Hezbollah vs. Saudi Arabia in Syrias war

In contrast to Saudi Arabias (or Qatars) military engagement in Syrias war there is quite comprehensible reason behind Hezbollahs involvement.
Hezbollah is subject to clear and present existential danger in case of the victory of mainly radical sectarian insurgents who for years have demonstrated their deadly anti – shia violence in Syria and Iraq.
There was and is obvious reason to assume that a CIA backed and Israeli supported „rebellion“ won’t stop at regime change in Syria but would also immediately cut the life line of Hezbollah in Lebanon. With the constant and increasing Israeli threat at the southern gates of Lebanon Hezbollah cannot afford to lose the Syrian supply channel.

Having shown why Hezbollah accepts significant casualties to ensure its survival it is barely comprehensible why Saudi Arabia goes at lengths to beat and remove the Syrian government and Hezbollah.
None of them poses a threat to Saudi Arabia, nor have they attacked Saudi Arabia. There is not even a frontier.
Essentially there is one neighbouring country that is highly pleased with Saudi Arabias huge support for the anti – Hezbollah forces: Israel, the country that not only occupies Palestinian land but also has attacked and fought every surrounding Arab country.

[Update] Why are Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW) fact-faking against Syria?

For the fourth time within few weeks Amnesty International and HRW used images from heavy destruction to blame the Syrian government and it´s army for bombings it had not carried out..

Each time images of devastating bombings were posted with the blame put on the Syrian army.
In the first case HRW posted the picture below along with a text condemning Syria for using „barrel bombs“:
However, it turned out that the destruction displayed was due to the US bombing of the Syrian city of Kobane:

In another instance, Amnesty International posted a picture showing destruction in Aleppo and again attributed it to bombings by the Syrian airforce:
The image has nothing to do with any barrel bombs but with a bombing carried out by the Syrian Al Qaeda affiliate and enemy of the government, the Al Nusra Front:

Then, HRWs Executive Director Ken Roth personally tweeted yet another photo supposedly showing heavy destruction in Aleppo and accusing Assad of being responsible for it, when in fact the massive destruction is from Gaza and a result of Israels bombing campaign in the summer of 2014:

Finally, Mr. Roth sent yet another tweet:

But as the „Moon of Alabama“ Blog once again excellently exposes the destruction shown above does not stem from „Assad´s barrel bombs“, but it shows „a neighborhood attacked by anti-Syrian Jihadists and defended by pro-Syrian forces in support of the government. Is Kenneth Roth insinuating that the Syrian government caused that damage by „barrel bombing“ its supporters? Or did rather the „moderate rebels“ he seemingly supports destroyed those buildings.“

Read also:

„Top Priority“ in Syria: Removing Assad (according to Samantha Power and others)

Samantha Power – US ambassador to the UN – says Assad is the major problem in Syria, because, had it not been for his (barrel) bombing, Jihadists would not come to Syria to fight for ISIS:

This is dishonest nonsense: If the US is concerned about Jihadists operating in Syria it should have put pressure on Turkey to not allow them to use that country as a hub to enter Syria. The same bearded islamist fighters that the US has been killing with drones in Pakistan and Afghanistan have been openly and freely gathering on the Turkish side of the border and moving into Syria without being stopped by Turkish border guards:

Qatar and Saudi Arabia purchased and sent thousands of tonnes of weapons to Syrian rebels as late as 2012:
„The airlift, which began on a small scale in early 2012 and continued intermittently through last fall, expanded into a steady and much heavier flow late last year, the data shows. It has grown to include more than 160 military cargo flights by Jordanian, Saudi and Qatari military-style cargo planes landing at Esenboga Airport near Ankara, and, to a lesser degree, at other Turkish and Jordanian airports.“

In the same year France violated a UN weapons ban and delivered weapons including heavy weapons (rocket launchers) to the rebels:

Jihadists would have not been enabled and encouraged to fight without such constant flow of weapons:
„…what the CIA calls a ‘rat line’, a back channel highway into Syria. The rat line, authorised in early 2012, was used to funnel weapons and ammunition from Libya via southern Turkey and across the Syrian border to the opposition. Many of those in Syria who ultimately received the weapons were jihadists, some of them affiliated with al-Qaida…funding came from Turkey, as well as Saudi Arabia and Qatar; the CIA, with the support of MI6, was responsible for getting arms from Gaddafi’s arsenals into Syria.“

