Articles that make you go Hmmmm. Al Qaeda are now our ally.

Posted: August 8, 2012 in Political musings
Tags: , , , , , ,

I am never quite sure what to make of some of the articles on  They are full of stories of conspiracies, dirty doings and nefarious news behind the news. What is true, and what is the work of fevered imaginations, is almost impossible to divine without one’s own research facilities, and opposing viewpoints to consider.

But this latest article seems well researched, and certainly worthy of serious consideration. As we wait for the Assad regime to fall, we need to be careful what we wish for. As has been said many times, if we are seeing quasi-West-friendly anti-democratic regimes being toppled, but only to be replaced with rabid religious nutters like Al-Qaeda, then frankly, we may end up looking back reminiscently to the stability of the Assads, Gadaffis and Mubaraks, as horrible as that sounds.

Quoting Orwell’s 1984, and Infowars lead their article with the ironic cry: “Winston, we were never at war with Eurasia!” Indeed, indeed. It was ever thus. But that does not mean we should not be alarmed. Here’s the article, you make your own mind up. What do you think of the points it raises?

Paul Joseph Watson
Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Senior Council on Foreign Relations fellow Ed Husain has hailed the presence of Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria, praising their fighting prowess in aid of FSA rebels while also lauding the increasing number of successful bombings carried out by Al-Qaeda fighters.

In case you didn’t get the memo – Al-Qaeda – the same group the United States accuses of carrying out the most devastating terrorist attack on U.S. soil in history, is now our ally in Syria.

Terrorist attacks carried out by Al-Qaeda in Syria are inherently moral and good. Down is the new up.

Winston, we were never at war with Eurasia!

“The Syrian rebels would be immeasurably weaker today without al-Qaeda in their ranks. By and large, Free Syrian Army (FSA) battalions are tired, divided, chaotic, and ineffective. Feeling abandoned by the West, rebel forces are increasingly demoralized as they square off with the Assad regime’s superior weaponry and professional army,” writes Husain, a Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies with the CFR.

“Al-Qaeda fighters, however, may help improve morale. The influx of jihadis brings discipline, religious fervor, battle experience from Iraq, funding from Sunni sympathizers in the Gulf, and most importantly, deadly results. In short, the FSA needs al-Qaeda now,” he adds.

The Council on Foreign Relations is considered to be America’s “most influential foreign-policy think tank” and has deep connections with the U.S. State Department. In 2009, Hillary Clinton welcomed the fact that the CFR had set up an outpost down the street from the State Department in Washington DC, because it meant “I won’t have as far to go to be told what we should be doing.”

Husain goes on to celebrate the fact that Al-Qaeda’s role in carrying out terrorist bombings in cities like Damascus and Aleppo has intensified, writing that “The group’s strength and acceptance by the FSA are demonstrated by their increasing activity on the ground –from seven attacks in March to sixty-six “operations” in June.”

His fervor for Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks – which have included targets such as schools and TV stations – is matched by the Obama administration as well as Ambassador Susan Rice, who have applauded terror bombings as a useful tool in destabilizing Bashar Assad’s government.

However, by the end of his article Husain is using the presence of Al-Qaeda fighters in Syria – put there with the aid of NATO powers – as another reason for military intervention in Syria.

“The planning to minimize al-Qaeda’s likely hold over Syrian tribes and fighters must begin now as the Obama administration ramps up its support to rebel groups,” he writes.

Husain strikes a similar tone to a recent report published by the RAND Corporation which also cites the presence of Al-Qaeda fighters in Syria as justification to “Conduct a covert campaign against al Qaeda and other extremist groups gaining a presence in the country.”

As the London Guardian has documented (in glowing terms), far from there being a distinction between the FSA rebels and Al-Qaeda terrorists, the Al-Qaeda fighters, along with hordes of foreign fighters including many veterans of NATO’s previous act of regime change in Libya, are now commanding the rebels.

“We have clear instructions from our [al-Qaida] leadership that if the FSA need our help we should give it. We help them with IEDs and car bombs. Our main talent is in the bombing operations,” said former FSA rebel turned Al-Qaeda commander Abu Khuder, adding that Al-Qaeda fighters meet “every day” with Syrian rebels.

In addition, rebel fighters are routinely photographed wearing the Al-Qaeda motif. There are also innumerable You Tube videos that show opposition forces flying the Al-Qaeda flag.

It’s astounding to witness the mainstream media and the establishment now admitting what for months they denied – that Al-Qaeda is not only present in Syria but actually leading the uprising against the Syrian government.

It’s also jaw-dropping to witness the lashings of praise being heaped upon Al-Qaeda for their efforts in carrying out terrorist attacks to precipitate a NATO-backed regime change, while those very same people simultaneously cite Al-Qaeda’s presence as a justification for U.S. and NATO military involvement in Syria.

  1. rbhexem says:

    I think its a load of crap, that’s what I think. But…….same old, same old!!


  2. We’re letting them lead the fight, not knowing what else to do. In five years the Arab Spring will have a new phrase. One that is more sinister.


  3. mlshatto says:

    Given the way the U.S. war machine works, this sounds quite believable. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Alas, it has ever been thus. Alliances in the Middle East shift almost as rapidly as do Mitt Romney’s positions on any given topic. We financed the Taliban when they were fighting the Soviets. Saddam Hussein was our good buddy when he opposed the ayatollahs in Iran. So it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if we were cheering on Al Qaeda in Syria. It is not in the interest of the deep-pocketed arms manufacturers to allow anything like a move toward lasting peace in that troubled region.


    • Which is a very depressing thought ….


      • mlshatto says:

        Yes, I know … it is depressing. I try not to be cynical too often, but the news over this past weekend has just been horrific. Then I look at my niece’s beautiful children, and I want to scoop them up in a big hug and tell them how very, very sorry I am that we are leaving them with such a mess to clean up. There’s good positive energy out there. OWS gives me some hope, and the Transition Towns movement shows how much some young people care about planning for a sustainable future. But what they are up against in this country is appalling. Most of the rest of the world “gets it” a lot better than we do. I’ve accepted the fact that I most likely won’t live long enough to see a lot of the wrongs made right, but maybe these children will.


  4. jvdix says:

    Is the enemy of my enemy my friend? If there was ever a question crying out to be answered “it depends,” it’s this one. In this particular case, I would say that this development should bring us up short and force us to consider we might be (gasp!) wrong. Yeah, like that’s ever going to happen.


  5. Ganesh Singh says:

    “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” For some context it may be happen true, or it may be relative matter i.e. may be differ between person to person , situation to situation, place to place, and so forth. Regarding peace building, conflict management issue, maintaining security for the people, for development, etc; this statement may not be right. However, on the one hand, Al-Qaeda terrorists are the big headache for entire world so that no one wants to enhance or to encourage their morale as well, on the other hand, we also cant undermine people’s security . If we give them such a opportunity to fight with each other, what will be the condition of people’s security. Hence, peace maker, peace builder, peace keeper cant assume that the enemy of their enemy is their friend, because peace keeper/maker/ builder are contrary terms of terrorists.If we have sacred mission to establish world peace, we should teach various good lessons to those Al-Qaeda terrorists.


What do YOU think? That's what matters. Please comment!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s