Our National Interests and Syria


Bashar al-Assad in vise toon

 

John R. Houk

© June 3, 2013

 

The blogger Danny Jeffrey has often been critical of the U.N. and Obama international principle of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The public presentation of R2P is that the international community has a responsibility to protect civilians of a nation placed in a life threatening dangerous position from either its government or perhaps internal terrorism the local government cannot cope with or both. AND that sounds altruistic enough, don’t you think?

 

Jeffrey’s criticism is simple. R2P is a tool of Leftist Globalists and the U.N. to have an excuse to further the agenda of a global New World Order under some kind of dual Leftist-Islamic design. Danny Jeffrey off the top of my head seems to emphasize the Caliphate agenda of Radical Islam.

 

I say “off the top of my head” because it seems that Danny’s essays that I have read tend to be suspicious of Islam’s goal to destroy Israel and the Leftist tend to agree with that agenda. I personally think global Leftists and the Caliphate agenda Muslims are taking advantage of each other with the intention of screwing each other over. My reasoning for this thinking is that Leftists are not fond of religious influence in general and Islam is not fond of any other religions or ideologies that are secularist at best and atheistic at worst. As far as Islam is concerned that would run the Leftist gamut of Secular Humanist Socialists to atheistic Marxists.

 

Thus in my line of thinking the Leftist-Radical Islam unity is more like an “enemy of my enemy is my friend” agenda until that enemy is eliminated. If that situation occurs you can imagine the global bloodlust that would follow a global Leftist vs. global Muslim Caliphate war. It would be like medieval days when the winners destroyed en masse the losers. Protocols of modern Western Civilization would be totally thrown out the door while such a war would be a series of battles in which each battle victory by either side would be an ethnic cleansing moment until the victors would be the only ones standing after ethnic cleansing annihilation.

 

A global Leftist-Caliphate war would be an End Times apocalypse in nature.

 

In this sense I agree with Danny that R2P is a nefarious thing that the long term affects will be of no good for people (Mostly Americans) who love Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The long term affects of R2P will strengthen the ulterior motives of global Leftists and global Caliphate Muslims to the horrible misfortune of Christians and Bill of Rights minded Americans. Both Christians and Bill of Rights minded Americans are the target of destruction by global Leftists and global Caliphate Muslims.

 

However when it comes to Syria, I believe dumping Bashar al-Assad will throw a monkey wrench in the Caliphate agenda because it will highlight the mutual hatred that Sunnis and Shias have for each other. Sunnis represent roughly 90% of Islam and Shias represent roughly 10% Islam.

 

The largest Shia nation is Iran of which that nation’s Mullocracy are mostly Twelver Shias. They are called Twelvers because they believe a Twelfth or Hidden Imam will reveal himself and force Islam upon the whole Earth. That Twelfth Imam is a direct descendant of the Prophet Mohammed. Therein lay the hatred between Sunnis and Shias.

 

The Sunnis beat back the Shias in a war in which the last Mohammed relative that was a Caliph – Ali – had his Caliphate terminated by assassination. The Shias believed only a person of a Mohammed ancestry line could guide Muslims as Caliph. Allegedly the last living relative of Mohammed (the twelfth in lineage that is) disappeared. I am uncertain what the Sunnis believe about this guy – perhaps Sunnis believe he was killed or perhaps never existed; thus ending any claim to a hereditary Caliphate. I am certain that the Shias believe this twelfth Imam and descendant of Mohammed via Ali went into some sort of occultation to be hidden until the time was right for revealing himself to secure the Earth for Islam.

 

Okay that is a brief summary of the Sunni-Shia divide that is roughly correct but I am sure is filled with anomalies from the Sunni or Shia perspective.

 

The thing is Iran – a Shia theocratic nation – has regional designs as in being the top Muslim dog in the Middle East. Iran is the only Muslim nation that has an open destructive against both Israel and America that will undoubted be threatening because the development of nuclear weapons.

 

Iran’s principle allies in the region are Assad’s Shia-Alawite minority Syrian government and Hezbollah-Shia terrorist dominated Lebanon. Taking out Assad from this religious maniac alliance of Iran-Syria-Hezbollah will disrupt the military designs of Iran.

 

Of course the problem that Danny will point is that Syrian rebels fighting against Assad are religious nuts of radical Sunni-Muslims that essentially and probably will lead to a problem for the USA and Israel. My thinking is though that the USA and Israel already have a problem with Israel. So why not place Iran is a situation that some of their nefarious regional goals are disrupted by killing or booting Assad out of Syrian control?

 

So here I am in the unenviable position of both agreeing and disagreeing with Danny Jeffrey’s most recent essay on R2P, aiding the Syrian rebels, Obama’s support of those rebels and Senator McCain’s pushing Obama to support those rebels.

 

And yet I also have to tell you that Obama is the most corrupt President as to supporting the Constitutional principles of the Founding Fathers since Aaron Burr almost attained that Presidency in our then young Republic. When Obama says “Change” he means transform America away from the Bill of Rights and to at least make America a Multiculturalist Socialist-Democratic nation and at worst a Marxist utopia with no Liberty whatsoever.

 

JRH 6/3/13 (Hat Tip: Danny from Facebook Group 1683 AD)

Please Support NCCR

Chemical Assad is a War Criminal


Bashar al-Assah lying about chem-weapons toon

John R. Houk

© May 28, 2013

 

Most Conservatives see the Syrian Civil War as a no-win situation for American National Interests. On one side you have the rogue government of Bashar al-Assad that is Iran’s ally and a conduit for Islamic terrorists especially the Shi’ites of Hezbollah entrenched in Lebanon. On the other side you have the Free Syrian Army (FSA) that is a loosely united bunch of Sunni Muslims and Syrian Secularists (See Also HERE and HERE) rebelling against Assad’s Shi’ite Alawite dominated government. The current problem with the Free Syrian Army rebels is that its army is dominated by Islamist factions of which the largest appears to an al Qaeda affiliate.