It was not Assad as „terror magnet“ that brought tens of thousands of international Jihadists to Syria, but Saudi and Qatari money, American, british and French weapons supplies and Turkish/Jordanian facilitations as border countries along with Israels not so covert sabotaging of Syrias military that allowed Jihadists to arm themselves, enter Syria and strengthen due to the weakening of the Syrian army.
The idea that the United States and Israel care for Sunni Arab lives and wellbeing is more than hypocritical, it is bizarre. Israel carries out operations that kill thousands of Palestinian civilians in the course of few weeks and destroy infrastructure worth billions of USD:
„Looking only at the major military operations of the Israeli army in the last 7 years it turns out that some 2700 Palestinian civilians were killed, while only 8 (eight) Israeli civilians were killed.“

The US supports Israel, justifies and legitimizes its actions, delivers the weapons and resupplies the ammunition. Israel has used phosphorus and cluster ammunition against Palestinians. The Palestinian victims of Israels are not labeled „activists“, nor „freedom fighters“. They are not even called resistance fighters or rebels, they are TERRORISTS.
But while Israel treats Palestinian children and minors as „terrorists„, the Israeli government suddenly is full of sympathy with bearded islamist Syrians who are portrayed as righteous men fighting against a dictatorship and for freedom and democracy:
The rise of sectarian radical islamists in Syria, both syrian and international Jihadists is neither a coincidence nor an „accidental“. It is according to a systematic long term plan to destroy pro-Russian and/or pro-Iranian governments opposed to Israel. The Syrian government brings all the ingredients to draw the wrath of the Americans, the Israelis and the Sunni Gulf states. The Americans and the Israelis – along with their European ever „yes saying“ allies – pretend to be moved by human rights violations, while everyone familiar with the fate of Palestinians since 1948 and that of the Iraqi since 1991 knows that both, the US and Israel, do not care at all for Muslim Arab lives.
The Gulf Arabs hate Assad and the Syrian government because of it´s pro-Iranian character. All allegations of torture and repression raised against Assad are unconvincing, given that the Gulf states as well as Turkey had relations with Syria until 2011 and were regularly meeting Assad. Had Assad agreed to allow the Qatari gas pipeline to go through Syria, the Qataris had not unleashed the Muslim Brotherhood against the Syrian government:
„In 2009 – the same year former French foreign minister Dumas alleges the British began planning operations in Syria – Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter’s North field, contiguous with Iran’s South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey“


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. “

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:

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!):

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.“

Zarqawi „achieved notoriety in the early stages of the Iraqi insurgency for the suicide attacks on Shia Islamic mosques, civilians“

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.“

Saudi plans for „liberated“ Syria?

Word is that Saudi Arabia has promised the Nusra Front (JAN) „every help“ the latter needs to defeat Assad. This would come through Turkey and possibly also through Jordan.
At the same time the Turkey based syrian opposition was praising the „liberation“ of Idlib at the hands of a coalition centering around JAN. This same coalition has been claiming for years that the Syrian opposition to Assad is a moderate movement supposedly interested in introducing a secular and liberal democracy to Syria.
But both this opposition and it’s propagandists in western governments and mass media must be totally delusional to think for a second that the likes of Saudi Arabia are investing resources to plant the seed of democracy into Syrias soil. Saudi Arabia is a country which has had some hundred people beheaded in 2014. It’s a place where women are not allowed to drive at all or travel without their husbands approval. Add to this the flogging of harmless bloggers and a total clamp down on all kind of political activity. Yet you still have people lauding the Saudi regime for its „restraint“, for being a regional stabilizer and a „valued partner“.
Saudi Arabia is none of this, but it is world’s biggest exporter of petroleum, one of the major buyers of American weapons and an enemy of Iran.

„Al Qaeda & friends“ captured the Syrian city of Idlib – some interesting notes

„Islamist rebels have captured the north-western Syrian city of Idlib from government forces“

These rebel coalition going by the name „Jaysh al Fateh“ is not only „Islamists“ but mainly even Al Qaeda, as the main factions involved were Jabhat al Nusra (JAN) and the Salafi group Ahrar al Sham.
„While Al Nusrah is an official arm of al Qaeda in Syria, both Ahrar al Sham and Jund al Aqsa are also linked to al Qaeda.“

Moderate fighters once supported by the United States played no role in Idlib’s capture. They had been routed from the province by Nusra over the past three months, and starting in December, the United States had cut their salaries and supplies.“

What is interesting is that in a Sunni city of 100.000 people no rebel victory video shows any population greeting and celebrating the rebels. Where are the „liberated“ civilians?

