleared to proceed beyond the checkpoint and the Syrian authorities provided a bulldozer to go ahead to clear the road of debris, earth mounds and other obstructions.

The bulldozer was fired upon, hit by direct gunfire and forced to withdraw, though with no casualties. Thereafter, bursts of gunfire, including machine-gun fire, erupted close to the trucks and UNRWA vehicles, suggesting a firefight.

Also, one mortar exploded very close to the convoy. The convoy withdrew at this point following the advice of the security escort and returned safely to Damascus.“
http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/amid-gunfire-relief-convoy-turns-back-syrias-besieged-yarmouk-camp

The strategic geographic position of the camp is highlighted again here:
„The Islamist armed groups of the opposition saw the camp as the Syrian government’s Achilles‘ heel and nothing else, a prize-catch in their desperate quest to „conquer“ Damascus; the perfect springboard for their intended „jihad“ against the regime’s main stronghold, practically putting a target on the camp’s back and turning its entire refugee population into a huge block of human shields held hostage to the flick of these groups‘ military whims…The armed opposition’s all-guns-blazing infiltration into, and subsequent control over Yarmouk in late 2012 has plunged its Palestinian refugees headfirst into the throes of the Syrian war; transforming the largest Palestinian refugee camp in Syria into a „hostile territory“ for the Syrian Army…For the Al-Nusra front and other Islamist fighting militias; taking control over the camp was primarily a matter of scoring territorial advances against the „infidel“ regime, it constituted the closest front they’ll ever manage to get to Damascus, only this „pyrrhic victory“ has had the camp caught in a tight militaristic death-grip where foreign backed insurgents are wreaking doomed havoc inside the camp (including looting, arbitrary seizure of properties and taking on human shields), and the Syrian army is giving the area the full „military-zone“ treatment; imposing a full-fledged siege on most parts of the camp, particularly its northern entrance which connects directly to Damascus. “
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MID-01-300114.html

The same article raises a valid question: Why are the militants inside the camp well-armed and well-fed and apparently not suffering from hunger and thirst while the civilians have been dying?
„the curious fact remains that while the civilian population is suffering the lashes of hunger, thirst and dwindling medical supplies, militants inside the camp appear to be largely unaffected by the siege. On the contrary these groups seem to be well-armed, fully weaponized (at least to the extent that enables them to retain full military control over the majority of the camp despite the ongoing siege) and on multiple occasions have even instigated clashes and firefights with the Syrian army.

This begs the question: what prevents these militants from using their own supply routes and active ammunition channels to soften the impact of the regime-imposed siege on the civilian population inside the camp, keeping in mind that areas bordering Yarmouk from its southern entrance are controlled by the „rebels“ themselves? „

Exposing Human Rights Watchs (HRW) pretension of impartiality

There is valid reason to reject the notion of HRWs impartiality.

Take for instance HRWs repeated allegations against the Syrian government. While it is wrong to ignore human rights violations of ANY war party the real question is why HRW chooses to attack and denounce the Syrian army in a time when the latter is fighting the „Islamic State“ and Al Qaeda (like Syrias Al Nusra Front).
Also, If HRW seriously claims to be concerned regarding Syrian lives it should encourage ANY peace talks that would help ending bloodshed. Instead HRW one-sidedly emphasized on the barrel bombs used by the Syrian army even using a picture of Kobanes destruction by the US airforce to highlight the devastation of rebel-held Aleppo by the Syrian airforce:
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2015/02/human-rights-watch-accuses-syria-of-barrel-bomb-damage-created-by-us-attacks.html

In general, HRW trivializes too much:
The Syrian army is – despite being portrayed otherwise by the international mainstream media – not the only party causing civilian deaths. According to the famous Aleppo blogger Edward Dark who criticizes both the government and the opposition the rebels shelling of Aleppo alone has killed in excess of 2800 civilians:
https://twitter.com/edwardedark/status/580044825426292736?s=09
The blogger even said in the end of February (2015) that „the rebels have killed more civilians than the regime“ in Aleppo:
https://twitter.com/edwardedark/status/571287191575506944

HRW was also quick (and totally wrong) in accusing the Syrian army of having used chemical weapons in the infamous Eastern Ghouta (Damascus) attacks of 2013. HRW, certainly no experts in missile technology and ballistics erroneously claimed that the rockets hitting different locations around Damascus were both fired from the same Syrian army mountain top. This claim was refuted:
http://whoghouta.blogspot.de/2013/11/the-conclusion.html

