Die „moderaten“ Rebellen der Jaish al Fath (Army of Conquest) in Nordsyrien?

Was soll eigentliche dieser ganze Unsinn um angeblich „moderate Rebellen“ in Syrien?

– 80% dieser „moderaten Rebellen“ tragen Bärte, die man zurecht und eindeutig mit Salafisten assoziiert
– Ihre ganzen Battaillone haben eindeutig islami(sti)sche Namen
– Sie beleidigen ihre Gegner (Syrische Armee, Hizbollah) mit religiösen Diffamierungen (Ungläubige, Apostate…)

Wer sollen denn diese „moderaten“ sein?
Die in Idlib kämpfende grösste und stärkste Rebellen-Dachorganisation ist „Jaish al Fath“ (bedeutet „Armee der Eroberung“ und das Wort „Fath“ ist eine „Hommage“ auf die frühislamischen Eroberungszüge der Muslime gegen die römischen Christen) beinhaltet als grösste Untergruppierungen zwei Gruppen, die als salafistisch und lokale „Ableger“ der Al Qaida gelten:
– Nusra Front
– Ahrar al Sham

Auch ein weiteres Mitglied, die „Jund al Aqsa“ gilt als Al Qaeda nah:

„The Long War Journal has previously identified Jund al Aqsa as an al Qaeda front, based on the biographies of its leadership, the group’s propaganda, and its close working relationship with the Al Nusrah Front, al Qaeda’s official branch in Syria. “

Weitere Mitglieder der Jaish al Fath sind tschetschenische, uighurische, türkische, uzbekische und marrokanische Verbände, die Selbstmordattentäter und Kindersoldaten einsetzen:


Die Russen bombardieren hauptsächlich die Jaish al Fath, aber was soll denn an ihr „moderat“ sein?

„The Turkistan Islamic Party (TIP), an Uighur jihadist group that is affiliated with al Qaeda and operates in Central and South Asia, has published photos showing its fighters engaging in combat with Syrian government forces in Hama and Latakia provinces. “

„Excellent“ US idea: (Further) arm islamists (and hope they fight RADICAL islamists)…

„Susan Rice, Obama’s national security adviser, said the US would „ramp up“ its support to the moderate Syrian opposition, Isis’s ostensible rivals for control of the Syrian resistance to Bashar Assad.“

This shows the unending idiocy of a senior member of the US administration. Still, her only silly and unsubstantiated approach towards the ISIS or „radical islamist“ dilemma is to attempt to boost the laughable and tiny Syrian non-islamist opposition. An opposition with a phantom, „ghost“ character, hardly playing any role in reality.

The US admin fails to understand that any „ramp up“ of Syrias allegedly „moderates“ has almost definitely one of the following consequences:

a) The moderates sell or forward the weapons to the radicals who are the more battle-hardened and experienced fighters, willing to die (and kill ruthlessly)

b) The radicals which are not only ISIS, but also „Nusra Front“, „Islamic Front“ or „Syrian revolutionary front“ (and thus according to Israeli sources 80% of the rebels) simply overcome the CIA-vetted „moderates“ and take their weapons

c) Many formerly „moderates“ discover that their companions are opportunists merely interested in building themselves a power base (just like the afghan militias in the 90s) and decide to join the „real mujahedeen“

After 13 years of „anti-terror“ war, „enduring freedom“, „mission accomplished“ and other garbage, Al Qaeda and affiliates are stronger than ever, while the oh so bad Bashar al Assad and his Iranian and Russian backers have been the best powers to fight Al Qaeda.

„International community“ – The western world´s unendurable self-complacency

I have come to the conclusion that most western people – and by this I mean mainly central Europeans and white Americans – are self-righteous racists in the sense that they are supremacists. Few of them would claim this vocally but there are clear patterns in their words, actions and minds that testimony to this impression. The anglo-saxon „white man“ is quite a narcissist, implicitly (and at times) explicitly believing in his superiority. There is wide spread belief that the western value system is inherently „good“, that westerners live up to higher moral levels, etc.

I am sure the „ordinary“ western citizen does not and cannot see what nine out of ten non-westerners living in central Europe see and feel every day. If you read and watch western (main stream) media these days you must be disgusted by a blatant lack of standard and decency. There is pogrom like polemic daily reporting on Russia and Putin. In an almost unprecedented twist of facts and total ignorance of truth a putchist, neo-Nazi junta in Ukraine has been romanticized as pro-democracy activists, simply as the „good guys“, the „legitimate“ „authorities“. It is a joke, though a sad and scandalous one, and the coverage of western European and american media is both infantile and propagandistic.

Nothing has changed: The arrogant people of the western world enjoy constructing yet another black and white phantasy world, where – as usual – they represent humanity, freedom, civilization, progress and happiness while their adversaries summarize everything bad in this world.

It is utterly laughable to hear western politicians talking about „the international community“. Who the hell makes up this self-complacent artificial entity, when major parts of the global population (China, India, Russia, wide parts of Africa, Middle East, South Asia and South America) often are not included?

Palestinian „terrorist“ vs. Ukrainian „freedom fighter“

The brazen double speak of most western politicians and media „experts“ knows no limits.
In order to justify Israeli violence and maintain the constant portrayal of Israel as innocent victim of the very people it occupies and suppresses since decades, every uniformed Palestinian had to be defamed as „terrorist“ or at least „with terrorist links“. This would apply to almost every member of a Palestinian security organization including traffic policemen of the Hamas rulers of Gaza.

At the same time when it comes to the worst violent, militant and at times even antisemitic mob those people are romanticized and hyped as „freedom fighters“ or „activists“ as long as they oppose pro-Russian people, be the latter a democratically elected government or citizens not sharing their anti-Russian views.

Whenever any ethnic or religious group in a pro-Russian country demanded secession or separatism US and most western European governments were the first to praise such „freedom movements“ and expect the ruling governments to immediately cede power or allow „reforms“. So, in a new climax of shamelessly biased coverage of events the removal of Ukraines elected government was cheered as a victory of democracy. So, it is legitimate to forcefully remove the regular government, but it is not legitimate for vast portions of the (East) Ukrainian population to oppose the non-elected and thus illegitimate new „government“ in Kiev?

Read this: