Posts tagged ‘Jabhat al Nusra’

January 4, 2017

How We Were Misled About Syria: the role of Médicins Sans Frontières (MSF)

by mkleit

Original is from Tim Hayward wordpress




I have unbounded admiration for the doctors who volunteer for the invaluable and often dangerous work of Médicins Sans Frontières (MSF). The question concerns MSF’s policy of ‘bearing witness’. MSF will speak out – even against governments – when it thinks a humanitarian situation could and should be dealt with differently by those it holds responsible.[1] It has done so in Syria.

But if none of MSF’s international doctors have been on the ground in Syria’s war zones since 2015,[2] how can MSF claim to bear witness for what is happening there?

MSF has relayed reports from the rebel-held areas to which, exclusively, its supplies and support have been dispatched. The reports – including allegations of government attacks on hospitals and civilians – come from people working with the permission and protection of such groups as Al Nusra, Isis and other foreign jihadis and mercenaries. These anti-government forces are known to exercise a rule of terror and to be not overly concerned about ordinary citizens’ access to medical attention. That is precisely why the MSF doctors withdrew from the areas under their control.[3] So there is scope to ask who the medics on the ground were, and who they were treating.


My question, though, simply concerns the reliability of uncorroborated witness statements coming from potentially compromised sources. For while press statements have been issued from various MSF offices around the world, it appears MSF had no independent access to verifiable information from Syria.

In fact, the public unavailability of detailed or verified information is a matter of record: even John Kirby of the US State Department could only assert that ‘relief agencies that we find credible are levelling these accusations’.[4]

The most prominent relief agency, and visible in all video footage linked to the alleged bombings, is the White Helmets.

It is a matter of record that the White Helmets are funded by the NATO and Gulf states whose avowed aim is regime change in Syria; or-38096it is generally believed that they work closely with terrorist organisations (how else could the Netflix documentary have shown them roaming so freely in a zone where MSF and Western journalists dared not set foot?[5]). Their independence and integrity are widely questioned.[6]

So while MSF has often been cited as an independent source of support for White Helmet testimony, its press statements have in fact merely repeated White Helmet claims![7]

Whether intending it or not, MSF thereby became complicit in purveying a particular narrative that suffused the Western media during the period from 22 September to 22 December 2016.[8] Before September, the media had been perfectly clear that the citizens of eastern Aleppo were being held captive, effectively as human shields, by forces dominated by jihadist terrorists.[9] That changed following the uncompromising statement by Samantha Power to the UN Security Council, in which she invoked the White Helmets as victims and witnesses of Russian and Syrian aggression.[10]

Western governments and media re-designated the terrorist groups as ‘moderate rebels’.[11] Concurrently, anti-government activists like Lina Shamy started tweeting in English, the celebrated twitter account in the name of the child Bana was created, and there followed a flow of ‘famous last webcams’ from purported ordinary civilians voicing fears of impending massacre by the Syrian government.

Those of us in the West who were uncertain about the authenticity of all this social media activity in a zone lacking basic infrastructure, let alone wifi,[12] were coaxed to accept the mainstream narrative because a respected organisation like MSF apparently bore witness to it.[13] Few of us realised that MSF was merely repeating White Helmet testimony, not independently verifying it.

The consistent testimony now coming from the people who have been liberated in eastern Aleppo suggests a quite different story from the one that Netflix and our media have promoted.[14] The Helmets themselves appear to have melted away with the departure from Aleppo of the jihadists and mercenaries. If there were any genuinely independent doctors working with them in Aleppo, they too have yet to be heard from. But most telling, in view of White Helmet claims to have saved some 70,000 lives (or whatever exact number we are invited to believe), is that not a single person interviewed in liberated Aleppo has thanked them.


So, in seeking to bear witness against the Syrian government, MSF has made claims on a basis that is uncertain and contested.[15]  By so publicly associating itself with the White Helmets and their narrative it may have risked compromising the reputation it relies on to attract international doctors.

Those of us who deeply appreciate the service to humankind of MSF’s international doctors are left to hope the organisation coordinating their work can be more sure to avoid bearing false witness.[16]

The problem with the false narrative is no trivial one, for it perpetuates a fundamental misrecognition of the causes of the war – and thus of all the casualities the doctors have to deal with.  A false narrative not only gives impunity to the guilty but it supports them in moving ever onwards with their murderous designs. It distracts from the ethical truth, too, that the jihadis and the states supplying them with arms and opportunity are in fundamental breach of the law and morality of just warfare.





[1] The background for this founding principle – of témoignage (‘bearing witness’) – is cited on their website: ‘Hundreds of thousands of people died in the Biafran war because of a deliberate government policy. On their return from the region, a group of young French doctors were frustrated and outraged by the inability of the Red Cross to say publicly what had happened.’

[2] MSF Voice from the Field in Syria: Dr. Nathalie Roberts

[3] Dr Nathalie Roberts has described how in the earlier days of the war in Syria, MSF had followed its usual working procedures in opposition-held areas but with the arrival of Islamic State group that became impossible: “they were not allowing all the patients to access the hospital”, they then started appropriating MSF supplies and even kidnapping MSF staff. They could not continue to work in a place where the occupying groups would not allow the doctors to do their medical job. (Dr Roberts interviewed on 13 March 2015)


[5] I personally first became curious about the White Helmets from viewing the Netflix documentary (, and the question I mention in the text here is the one I simply could not get past. I was therefore not surprised to find that others had already offered powerful critiques of the organisation.

I also had trouble imagining how people working in such desperate conditions would have the leisure to keep up with the latest Western craze of the Mannequin Challenge, and also the insensitivity to do a facsimile rescue for the purpose. The video of this PR own goal was quickly removed by the White Helmets’ promoters but remains available elsewhere at time of writing, e.g.:

A discussion of it is here:

[6] The critical sources now on the internet are far too numerous to mention, but indicative examples include:

[7] The spokespersons bearing MSF witness to the public are quite numerous and remote from Syria. They seldom make explicit the source of their information, but when they do we find it is the White Helmets.

Sam Taylor, for instance, who is Syria communications coordinator for MSF and is based in Jordan, uncritically reproduced White Helmets material: ‘The civil defense, also known as the White Helmets, said the hospital and adjacent buildings were struck in four consecutive airstrikes.’ ‘Video posted by the White Helmets showed lifeless bodies, including children, being pulled from a building and loaded into ambulances amid screams and wailing. Distraught rescue workers tried to keep away onlookers, apparently fearing more bombs.’

Taylor does mention another authority: ‘Shortly after midday Thursday, new airstrikes in rebel-held areas killed at least 20 people in two neighbourhoods, the Syrian Civil Defense and the Observatory said.’ By ‘Observatory’, he presumably means the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Although this sounds like an independent organisation, it is in fact a single individual named Rami Abdulrahman (sometimes referred to as Rami Abdul Rahman) living in Coventry in the UK; and he is presumably as independent as one can expect from an opposition exile whose small network of informants in Syria consists largely of anti-government activists.

Certainly, he is no more directly a witness than is MSF’s spokesperson. Needless to say, the Observatory’s credibility and independence is disputed:;;

Despite this lack of verified independent evidence, Taylor was prepared to state on behalf of MSF that a hospital attack ‘was deliberate’ While the basis for the accusation is not given, the cumulative effect of this sort of public statement is evident.

Pablo Marco Blanco, MSF’s Operations Manager for the Middle East in Barcelona, effectively endorsed the accusation, while admitting that the basis of the information was unconfirmed.

Similar communications came from Muskilda Zancada, ‘MSF head of mission in Syria’ in Barcelona. Zancada also stated that ‘civilians are targeted’ Paul McPhun, Executive Director MSF Australia, speaking from Australia (10 October 2016) likewise makes categorial statements about targeted bombings in Aleppo, but without indicating the source of his knowledge.

It is even possible that the accusations are true. Yet it is also possible that they are not. The fallibility of MSF sources has been illustrated by how Teresa Sancristoval, Head of MSF’s Emergency Unit for Aleppo, was clearly being fed her information in Barcelona from people with an oppositional stance towards the Syrian Government because they were ‘afraid of the retaliations they can suffer’ (see note 7).

While I have no doubt that all MSF statements are made from a standpoint of agonised human sympathy, and in good faith, they take on a life of their own when picked up by the media and disseminated for further purposes.