And there is the well-known neutral blogger Edward Dark who even says that most of the people fled Idlib towards government areas:
Same repeated by another source:



„Over 120,000 pro-Assad fighters killed in Syria“? – The flaws of a wild claim

According to SOHR „120,000 fighters supporting Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad have been killed in the civil war since 2011“

Why is this number unlikely (too high)?
In April 2014 SOHR was speaking of a total „pro-regime“ death toll of 57.500 fighters. So, the statement above would imply that in the last 8 months until December 2014 some 62.500 further pro-government army soldiers and militia fighters were killed. This is totally exaggerated as it would mean that these forces had an average monthly casualty figure of almost 8.000 men.

More interestingly, however, this contradicts another assertion made by SOHR in the same article above:
„nearly 11,000 government security forces and allied militia were killed in the five months after Al-Assad’s inauguration speech at the start of his third term…Al-Assad began a third term last July…“
This figure sounds more realistic and puts the average death toll at 2.200 pro-government fighters per month, which is way below the 8.000 men calculated before.
Assuming the latest average of 2.200 deaths to be true, the highest casualty figure for the government side would be 57.500 + 8 x 2.200 = appr. 75.000.

According to an early report by Nir Rosen and later admissions by SOHR themselves in many cases rebel casualties were declared civilian deaths to demonize the government. At the same time it is not far-fetched to assume that SOHR has been very open to accept rebel claims about „Shabbiha deaths“. Probably many pro-government civilians or state employees (such as ordinary policemen) who were killed intentionally or accidentally by the rebels were denounced by the latter as „Shabbiha“ or otherwise part of the security apparatus.


More than 140 pupils and teachers have been killed by the Taliban – May God destroy Wahhabism

May God destroy a sick ideology that considers lawful the intentional killing of school children:
The criminal mindset that motivates „believers“ to consider mass killing of children „halal“ has nothing „divine“ in it. This is no religion from God, it is a mental disease, an evil cancer that has to be dealt with harshly and destroyed.
This mental disease disguised as „heavenly religion“ is a result of Saudi Arabia successfully spreading it´s radical and sectarian Wahhabi ideology due to having almost unlimited financial ressources. The US has facilitated this as a matter of fact by not penalizing Saudi Arabia and – on the contrary – encouraging every military and political strategy that harms and „contains“ Iran.
To achieve this Saudi Arabia has been investing for more than 30 years in a systematic and massive build-up of Madrassahs and military camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan teaching and preaching anti-Shia and thus anti-Iranian Wahhabism. This has always been considered OK and even as a desirable result by the US and it´s allies.
The Taliban were created, maintained and armed and trained by Pakistans secret service ISI and with massive infusions of money from Saudi and other Gulf Arab individuals who share the same Wahhabi ideology. Saudi Arabias Prince Turki himself visited Afghanistan under the Taliban in the late Nineties and provided hundreds of Datsun and Toyota Pick-up trucks with heavy MGs and artillery pieces mounted on them. Without enormous help by the Saudi government and private donors from the Persian Gulf countries plus the immense support by Pakistan where major parts of the military establishment sympathize with the Taliban the latter would not have been able to battle and push back the other Mujahedeen factions (who were mainly Sunni Afghans themselves).

Also today Al Qaeda in Yemen following the same sick ideology staged another attack that led to the death of many Children: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30504641

The artcile on the top contains this statement, which brings it to the point:
„Like Boko Haram in Nigeria, the Pakistani Taliban has an aversion to classrooms. It is a function of its own illiteracy, but also its belief that such places of learning promote “vulgarity” and “Western-inspired decadence”.

We Muslims must finally find the courage to acknowledge that there are major flaws in this religion, which are unfortunately not limited to Wahhabism. The broad majority of problems related with Islam come from the „prophetic traditions“, the so called „Hadeeth“, which are supposed to be the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad. Although even the supposedly authentic „Saheeh Hadeeth“ are highly disputed in their reliability and do not withstand critical investigations the broad majority of mainstream Sunni muslims and many Shias believe in them and consider them „teachings“ that are as binding as the Quran.
The islamic community is simply too lazy and fearful of committing a sin by doubting the Hadeeth and being more sceptic towards them.
One such Hadeeth (allegedly by Umar ibn al Khattab) which is often cited to „justify“ hostility towards schools and universities or any centers of non-religious learning is the following:
„As for the books you mention, here is my reply. If their content is in accordance with the book of Allah, we may do without them, for in that case the book of Allah more than suffices. If, on the other hand, they contain matter not in accordance with the book of Allah, there can be no need to preserve them. Proceed, then, and destroy them.“
Although there are indications that this Hadeeth is a forgery some Muslims cite this and other Muslims – holding Umar for an almost „infallible“ person – simply accept it.