 

And so there is the appearance of a no-win choice existing for the U.S. government. It has been confirmed that the Assad government is indeed using chemical weapons against the FSA. It is probably a good guess that Assad is using internationally illegal chemical weapons against the FSA it is a good guess that Assad is using chemical weapons against the Sunni civilian population that is supportive of the FSA.

 

History shows that helping Islamists against a current common enemy of the USA will come back to bite us in the – you know what. We aided Taliban Islamists against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Taliban were more than willing to take American aid to be a thorn in Soviet Russia’s side until the Soviet army withdrew and the puppet Communist government eventually fell into the hands of Mullah Mohammed Omar. AND the old one-eyed Mullah Omar repaid our aid by giving al Qaeda and its power structure led by Usama bin Laden refuge after the psycho Islamic terrorist sneak attack on 9/11.

 

The same thing will probably happen if America decides to aid the FSA against Assad’s rogue Syrian government. So then why help the FSA?

 

The reason for helping the FSA is because ending Assad throws a monkey wrench into Iran and Hezbollah’s nefarious designs against Israel and the USA. Well, at least for awhile there will be disruption against Iran.

 

The hat trick is knowing history of radical Muslims we have helped will bite our gluteus maximus then at least be smart enough to develop a couple of back-up plans in preparation for that radical Muslim back-stabbing. And by back-up plans I mean something that will strike pain and fear for radical Muslim treachery. A military response does not necessarily mean soldiers on the ground. A military response can be a military strike using conventional weaponry or nuclear weaponry on a strategic basis. And strategic nukes does not turning a whole nation into nuclear made glass from a massive nuke blast.   

 

So yes, at this time an American led coalition needs to remove and punish Assad and his chem-weapon happy generals as war criminals.

 

JRH 5/28/13

Please Support NCCR

U.S. National Interests and the Syrian Civil War


Map locates Khan al-Assal, Syria, where the government and rebels accused each other of attacking with chemical weapons

John R. Houk

© April 28, 2013

 

Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian regime is using chemical weapons to stop the momentum of the Syrian rebels from dethroning the Assad regime. Now I realize perhaps a half to even more than a half of the Rebels are radical Muslims perhaps making them no worse than Assad’s secular-socialized government dominated by Syria’s Alawite-Shia (See Here, Here and Here) minority. Nonetheless, chemical weapons are supposed to be illegal by international convention. I am guessing the U.N. Security Council could empower military sanctions against Assad’s regime.

 

Now I know many Conservatives – Danny Jeffrey comes to mind – are against the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect (R2P). R2P apparently has a few criticisms such as providing an excuse to invade to accomplish the National Interests of perhaps an agreed coalition bloc of nations. And perhaps R2P could embroil the USA in a war that is conducted beyond the pale of the U.S. Constitution.

 

I believe removing Assad is as much in the National Interests of the USA as there is a R2P military reason to save civilian lives. Now Danny Jeffrey’s concern is that R2P strategy is an Obama mask to discreetly aid invading Arab or Muslim armies to take down the Leftist perceived threat to world peace in the Jewish State of Israel. With Obama at the helm of the U.S. government I can see Danny’s view of a reprehensible motive behind the Obama R2P agenda. President Barack Hussein Obama is NO friend of Israel. Obama has gone beyond satisfying political correctness by saying Palestinians deserve a sovereign nation to forcing the issue including robbing Israel of half its capital city of Jerusalem and giving that to Jew-Hating Arabs who call themselves Palestinians.

 

Why is it in America’s National Interest to remove Bashar al-Assad? Anything that throws a monkey wrench into the radical Islamic agenda of America’s enemy Iran is good for America and perhaps signals those Twelver maniacs that American muscle might actually spank Iran for making good on their threats to drive Israeli Jews into the sea.

 

The fine line at issue is what will the U.S. government do after aiding Syrian rebels to give the Assad regime a boot? It would be crazy to get rid of Assad and allow a radical Muslim government to form to be the Sunni mirror image of Iran’s Shi’ite Twelver radical Muslim government.

 

The information I have managed to cull about the nature of the Syrian Rebels is that the Islamist militias – especially Jabhat al Nusra – are gaining infrastructure control of the rebel held land in Syria. Even though the secular or more moderate Muslim rebels figured prominently early in the Syrian Rebellion against Assad, it appears the radical Muslims by virtue of infrastructure possession would evolve into the controlling faction of any future Syrian government absent of Assad. This would not be good for American National Interests. A Sunni Islamist theocratic nation will be as much of an enemy of the USA and Israel as Iran is. Indeed I suspect Iran would make friendly overtures to a Sunni Islamist regime even though Iran represents Shia Islam. Just for perspective you should know that Sunnis are about 90% of Islam while Shias are roughly 10% of Islam. Radical Muslim Sunni Clerics have labeled Shias a heretic religion thus making the Shias as much of an infidel as Jews and Christians. Perhaps even more worth of death than Jews and Christians because a Shi’ite existence could be perceived as an insult to Allah and Mohammed. Among radical Muslims, in particular insulting Mo and Allah, is a good reason for the execution of the death penalty.

 

So here are the horns of a dilemma the U.S. government faces. Help the Syrian Rebels defeat Assad quite probably bring into power a Jew-Hating and American-Hating Islamist government OR do nothing while Assad uses chemical weapons of mass destruction to reverse the defeat he has been experiencing utilizing conventional weapons against the Rebels. Undoubtedly an Assad victory to remain in power would result in a wholesale genocide of Sunni Rebels and the civilian Sunni population that supported the Rebels. An Assad victory would also mean acquiring hubris perhaps leading the dictator to make rash moves against American interests and Israel, feeling an illusion of being undefeatable.

 

In the realm of the lesser of two evils, it still seems to me Assad’s demise will in at least the short term be better for the National Interests of the USA even if the long term outcome of Assad’s removal may not be helpful. The best way to bring down Assad with the least amount of American blood is to provide arms to the Syrian Rebels. It may be a futile hope but weaponry should be distributed to the more secular minded Sunnis who desire an elected government rather than a theo-political Sharia religious government in which the religious elite call the shots.

 

It will be up to the U.S. government – cough the Obama Administration – to actively influence a relationship that is not inimical to American National Interests. That probably is a tough order for I sense even a secular government based on Islamic elections will still be a Jew-Hating anti-Israel government. Which brings us back to Danny Jeffrey’s thoughts that President Barack Hussein Obama will part of an agenda to use R2P to join Arab and Muslim government to end the existence of Israel.

 

I was brought to this line of thinking from reading a Caroline Glick article entitled, “Time to confront Obama”. Glick wants to confront Obama’s motives behind the decisions he has made relating to Islamic terrorism, his treatment of Israel, wondering the value the word of BHO in relation to the Chemical WMD attack perpetrated by Bashar al-Assad against his own citizens and so on.

 

As my thoughts began to evolve it became apparent I was following a different train of thinking than Ms Glick. Nonetheless, you should read her article which is anti-Obama and pro-Israel. I like that way of thinking.

 

JRH 4/28/13

Please Support NCCR

ISW Report Examines the Free Syrian Army


Free Syrian Army - logo in background

Intro: Free Syrian Army

John R. Houk

© April 2, 2013

 

As Americans we should be kept up to date on the civil war happening now in Syria. Syria has been ruled by the Assad family for over 40 years as a ruthless dictatorship that is supportive of Syria’s minority religion of Alawite Shia Islam.

 

Al_Assad_family portraitWhen the Arab Spring began to erupt across North Africa (Maghreb) against despotic regimes and influenced by Islamists but with secular minded Muslims in tow. The throw the dictators out syndrome reached Syria. Unfortunately for the anti-dictatorship crowd in Syria the current dictator Bashar al-Assad has aligned his regime politically and militarily with aspiring regional power Iran. Frankly I believe the Syrian civil war has lasted over a couple years because of Iranian support for the Assad Regime which has been a conduit connection with Lebanon’s Shi’ite terrorists Hezbollah.

 

Syria’s rebels are represented by the majority Sunni Muslims of which the most powerful elements are al Qaeda/Wahhabi influenced Islamists. This is significant because the Obama Administration is committed to bringing down Assad but is in the dilemma of supporting American-Jew hating Islamists to bring down Assad’s regime. Many people including me believe the secrecy being maintained by the Obama Administration has to do with Benghazigate; i.e. Islamic terrorists attacking a Consulate-like building in Benghazi killing Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others. The scandal surrounds the capability to prevent the attack (See HERE, HERE and HERE) and the reason that Stevens was there in the first place. That reason could be something to do with sending Qaddafi captured weapons to the Syrian rebels which in all likelihood are also American-Jew-hating Islamists.

 

Below is an email introduction from Institute for the Study of War (ISW) which has a link to a summary of the Free Syrian Army.

 

JRH 4/2/13

Please Support NCCR

******************************

ISW Report Examines the Free Syrian Army

 

ISW – For Immediate Release

Contact person: Maggie Rackl

Sent: Mar 25, 2013 at 4:34 PM

 

ISW’s latest report, The Free Syrian Army, analyzes how rebel commanders on the ground in Syria have begun to coordinate tactically in order to plan operations and combine resources. This cooperation has facilitated many important offensives and rebels have taken control of the majority of the northern and eastern portions of the country. However, rebels have been unable to capitalize on these successes, and fighting has largely stalemated along current battle fronts particularly in the key areas of Aleppo, Homs and Damascus.

 

In her report, ISW Senior Syria Analyst Elizabeth O’Bagy explores how rebels have attempted to overcome the fragmentation and disorganization that have plagued Syria’s armed opposition since peaceful protestors took up arms in December 2011. A lack of unity has made cooperation and coordination difficult on the battlefield and has limited the effectiveness of rebel operations.

 

On December 7, 2012, rebel leaders from across Syria announced the election of a new 30-member unified command structure called the Supreme Joint Military Command Council, known as the Supreme Military Command (SMC). The Supreme Military Command improves upon previous attempts at armed opposition unification through higher integration of disparate rebel groups and enhanced communication, which suggest that it could prove to be an enduring security institution. The SMC has the potential to serve as a check on radicalization and help to assert a moderate authority in Syria. If the SMC can create enough incentives for moderation it will likely be able to marginalize the most radical elements within its structure.

 

There remain a number of critical obstacles ahead for the SMC. They include the incorporation of existing command networks, which will have an impact on command and control and resource allocation; mitigating the strength of extremist groups; and managing disparate sources of financing. As the SMC develops its institutional capacity, its ability to assert greater authority will likely depend on its transactional legitimacy and its ability to distribute critical resources to rebel-held communities. Overcoming these obstacles will be difficult, especially as the nature of the conflict transforms and the sectarian polarization makes it more challenging to create a strong military institution and professional armed force.

_____________________

The Free Syrian Army

Executive Summary

 

By Elizabeth O’Bagy

Institute for the Study of War

 

Fragmentation and disorganization have plagued Syria’s armed opposition since peaceful protestors took up arms in December 2011 and began forming rebel groups under the umbrella of the Free Syrian Army. A lack of unity has made cooperation and coordination difficult on the battlefield and has limited the effectiveness of rebel operations.

 

Since the summer of 2012, rebel commanders on the ground in Syria have begun to coordinate tactically in order to plan operations and combine resources. This cooperation has facilitated many important offensives and rebels have taken control of the majority of the eastern portion of the country, overrunning their first provincial capital in March 2013 with the capture of al-Raqqa city. However, rebels have been unable to capitalize on these successes, and fighting has largely stalemated along current battle fronts particularly in the key areas of Aleppo, Homs and Damascus. 

 

In order to overcome the current military stalemate, the opposition needs to develop an operational level headquarters that can designate campaign priorities, task units to support priority missions, and resource these units with the proper equipment to execute their missions. Recently, the opposition has established a new national military structure that may grow to serve this purpose.

 

On December 7, 2012, rebel leaders from across Syria announced the election of a new 30-member unified command structure called the Supreme Joint Military Command Council, known as the Supreme Military Command (SMC). The Supreme Military Command improves upon previous attempts at armed opposition unification through higher integration of disparate rebel groups and enhanced communication, which suggest that it could prove to be an enduring security institution.

 

The SMC includes all of Syria’s most important opposition field commanders, and its authority is based on the power and influence of these rebel leaders. Its legitimacy is derived from the bottom-up, rather than top-down, and it has no institutional legitimacy apart from the legitimacy of the commanders associated with the council. Thus, the SMC is not structurally cohesive, and its ability to enforce command and control is dependent on the cooperation of each of its members.

 

The incorporation of rebel networks has resulted in chains of command that are not uniform across the five fronts, with each sub-unit retaining their own unique authority structures.

The SMC’s primary function to date has been to serve as a platform for coordination. Regardless of the limits of its current command and control, the SMC has played an important role in syncing rebel operations with several notable successes. It has allowed for greater opportunities for collaboration and coordination among the disparate rebel groups operating in Syria.

 

As the SMC develops its institutional capacity, its ability to assert greater authority will likely depend on its transactional legitimacy and its ability to distribute critical resources to rebel-held communities.

 

To date, disparate sources of funding have significantly handicapped the rebels’ ability to unite and consolidate authority on a national level. Although private sources of funding will likely continue outside the parameters of the SMC, uniting the support channels of rebels’ main state sponsors will be fundamental to ensuring the legitimacy of the new organization. The ability to provide resources and material support to its sub-units is the determining factor in whether or not the SMC will be able to unite rebel forces under its command and establish a level of command and control.

 

The SMC has the potential to serve as a check on radicalization and help to assert a moderate authority in Syria. If the SMC can create enough incentives for moderation it will likely be able to marginalize the most radical elements within its structure. To this end, the SMC has recognized the importance of the inclusion of some of the more radical forces, while still drawing a red line at the inclusion of forces that seek the destruction of a Syrian state, such as jihadist groups like Jabhat Nusra.

 

Ultimately, even if the SMC only serves as a mechanism for greater cooperation and coordination, it is a significant development in that it has united the efforts of rebel commanders across Syria. It is the first attempt at unity that incorporates important commanders from all Syrian provinces and has enough legitimacy on the ground to even begin the process of building a structure capable of providing a national-level chain of command.

 

Syria’s state security apparatus will collapse as the Assad regime finishes its transformation into a militia-like entity. The Supreme Military Command is currently the only organization that could serve to fill the security vacuum left by this transformation. As the Syrian opposition begins to build a transitional government, the SMC could create a framework for rebuilding Syria’s security and governing institutions if properly supported. The SMC’s ability to act as a basis for a national defense institution will be an important component in filling the power vacuum left by Assad’s fall and will aid in a secure and stable Syria.

 

There remain a number of critical obstacles ahead for the SMC. They include the incorporation of existing command networks, which will have an impact on command and control and resource allocation; mitigating the strength of extremist groups; and managing disparate sources of financing. Overcoming these obstacles will be difficult, especially as the nature of the conflict transforms and the sectarian polarization makes it more challenging to create a strong military institution and professional armed force. Although the SMC must do its part internally to overcome these obstacles, its success will largely depend on greater international support and access to more resources.

 

The goal behind U.S. support to the opposition should be to build a force on the ground that is committed to building a nonsectarian, stable Syria, with a government more likely to respect American interests. Working with the SMC could enhance America’s position vis-à-vis Syria’s armed opposition and provide a mechanism for stability should the Assad regime fall.

 

PDF Document:

The free Syrian army

MIDDLE EAST SECURITY REPORT 9

March 2013

_____________________

Intro: Free Syrian Army

John R. Houk

© April 2, 2013

____________________

ISW Report Examines the Free Syrian Army

 

The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) is a non-partisan, non-profit, public policy research organization. ISW advances an informed understanding of military affairs through reliable research, trusted analysis, and innovative education. We are committed to improving the nation’s ability to execute military operations and respond to emerging threats in order to achieve U.S. strategic objectives.

 

©2007 – 2013 THE INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF WAR

 

Who We Are Page

 

BHO is Arming Syrian Radical Muslims


Jabhat al-Nusra executes Alawite Shi'ites

Jabhat al-Nusrah Assassinates Alawite Shi’ites

 

John R. Houk

© February 19, 2013

 

Yesterday I posted some thoughts on an article by Greg Campbell about the potential conspiracy of Obama and his Leftist minions in his Administration preparing to terminate the 2nd Amendment gun rights of Americans in order to squash self-protection in an economic collapse scenario. Campbell has discovered that various government agencies have ordered an unreasonable amount of hollow-point bullets without a credible explanation for such an order.

 

Along those lines Theodore Shoebat wonders why the Obama Administration is so hot to restrict gun ownership while evidence is suggesting the President has ordered the arming of al Qaeda-minded rebels against a ruthless dictator in Bashar al-Assad. Assad is an evil enemy of America and Israel as well a minion of Iran, BUT so are al Qaeda-minded rebels.

 

Realistically U.S. Foreign Policy is in the proverbial rock and the hard place. Bashar al-Assad is a genocidal dictator just like his daddy Hafez. Syria is a minion of U.S. hating Iran. As Iran’s minion Syria has been a rogue nation protecting Islamic terrorists of both Shia (Hezbollah) and Sunni (Hamas) persuasions when their agendas are to destroy Israel. Bashar al-Assad’s Syria is definitely NO friend to the USA or Israel.

 

The al Qaeda rebels in Syria is one of many rebel groups yet apparently the current most effective in battling Assad’s Syrian army. This al Qaeda in Syria calls itself Jabhat al Nusra and is affiliated with al Qaeda Iraq (AQI). AQI of course was the central insurgents that fought U.S. troops in Iraq until weakened by the success of The Surge that won over Iraqis to help the U.S. led troops because in their Muslim mind the USA was the lesser of two evils with AQI’s extreme brutality. Radical Islamic rebels in Syria particularly Jabhat al Nusra is again definitely NO friend to the USA or to Israel.

 

AND YET President Barack Hussein Obama is committed to finding back door ways to arm the Radical Islamic rebels that hate America just as much as Bashar al-Assad.

 

For America to maintain an influence in the Middle East our nation is in the unenviable position of helping two evil anti-American entities that hate our ally Israel. Helping the rebels places a monkey wrench in the Iranian agenda in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia recognizes this because it is pouring its Wahhabi money into the Syrian Rebel cause.

 

I hate to tell everyone this. Due to Iran’s hatred of Israel and willingness to help Sunni and Shia Radical Islamic terrorists in an agenda to drive Israel into the sea, the USA will eventually become embroiled in a Middle East war on behalf of Israel. UNLESS …

 

That is unless President Barack Hussein Obama is willing to throw the Jewish State of Israel under the bus disavowing our commitment of defense for whatever lame reason that is supportive of the perception of Middle Eastern peace.

 

This brings us back to Theodore Shoebat’s premise of why is Barack Hussein Obama trying to disarm Americans while arming Islamic terrorists in the Middle East?

 

JRH 2/19/13

Please Support NCCR

*****************************

Obama Wants To Disarm Americans But Arm Terrorists

 

By Theodore Shoebat

February 17, 2013

Shoebat.com

                                             

Obama wants to decree a ban on all assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons, which would apply to rifles and pistols. On this ban, Obama stated clearly:

 

I’m going to be putting forward a package and I’m going to be putting my full weight behind it… I’m going to be making an argument to the American people about why this is important and why we have to do everything we can to make sure that something like what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary does not happen again.

 

Yet, the Obama administration has been involved in providing weapons to rebels who have committed many atrocities throughout Syria. Why must Americans be disarmed and jihadists be given weapons to? Americans are simply observing a right, while the Islamists want guns to force Syria into becoming a Sharia governed state.

 

Leon Panetta, who is now retiring, and General Martin Dempsey, the principle military adviser of Obama, have both revealed that they supported a plan last year composed by Hillary Clinton and General Petraeus that would provide weapons to the Syrian rebels, who are all fighting for a jihadist cause.

 

John Mccain also supported, and still supports, this plan, saying

 

“I urge the president to heed the advice of his former and current national security leaders and immediately take the necessary steps, along with our friends and allies, that could hasten the end of the conflict in Syria”

 

Though Obama is said to have turned down this plan, he still has supported the Syrian rebellion in a very covert and elusive manner. The current administration has instead used a middle-man: Saudi Arabia, to receive American weapons and then transfer them to the hands of the jihadists.

 

Michael Kelley of Business Insider reported last year that in

 

2011 the U.S. sold $33.4 billion worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia and $1.7 billion to Qatar as sales tripled to a record high and accounted for nearly 78 percent of all global arms sales.

 

And where did these weapons go to? Syria, where they were obtained by jihadists who would not hesitate for a second to behead any American, or any non-Muslim.

 

As one American official put it:

 

“The opposition groups that are receiving the most of the lethal aid are exactly the ones we don’t want to have it”

 

Though the U.S. is not directly sending arms to the revolutionists, it is providing support for shipping small arms such as rifles (which Obama wants to ban in the U.S.) and grenades, and therefore, is nevertheless directly supporting the rebels themselves.

 

So, to Obama Americans shouldn’t have rifles but Syrian rebels should? This dangerous distortion is just more evidence as to how supportive the current administration has been for the Islamists.

 

The American government actually expected an organized plan mapped out by the rebels that would show how Syria will be governed in the future. But they haven’t received any future plans, and the reason is that the rebels are using the Americans for the assistance but refuse to reveal their true intentions for a post-Assad Syria, since what they really desire is a Muslim Brotherhood ruled nation.