In the end it is clear that what matters from the humanitarian point of view is that the bombing should stop. When MSF call for all sides to stop, they can claim to speak for humankind. When they complain of ‘targeted and indiscriminate bombing by the Syrian and Russian armed forces’ ( they create unnecessary controversy: if bombing both targeted and indiscriminate is to stop on the government side, that is as much as to say – from the government’s perspective – that it should simply allow the ISIS and Al Nusra terrorists free rein over the people and sovereign territory that it has a duty to defend. MSF do not want to say exactly this, I assume, but my point is that the organisation seems not to have a firm enough grip on its communications policy or a sufficiently coherent approach to defining its extra-medical mission.

[8] MSF statements from Syria condemning the Syrian and Russian governments have been demonstrably lacking in certainty or detail. For instance, in relaying reports of attacks on hospitals around Aleppo in May they note that ‘one was the MSF-supported al Sakhour hospital in Aleppo city, which was forced to suspend activities after being bombed at least twice on consecutive days.’ ( An inexact statement like this – being equivocal as to whether the number of bombings was two, three, or some other number – may or may not be true; it cannot claim to have been properly verified, since a verification would make clear whether or not a third or further bombings had occurred.

MSF uncritically accepted the veracity of the ‘famous last webcams’ coming out of besieged eastern Aleppo. As late as 14 December 2014 MSF wrote on their own website: ‘Whatever hope remained is rapidly dissipating. People are terrified, almost certain that their own deaths are near. Messages in which they say goodbye to their love ones are proliferating.’ ]

MSF do not appear to have known as much as one might hope or expect about the doctors they supported in terrorist-held Aleppo and whose words they relay to the public. The doctors communicating from terrorist-held Aleppo whose testimony the MSF publicly cited just prior to the liberation of Aleppo were apparently not looking forward to the end of the siege, and MSF even believed that their forebodings were shared by the ordinary people of Aleppo: ‘Like the rest of the population, “doctors are terrified and losing hope,” says Teresa Sancristoval, Head of MSF’s Emergency Unit for Aleppo. “They are afraid of the retaliations they can suffer. For the last two days, our exchanges have been more about goodbye messages and requests for evacuation than anything else. They feel abandoned to their fate and with no way out.”’


[10] As Stephen Cohen has pointed out, the sea change came with the breakdown of negotiations between Obama and Putin.

The view was then forcefully asserted against Obama by Samantha Power.

In her speech to UN Security Council she singled out the White Helmets as victims and witnesses of Russian and Syrian attacks. She declared: ‘This is not the day, this is not the time to blame all sides, to draw false equivalencies. It is not the time to say that “airstrikes took place,” or “civilians were killed.” It is time to say who is carrying out those airstrikes, and who is killing civilians.’
[11] Some insights into the unreliability of the mainstream narrative have occasionally been heard from within mainstream media outlets.

For instance: (‘Tulsi Gabbard tells the truth about Syria’ on CNN)
Carla Ortiz Speaks about her Experience in Aleppo and The Little Syrian Girl

Criticisms have of course been extensive in the Russian media. Since promoters of the Western narrative do not regard the Russia Today (RT) channel as a reliable source, I mention just a couple of interviews that they might concede have some credibility – one from a Church of England clergyman and one from a former UK ambassador to Syria:
‘Consistent stories of brutality at the hands of the Syrian rebels’ – Rev. Andrew Ashdown

US effectively siding with Al-Qaeda in desire to get rid of Assad – former UK ambassador to Syria

[12] Common sense scepticism on this point is supported by the first hand testimony of Carla Ortiz about trying to get internet connections in Aleppo

[13] I have seen MSF cited as a source to discredit the account of Syria given to the UN by Canadian journalist Eva Bartlett
In fact, I was first prompted to do the research that led to writing this blog because a respected and well-informed friend on Facebook invoked MSF as a refutation of Bartlett’s claims. I believe it has since become clear that events have entirely vindicated Bartlett.

[14] Some examples of interviews with newly liberated citizens in Aleppo:

[15] Stronger criticism of MSF than I am making is found in Miri Wood’s ‘Guide to Understanding How ‘Unhospitals’ Cannot Be Bombed’ ; MSF’s relationship with the Syrian Government is known to be an uneasy one:

[16] MSF takes a certain pride in fostering debate and allowing some plurality of political views to be aired within the organisation: it does not attempt, as ICRC does, to hold a single public line. (Rony Brauman, ‘Médecins Sans Frontières and the ICRC: matters of principle’, International Review of the Red Cross, No. 888, 31 December 2012:

Yet the public hears MSF-branded messages and thinks they represent the honest and considered position of a respected organisation. They are encouraged to do so by the fact that press releases and comments are issued by the organisation and not as independent opinions of particular members.