To understand that HRW IS indeed biased and pursuing an agenda it is good to know who HRWs „Executive Director“ Kenneth Roth is. Ken Roth is at the same time part of the leadership of the „Council on Foreign Relations“ (CFR), an American think tank that – despite using a subtle pattern – has been defending wars and offensive military action under the pretext of defending human rights, fighting terror or the much quoted „responsibility to protect“ (R2P):
http://www.cfr.org/staff/b654
http://www.cfr.org/syria/r2p-crisis-following-un-syria-vote/p27303
http://www.lobelog.com/cfr-liberals-again-pushing-for-another-middle-east-war/

While it is true that HRW occasionally criticizes the US and Israel, this is merely to keep up the appearance of neutrality as such criticism is not intended to have the slightest negative consequences for those countries in particular or any pro western Nato or EU country in general. Noone is willing or able to impose sanctions on Israel or the US, let alone wage any war or „humanitarian intervention“ against those countries. Policies such as „responsibility to protect“ (R2P) have no external expression in case of western or pro-western countries. They will for instance never be applied against Saudi Arabia, no matter how much death and damage Saudi Arabias totally unjustified offensive war against the people of Yemen will cause.

 

To say IS or any Al Qaeda affiliates in Iraq or elsewhere is a reaction to Shia violence is nonsense

„The systematic murder of Shias by Isis has mirrored that of al-Qaeda in Iraq since the first days of the US occupation in 2003. The preferred method before Isis became a powerful military force was to send suicide bombers to mosques, markets or pilgrimage sites where the explosion would cause maximum casualties.“
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-mass-graves-iraqi-forensic-teams-recover-remains-of-1700-military-cadets-slaughtered-by-militants-near-tikrit-10160883.html

Assad, IS and the „activists“

Probably every single western mainstream media outlet, be it Radio, TV, Newspapers or Internet, has at least once used the phrase „Assad is bombing his own people“.

Interestingly, whenever the insurgents in Syria capture a town or village and the inhabitants flee towards government-held areas, immediately some „activists“ are quoted claiming that the people – who we are supposed to believe are entirely pro-rebels and against the Syrian government – do this in order to escape from the subsequent bombing by the Syrian army.
This „logic“ is difficult to comprehend because it basically implies the following:
1. Before their town´s capture the inhabitants did NOT flee towards the rebel-held „liberated“ areas
2. The people, especially the supposedly oppressed and marginalized Sunni majority choses to continue being „mistreated“ and suffering the evil of the „Assad regime“ instead of joining the rebel ranks to help „liberate“ further places in Syria
In addition the question should be raised in reverse whether those „activists“ would assume civilians fleeing toward rebel-areas are government supporters trying to avoid rebel shellings, tunnel and suicide bombs. (?)

Now, to connect the issue with IS, let´s take a look at the takeover of the Yarmouk camp by IS. It is said that from thr original 200.000 residents of the camp all but 10-20.000 have left. Further, it is said that IS controls 90% of the camp.
You can bet that if the Syrian army and allies shell and bomb the camp, our „activists“ will report of the regimes „indiscriminate“ shelling of civilians. All the while there are still pockets of resistance by „moderate“ heroic rebels who try to repel IS, of course without harming any civilians (except „Shabiha“ probably) and entirely hurting the radical IS militants, whom at least parts of the MSM are still portraying as a creation of Assad or in cahoots with him.

To summarize, we „learn“ that while…
– the Israelis act with maximum „restraint“ and exclusively target „terrorists“ and in the process „regrettably“ kill thousands of civilians
or
– the Saudis destruction of a neighbouring country´s entire military, industrial and civilian infrastructure is merely a tragic and unavoidable collateral damage of „defending“ against an allegedly Iranian-backed militia (which has been operating on it´s own country´s soil
…Assad and his majority Sunni army are deliberately and intentionally killing the „own people“, simply because the latter are Sunnis and demanded basic rights.
The actions of the Syrian army, we are supposed to believe, have nothing to do with militants (including IS) infiltrating neighborhoods and leading to the civilians subsequent departure.
And even if IS should take over the entire 100% of Yarmouk and only 1000 residents would remain you can be sure that „Assad“ does not bomb the camp to fight IS but to kill his „own people“.