 

One Middle Eastern diplomat, who has worked extensively with the C.I.A., has said that there hasn’t been any report by the rebels as to how Syria will be ruled after Assad is removed. In his own words:

 

We haven’t seen anyone step up to take a leadership role for what happens after Assad, … There’s not much of anything that’s encouraging. We should have lowered our expectations

 

Syria is going down the road to become just another state of the future Sunni confederacy that is forming, alongside Egypt and Libya.

 

Obama said to NBC that

 

there are a vast majority of responsible gun owners out there who recognize that we can’t have a situation in which somebody with severe psychological problems is able to get the kind of high capacity weapons that this individual in Newtown obtained and gun down our kids.

 

Yet, his administration is helping ship rifles and grenades to Syria, and is working with the Saudis to provide arms to Islamic renegades who themselves have severe urges to commit some of the most vile violence caught on film.

 

Just to give you a picture of how these rebels use their guns, here is a video of jihadists executing a Syrian police officer:

 

VIDEO: Implementing of the Death Sentence Against a Policeman at the Hands of Criminal Gangs (Title translated by Google Translate)

 

Another film I found shows a sadistic bunch of rebels beheading a man in cold blood while laughing and saying “Allah is greater.” If you have the heart for it, the video is found here:

 

Brutal Beheading Execution Of Prisoner By ‘Free Syrian Army’ *Warning Graphic*

 

Recent footage shows jihadists executing an innocent civilian. The killer even phones his mother to let her know the sinister act he is about to commit:

 

the execution of sunni civilians in syria .

 

In Syria right now, the most armed entity is the military, the second most equipped are the rebels, and the most defenseless are the civilians. In the midst of the fray, the civilians are the ones who suffer the most, since the Islamists have the weapons, and the military is unable to protect all places of the country at once.

 

Now, apply this to America. If a full weapons band was ever decreed, the military, the police, and the lawless would be the most armed, and American civilians helpless. Police and military personal would not be able to protect the entire country, leaving the criminals many opportunities to pick out their victims.

 

Obama and the rest of his Leftist ilk keep promoting the idea that guns are the problem, while neglecting the roots of the issue at hand: violent ideologies. All murderers, be they jihadists or spree killers, reject the philosophical idea that life is sacred. Since the Left is not pro-life, they have refused to confront this issue all together, and so are now giving the way to terrorists. The assistance to terrorists in the Middle East will provide confidence for Islamists here in America. Just take a look at the news now. Just this month, a Muslim named Yusuf Ibrahim shot to death two Coptic Christians (Hanny F. Tawadros, 25, and Amgad A. Konds, 27), decapitated them, severed their hands, and buried them in a randomly picked yard. We’re going to be seeing more of this as Islam is allowed to rise and thrive on our insane obsession on tolerance.

 

As I write in my book, For God or For Tyranny, when the Third Reich reigned, Hitler and his minions established the Nazi Weapons Act of 1938, which prohibited German civilians from owning any firearms. The Left is doing the same thing, but in a ‘nicer,’ ‘gentler,’ more ‘sensitive’ and gradual way. Only those without prudence, foresight, and some historical knowledge on how tyrannies function, would believe that the Obama administration really wants to end crime and protect children (they are all pro-choice).

 

In our Declaration of Independence, one of the stated reasons for the American Revolution was that King George

 

excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare, is undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

 

If the Second Amendment is ever done away with, the only people that would be helped are the savages amongst us.

 

Theodore Shoebat is the author of the book, For God or For Tyranny

______________________

BHO is Arming Syrian Radical Muslims

John R. Houk

© February 19, 2013

______________________

Obama Wants To Disarm Americans But Arm Terrorists

 

© 2013 Walid Shoebat. All Rights Reserved.

Syria is Becoming the Land of Massacres


sunni-vs-shia

 

John R. Houk

© July 2, 2012

 

Danny Jeffrey of Freedom Rings 1776 has uncovered a Western Media conspiracy to make Bashar al-Assad look like the only butcher in the Syrian civil war. The conspiracies involve utilizing photographs from other Muslim perpetrated atrocities and link it to the grisly massacre in Houla, Syria. Jeffrey has a point because in the process of looking for independent sources I found out that the BBC used a 2003 Iraq photo and implied this was a picture of the result of Assad’s forces slaughtering Syrians at Houla.

 

A few days have passed since the BBC irresponsibly passed off this 2003 picture of dead Iraqis as depicting dead Syrians in last week’s Houla massacre. The original photographer, who works for Getty Images, said “Someone is using someone else’s picture for propaganda on purpose.” The Telegraph:

 

Photographer Marco di Lauro said he nearly “fell off his chair” when he saw the image being used, and said he was “astonished” at the failure of the corporation to check their sources.

 

The picture, which was actually taken on March 27, 2003, shows a young Iraqi child jumping over dozens of white body bags containing skeletons found in a desert south of Baghdad.

 

It was posted on the BBC news website today under the heading “Syria massacre in Houla condemned as outrage grows”. (Read entire article: The BBC’s Photo Fib of a Syrian Massacre; by John Glaser, AntiWar.com, 5/29/12)

 

The photo Jeffrey uncovered was at Fox News (If Jeffrey’s uncovering gains traction, look to Fox News to remove photo at this story). Jeffrey goes through some very legitimate investigation which you can see by clicking HERE or going to the cross post below.