While it is not my place to tell MSF how to conduct its affairs, I would say that their internal plurality of opinion is not necessarily a virtue: if they cannot agree on certain matters of principle about bearing witness, then the wise option might be simply to refrain, as ICRC do. At any rate, some of their internal philosophical debate strikes this reader as unhelpfully verbose and analytically unclear. More specifically relating to Syria, it is reasonable to believe that the geopolitics of the region and the machinations of its various protagonists are as complex and challenging, in their way, as are the medical emergencies in a war zone. Even the most judicious political analyst would not be much use in dealing with the latter. The people in MSF offices might reflect on whether the converse does not also apply.

We are not in a position to know if Syria or Russia should answer any charges in respect of the conduct of war.  We do know that their enemies must, and, more crucially, that they face the more fundamental charge of having attacked Syria and its people without just cause.

I find a rather bitter irony in the MSF position that they distinguish themselves from the ICRC in not being willing to patch up victims simply in order to make possible further harm to them; for that could be said to be what they are doing by wishing that a sovereign people should not use full lethal force against merciless invaders on its soil.

March 25, 2016

Stop Wahhabist School to Fight Terrorism

by mkleit

Young man sitting in front of Brussels’ stock exchange building


Terrorist attacks in Europe has caused a two-way incitement between Europeans and Muslims, which is a result that terrorist group ISIL is trying to reach as they’ve said after the Charlie Hebdo attacks on the 7th of January 2015: “compel the Crusaders (Europeans) to actively destroy the garrison themselves… Muslims in the West will quickly find themselves between one of two choices, they either apostatize… or they emigrate to the Islamic State and thereby escape persecution from the Crusader governments and citizens”.

The latest attacks on the Belgian capitol Brussels left 35 dead and 270 injured when suicide bombers hit Zaventem airport and Maalbeek metro station on Tuesday morning. Recent reports from Belgian media showed that people involved in the terrorist attacks are Muslims and of Arab background.

Mostly, Europeans would blame the millions of Muslims in Europe (and a lot of them have done so) for being the cause of religious incitement, and by far that’s sort of right, since there’s a minority of Muslims whose taking a big part of inciting against the “Crusaders”.


Wahhabism from Saudi Arabia hitting several nations

The Arab – Muslims whom are able to go to Europe and live there (aside of refugees and asylum seekers) can afford the living, where the biggest percentage comes from the GCC countries (Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and Emirates). And the ideology that all of these countries share (except Oman and partially Kuwait) is Wahhabism or Salafism. This sect is considered to be the most fanatic, extremist, and inciting amongt all Muslim sects – consider them as the KKK or the Nazis of Islam. This ideology is also the root of many terrorist groups, such as Al-Qaeda (Iraq, Syria, Morocco, Egypt, Afghanistan..) ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and Levant/ Syria and Iraq), Boko Haram (Nigeria), al Nusra Front (Jabhat al Nusra/ Syria), Ahrar al Sham (Syria), Jaysh al Islam (Syria), al Shabab(Somalia), Taliban (Afghanistan, Pakistan) etc…

One might think that abolishing ISIL, the most prominent terrorist group would save the world from terrorism, but no! Such an action wouldn’t do anything, because religious fanaticism is not bound by a group, it’s an idea, and ideas don’t die by bombs and bullets; ideas should be fought by ideas.

In their book, Global Terrorism and New Media, Philip Seib and Dana M. Janbek argue that terrorist groups are teaching younger generations (between 10 and 12 years old) their ideology through boot camps and schools that are in their area of control. This strategy elongates the group’s survival for a longer time. They would teach students how to be hate-filled fighters, as well as how much other sects and religious groups are “sinners and blasphemers”, most evidently the crusaders (Euro-Christians) and the Rawafids (Shiites Muslims, the second biggest sect in Islam). And among this, they would teach them that it’s okay to call them blasphemers and punish them for being from a different sect, where punishment varies from flogging to beheading and public execution.


These schools of thought are not solely found in areas of terrorist groups, but also in countries like Saudi Arabia. And they’re also expanding to European countries – under Saudi funding – such as France, Belgium, Germany, and Britain; since the mentioned countries have close relations with the Gulf state, as well as big Muslim communities.