 

Jeffrey’s theme about the photo is that the Western Media is becoming a propaganda tool of the Western powers that are plugged into the United Nations’ concept of Responsibility to Protect:

 

The basic concept is that anytime a nation is being subjected to a forceful overthrow, the the UN affiliated members of the western powers are to intervene with a no fly zone over that nation. We did this in Libya along with providing arms to Al Qaeda in their effort to depose Qaddafi. The effort was perfect to enact R2P as Qaddafi was generally hated world wide so there was little outcry from the people of America. (From Jeffrey article cross posted at SlantRight 2.0 entitled “Israel’s Doomsday Scheme.”)

 

The R2P thinking in this light is a little practice of New World Order application under the auspices of the United Nations (think Agenda 21). Now I don’t know if Jeffrey thinks this is NWO stuff but I do. I do know that the R2P principle is a World Powers agenda to eliminate Israel (at least the EU and American Leftists) probably under the mistaken concept that no Israel means peace in the Middle East. After the Libyan R2P the Western powers then want to take down Assad.

 

The problem with taking down Assad is it is merely replacing a Jew-hating rogue Shia-Alawite regime with a Jew-hating Radical Islamic (al Qaeda influence) rogue Sunni regime. Israel – our chief ally in the Middle East – will not benefit in a regime change except perhaps Iran losing a chief ally in the Middle East.

 

Some short-sighted geopolitical thinking might see a National Security win for the USA with Iran losing its Syrian ally to a bunch Radical Islamic Sunnis. Historically there has been a bloody divide between Sunnis (90% of Islam) and Shias (10% of Islam). In Saudi Arabia the Wahhabi Clerics have often declared the Shias a bunch of infidels grouped with Christians, Jews and polytheists. On the other hand Iran has successfully crossed the Sunni-Shia divide by focusing on the modern enemy of Islam – Jewish Israel.

 

Hamas is a Sunni Muslim Brotherhood offshoot; however Iran has undoubtedly sent missiles to Hamas to use on Israel. Hamas has condemned the Assad regime for shooting Sunni Syrians; I believe that condemnation of Syria has more to do with traditional Sunni-Shia divide than insulting Assad-Hamas arms supporter Iran.

 

Jeffrey does not see the potential National Security benefit of screwing Iran by taking Assad out of Syria. Jeffrey sees only the R2P doctrine and Left Wing globalist conspirators like George Soros pulling the strings as part of an anti-Israel strategy. NOW I don’t discount Jeffrey’s thoughts about R2P, destroy Israel and globalism. It may very well be a part of multitudinous agendas that might have converged simultaneously in consensus to mess with Iran, but the agendas may part ways as far the end game of US Foreign Policy-Military Geopolitics. If I am correct on my convergence theory then Israel’s safety would depend largely who controls the White House after 2012. I am certain an Obama reelection will cement Jeffrey’s scenario!

 

Jeffrey starts his exposé on a false Houla photograph by throwing Senator McCain into complicity of knowingly supporting al Qaeda-like Sunni rebels as part of a greater R2P UN global strategy. Read the blog Friends of Syria which has a post specifically connecting Senator McCain, George Soros and the Free Syrian Army (FSA).

 

There is no doubt in my mind that McCain is a RINO; however I believe McCain was a brave American veteran who suffered in a North Viet POW camp. I also believe McCain is unduly influenced by his staff which ropes him into projects that he stubbornly protects because his name is attached to it. For instance I believe it was brilliant to choose Sarah Palin as his VP running mate. McCain’s mistake was not unleashing Palin to be the lightening rod on bringing Obama’s sketchy history into question. McCain instead listened to his advisors to pull the reins on Palin allowing the press to portray her as a buffoon. Instead of trying to shut Palin up, McCain should have unleashed her to attack Obama on some of the same issues of experience in a tit-for-tat that I doubt Obama could answer straight forwardly. I think McCain would have won in 2008 if that political strategy was followed. BUT again, McCain was a Republican establishment RINO. As a RINO I doubt he would have taken the Socialist path Obama has taken however I doubt he would have done anything to change big government or take steps to lower or eliminate the deficit. For that matter I am doubtful Romney will be the Tea Party Conservative our nation needs; however I am confident Romney will end Obama’s Socialist agenda to change America. We need to elect Romney to put a hiccup in the Obama-Dem-Socialist agenda currently in place for America’s future.

 

Let’s get back to the Houla Massacre.

 

The issue about Houla is: Was it perpetrated by FSA (SA Wikipedia) rebels or Assad’s Shabiha Militia (not Syrian regular army)?  

 

The United Nations version gravitates toward the Assad regime as the culprit or at the very least Assad’s irregular Shabiha Militia. A Reuters article dated June 27, 2012 reports the UN view:

 

(Reuters) – Syrian government forces have committed human rights violations, including executions, across the country “on an alarming scale” during military operations in the past three months, United Nations investigators said on Wednesday.

 

Their report, presented by investigation head Paulo Pinheiro to the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, also listed multiple killings and kidnappings by armed opposition groups trying to topple President Bashar al-Assad.

 

“In the increasingly militarized context, human rights violations are occurring across the country on an alarming scale during military operations against locations believed to be hosting defectors and/or those perceived as affiliated with anti-government armed groups, including the Free Syrian Army,” the 20-page report said. (Emphasis Mine)

 

Syria’s ambassador dismissed the accusations and walked out of the debate after threatening to end cooperation.

 

The investigation’s report also said it was unable to determine who carried out a massacre of more than 100 people in Houla in late May but that forces loyal to Assad may have carried out many of the killings. This was based on its preliminary analysis of satellite images, videos and interviews with witnesses conducted either by telephone or Skype.

 

 

The U.N. investigators voiced concern that rebels were using children as medical porters, messengers and cooks, exposing them to risk of death and injury. Some had been going back and forth across the border with Turkey, they said.

 

Pinheiro, who made a first visit to Damascus at the weekend for talks with senior Syrian officials, presented the report to the U.N. Human Rights Council that set up the international inquiry last September.

 

 

“The evidence is incontrovertible. The Assad regime is waging a brutal campaign against the Syrian people, characterized by aerial bombardment, mass killings, rape and other atrocities,” U.S. ambassador Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe said in her speech.

 

The U.N. team, which conducted nearly 400 interviews, said it had collected photographs, videos, satellite imagery and other documentary evidence during its recent investigative missions in the region.

 

It was updating its confidential list of identified perpetrators for possible use in future criminal prosecutions for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

 

“We provided a list of names and units of the military forces or security sections of the government of Syria that based on our evidence would be able to be investigated as being responsible for gross human rights violations and international crimes,” Pinheiro said. (Read Entirety: Syria government, rebels violate rights: U.N.; Reporting by Stephanie Nebehay; Editing by Angus MacSwan and Toby Chopra; Reuters, June 27, 2012)

 

See also this NRO report John Rosenthal dated 6/9/12 stating “rebels” executed Christians and Shia Alawites and then proceeded to make it look like the Assad Regime were the culprits of mass murder.

 

Independent reports out of the influence of Western Media except a German periodical indicate that the FSA has been framed and that the Shabiha Militia (Assad supporters) executed the massacre in Houla:

 

 

The summary killing of 108 civilians in Houla, many of them children, raised an international outcry against Assad’s regime, with many countries, including Bulgaria, breaking diplomatic ties with Syria.

 

However, an analysis of what happened in Houla on May 25, as well as reports by locals, show that the atrocity was carried out by rebel forces, just as claimed by official Syrian news information agency SANA.

 

Tuesday reputed German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes the fact that the larger part of victims of the massacre were members of the Alawi and Shia minorities in teh (sic) village strongly points to the massacre being committed by armed Sunni rebels.

 

According to eyewitness reports quoted by FAZ, the atrocity began after rebel forces attacked three army checkpoints near the village to protect local Alawi communities.

 

During the skirmish, the massacre itself began, in which armed Sunni rebels turned on Alawi and Shia families and slaughtered them.

 

Then they filmed and photographed the victims to present them as Sunni victims of the Assad regime.

 

… (Read Entirety: Houla Massacre Likely Committed by Rebels, Not Syrian Govt; novinite.com; 6/12/12)

 

A Chinese News agency known as The 4th Media runs a long detailed article absolving the Assad Regime and the Shabiha Militia of the Houla Massacre utilizing info from Western sources, but keep in mind China is supportive of the Assad Regime. I doubt The 4th Media would engage in reporting that made Assad as culpable as the FSM in any massacre in Syria.

 

The best dissection of what happened in Houla are the enumerated details from a Muslim journalist Siraj Datoo. He quotes the German Newspaper FAZ which claims that 90% of Houla’s population were Sunni Muslims yet the more than 100 dead were Shia Alawites.

 

Datoo describes Assad’s army shelling Datoo. Then he writes while the shelling was going on the Sunni FSA rebels sought out the Shia living in Houla by going house to house and executing families (men, women & children) by gunfire and knife stabs. The FSA then took pictures and disseminated them to the Western press along with the verified shelling of Houla by Assad forces with the implication that the Shabiha Militia entered Houla after the shelling to massacre the people. The obvious wonderment is: Why in the world would the Shabiha massacre Shias rather than Sunnis?

 

Now let’s be clear though, Assad is far from a sainted Shia hero defending the innocent lives of his own faith and tribal affiliations. Assad has gone after Sunni population centers and indiscriminately killing them. So what we are seeing in the Syrian civil war is how Muslims in the Middle East conduct war. The Sunni-Shia divide and the ensuing murders of civilian populations based on a religio-ethnic cleansing is the modus operandi of Muslim war. Just think what will happen in Israel if there ever is a successful military assault that breaks through the IDF lines will begin a slaughter of Jews that will make the Nazi Holocaust look like a humane ethnic cleansing.

 

JRH 7/2/12

Please Support NCCR

On Syria – Obama Indecision may be Worse than Decisiveness


Free Syria Supporters 2-29-12

John R. Houk

© March 1, 2012

 

 

The current Syrian government – a client State of Iran – has been massacring its own citizens for months now. Unlike in Libya, the Obama solution is to look the other way. Why?

 

My best guess is that the consequences of aiding Syrian revolutionaries (the Sunni-Islam majority weary of the Alawite-Islam minority) have too many unknowns for President BHO to enter the fray to stop the genocide.

 

If BHO actively supports the revolutionaries will Iran have the guts to send troops into Syria to defend its client? And if Iran sends troops will Israel use the excuse to enter Syria militarily because of Iranian threats to wipe Israel off the map? Will the real Lebanese government in the form of Hezbollah offer military support to Assad’s Syria since Hezbollah is both a client of Iran and Shias like Alawites are Shias? Again, will Hezbollah action force Israel’s entrance into Syria?

 

I am sure there are other possible consequences that BHO does not want to deal with in an election year; nonetheless you can see that revolution in Syria could be the first domino leading to at least a Middle East regional war or worst WWIII.

 

If Obama Foreign Policy spinelessness continues his indecision might tip the first domino making things worse in a war somewhat like Britain and France waited on Hitler to have some common sense until the Nazis invaded Poland in 1939.

 

Below are some Leslie J. Sacks thoughts on the slaughter in Iran which is a bit different than my thoughts.

 

JRH 3/1/12 (Read the Sacks thoughts at the end of my thoughts at SlantRight 2.0)