When Europeans blame Muslims for this problem, they are partially correct, but they’re mistaken when they blame the refugees for causing the damage. Although some of the latter have took part in the battles in Syria, as many pictures show ex-fighters from extremist factions seeking refuge with the influx to Europe. But the problem is inside Europe itself, where it comes from these school and extremists Salafi-Wahhabi communities that are spreading fanaticism. Thus, they serve as a “shelter” and “sanctuary” for extremists coming from the MENA region and Asia, whether these countries are suffering from turmoil like Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Nigeria, or countries that serve as a holder for this thought like Saudi Arabia.


The only way to protect the EU, is to do what Tunisia has been recently doing by their campaign “tomorrow is better”, where they are re-educating inmates imprisoned for terrorist act by extracting the extremist thought from their heads and planting patriotic and moderate-religious ideology. As for the schools, the government is keeping an eagle’s eye on academic curricula, so that they would not contain topics of incitement and fanaticism.

If such procedures are made, alongside other educational and security ones, not only in  Europe but also in the countries that are being vastly effected by extremist thoughts like Lebanon, Syria, Pakistan, Iraq and others, we would gradually defeat extremist thoughts and potential terrorism, because it’s not fair nor right to blame millions of people for the acts of a few.

February 22, 2016

حلب: ما قبل وبعد

by mkleit

لا أقمنا في مكان وإن طاب ولا يمكن المكان الرحيل
كلما رحبت بنا الروض قلنا حلب قصدنا وأنت السبيل
فيك مرعى جيادنا والمطايا وإليها وجيفنا والذميل – أبو الطيب المتنبي

حلب للوارد جنة عدن وهي للغادرين نار سعير والعظيم العظيم يكبر في عينه منها قدر الصغير الصغير – أبو العلاء المعري

نفيت عنك العلة و الظرف و الأدبا”
و إن خلقت لها إن لم تزر حلبا
لو ألف المجد سفرا عن مفاخره
لراح يكتب في عنوانه حلبا” – الأخطل الصغير


Source: Reuters, Getty Images

January 26, 2016

The Icey Journey to Seek Refuge

by mkleit

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Refugees from Syria and other war-torn countries have a journey different from that of “the death boats”. The slideshow above shows the journey that refugees take while crossing European borders under harsh weather conditions.

The photos belong to Reuters from the Serbian – Macedonian borders (map below of refugees full route since the wave started).


Route line that refugees have taken from Turkey to Germany

August 21, 2014

خمسة أسباب علمية وراء وحشية «داعش»

by mkleit

وضع الأستاذ في علم النفس في كلية «ترينيتي» في دبلن، والمدير المؤسس لمعهد «ترينيتي» للعلوم العصبية، إيان روبرتسون، 5 تفسيرات علمية للوحشية التي يمارسها تنظيم «داعش»، موضحاً أنه بينما يري الكثيرون قطع الرؤوس والأعمال المتطرفة الأخرى أمور غير وارد القيام بها، فإن هناك عدة عوامل يمكن أن تجعل من أي شخص «شخصية متطرفة».

1.«الوحشية» تولد «الوحشية»

الجزء الأول من الجواب قد يكون بسيطاً، يتمثل في أن «الوحشية» تولد «الوحشية»، كما أن الثمة المشتركة بين الأشخاص الذين تعرضوا للمعاملة بالقسوة، هي القسوة والعدوان وعدم التعاطف.

في معسكرات الاعتقال النازي، على سبيل المثال، كان العديد من الحراس الأكثر قسوة سجناء في سجون «كابوس» سيئة السمعة، الأمر الذي يعني أن الضحايا غالباً ما يستجيبون للصدمة بأن يتحولوا هم أنفسهم إلى جناة.

2.الاندماج في «المجموعة»

تحول الضحية إلى جاني ليس السبب الوحيد الذي يؤدي إلى «الوحشية»، ففي حالة انهيار الدولة، ينهار معها النظام والقانون والمجتمع المدني، ويبقي الحل الوحيد للبقاء هو «المجموعة»، بصرف النظر عن الاعتبارات الدينية أو العنصرية أو السياسية أو القبلية أو العشائرية، ويظل البقاء معتمداً على الأمن المتبادل الذي تقدمه المجموعة.

الحرب غالباً ما تربط الأشخاص في مجموعات، هذه الروابط تخفف الشعور بالخوف والضيق الذي يشعر به الفرد حينما تنهار الدولة، كما أنها توفر أيضاً الثقة بالنفس للأشخاص الذين يشعرون بالإذلال من فقدانهم لمنازلهم ومكانتهم في المجتمع.

في هذه الحالة تندمج الهويات الفردية والجماعية نسبياً، وتصبح تصرفات الأشخاص تعبيراً عن المجموعة أكثر ما هي تعبر عن إرادة الشخص نفسه. وحينما يحدث ذلك، قد يقوم هؤلاء بأشياء مرعبة لم يتخيلوا يوماً القيام بها، ويصبح ضمير الفرد ضئيل نسبياً داخل المجموعة. ومن ثم تقع مسؤولية «الوحشية» علي المجموعة أكثر من الفرد.

ويظهر ذلك بوضوح هلى وجوه مقاتلو «داعش» الذين يتسابقون في الظهور علي عربات، يلوحون بالأعلام السوداء، بابتسامات عريضة على وجوههم بعد ذبح من لا يعتنق الإسلام.

ولأن الهوية الفردية تكون ذائبة إلى حد كبير في هوية المجموعة، يصبح الفرد أكثر استعدادًا للتضحية بنفسه في المعركة، أو القيام بالتفجيرات الانتحارية.


التفكير في المذابح التي تحدث بين السنة والشيعة في العراق وسوريا يعكس حقيقة مرعبة، تتمثل في أنه داخل المجموعة، يتم تعزيز فكرة القبلية، وكراهية كل من هم خارج مجموعتهم.

وحتى حينما يكون العنف ضد المجموعات الأخرى مدمر للذات مثلما هو واضح بشكل مأساوي في الشرق الأوسط، فإن المجموعات التي تقوم على أسس دينية تظهر عداءاً ضد معارضيها أكثر من المجموعات التي لا تقوم على أساس ديني.


يري روبرتسون أن الانتقام «يعد قيمة كبيرة في الثقافة العربية، ويلعب دوراً في استمرارية الوحشية». ويولد الانتقام المزيد من الوحشية في دوامة لا تنتهي، لكن الأكثر من ذلك، أن الانتقام قد يكون حافز قوي، لكنه مخادع أيضاً، لأن الانتقام من شخص ما يضخم المشكلة ويؤدي إلى استمرارها.


يرتكب الأشخاص الذين ينتمون إلى مجموعات بأفعال وحشية إذا سمح لهم قادتهم بالقيام بذلك، خاصة إذا كانوا هؤلاء الأشخاص يرغبون في التضحية بأنفسهم لصالح المجموعة. فمقاتلو «داعش» يذبحون المسيحيين واليزيديين العزل لأن قادتهم أخبروهم أن هذا هو الشيء الصحيح الذي ينبغي عمله. والقادة، على أي مستوي من القبيلة إلى الدولة، هي المسؤولة عن الوحشية، والمشكلة تكمن في أن القادة يستطيعون إنهاء الوحشية، أو تشجيع الوحشية، وعندها لن يستطيع أي شيء الوقوف ضدها.


المصدر: المصري اليوم

January 20, 2014

فيلم “سعودي” طويل

by mkleit

تمر المساحة الممتدة من الريف الشمالي لإدلب في غرب سوريا الى شرقه عند الرقة مرورا بأقدم مدن العالم، حلب، بحقن طائفي-سياسي أكبر من حجمها الجغرافي، أدى الى مقتل أكثر من 350 شخص في أقل من أسبوع، أكثر بما تسبب به طيران النظام حين قصف بالبراميل المتفجرة على منطقة سيف الدولة في حلب المدينة الشهر الماضي. وقد اندلعت الاشتباكات ما بين الفصائل المعارضة كافة بعد إعدام “دولة الاسلام في العراق والشام” (داعش) الطبيب الميداني حسين سليمان، أبو ريان، التابع لكتائب أحرار الشام (الجبهة الاسلامية) الجمعة الماضية، مما أدى الى “انتفاضة” مسلحة ضد داعش في مناطق تواجدها. والجدير بالملاحظة أن اللاعبين الأساسيين ضمن هذه الانتفاضة هما جبهة النصرة والجبهة الاسلامية، الفصيلين الاسلاميين المتطرفين في المعارضة السورية. ولكن توقيت التحرك كان مثير للاهتمام، بالاضافة الى كون جبهة النصرة وداعش “الابنتان المدللتان” لتنظيم القاعدة الارهابي، والجبهة الاسلامية ليست ببعيدة عن المنهج والفكر “القاعدي” أبدا.

“تحمسنا كثيرا حين استيقظ الشعب والفصائل المسلحة على انتهاكات داعش، رغم أنها ليست الأولى بحقنا، ولكنها بادرة حسنة من ناحية. ومن ناحية أخرى قد تكون نقمة، لا نعمة”. تقول الناشطة الاعلامية في المعارضة السورية، مريم، التي تحفظت عن نشر اسمها الكامل لأسباب أمنية. وهي  اضطرت للخروج من حلب المدينة بسبب ملاحقة الجماعات المتطرفة والنظام لها بسبب “آرائها ضد إديولوجيّتهم المتشددة”، على حد تعبيرها. وتضيف “لكن لا أصدق هذه التحركات الأخيرة، أعتبرها مسرحية أمام الشعب السوري لتخييرهم بين داعش أم الجبهة الاسلامية “، التأكيد على كلام مريم يأتي في الوقت الذي تقلص فيه تموين “الجيش السوري الحر” بالعتاد والمال بسبب سيطرة المعابر الحدودية  السورية-التركية من قبل داعش والجبهة الاسلامية، آخرها معبر باب الهوى الذي أدى الى مقتل 20 عنصرًا من “لواء الفاروق” المنضوي تحت جناح “الجيش الحر”، بحسب مصادر في اللواء المذكور، والذي كان يسيطر على المعبر الحدودي الأخير للمعارضة “المعتدلة” بين سوريا وتركيا.

ومن هنا يرسم سيناريو مسرحية “متأسلمة” على المعارضة السورية، وكل من لديه مصالح في سوريا. حيث وسائل اعلامية، بتوجه معيّن، عملت على اعادة تسويق للجماعات المتطرفة عبر تفضيل احداهم على أخرى، وألبست اثنين منهم قناع المسرح المبتسم وتركت الثالث بزي الشرير، رغم أنه يأخذ دور “الفارس المخلص”، بنظرهم، على عتبة مسرح الأنبار والفلوجة.

ألعوبة السعودية في سوريا

ألعوبة السعودية في سوريا

وفي السياق نفسه، سوّقت وسائل اعلامية غربية وخليجية “اعتدال” الجبهة الاسلامية مقارنةً بداعش المتطرفة. وبذلك يخسر النظام السوري نقطة مهمة في مؤتمر جنيف 2، ألا وهي “مكافحة الارهاب” الذي يسعى لها المجتمع الدولي المشارك في المؤتمر المرتقب، والذي عارضت السعودية انعقاده ورفضت المجموعات الاسلامية المتطرفة حضوره.

“السعودية لا تريد جنيف، لأن هناك احتمال كبير ببقاء النظام. فالأفضل قلب الموازين لصالحها عبر الغاء داعش من سوريا، أولا، وتركها في العراق، بينما النصرة تنضوي تحت شعار الجبهة الاسلامية، المحكومة بقرار سعودي، وبذلك لا تعود ذريعة موالي النظام ببقاء الأسد في السلطة لها قيمة”، تشرح مريم.

رغم تشرذم المعارضة السورية في ما يحصل، لكنهم توحّدوا حين تعلق الأمر بالتخلص من داعش، التنظيم الذي لم يفرق كثيرا بين فصائل المعارضة، العلمانية منها والاسلامية، وبين الجيش السوري. ولكن البديل لداعش على الساحة يبدو أنه الجبهة الاسلامية شيئا فشيء، الفصيل الذي يعتبر الأكبر في العتاد والتمويل والعدد، ولكنه يتساوى مع داعش في درجة التشدد الديني. حيث يتوعد احدى قادته الأساسيين، زهران علوش، من حين الى آخر بقتل “النصيرية والروافض”، أي الطائفتين العلوية والشيعية. واشتهر أيضا بقتل مدنيين سوريين، آخرهم في مدينة عدرا العمالية في ريف دمشق الغربي، وخطف الناشطين المعارضين البارزين، وآخرهم رزان زيتونة وزملائها.

والجدير بالذكر أن الجبهة الاسلامية متمولة من السعودية بشكل مباشر، بينما النصرة وداعش فتمويلهم من القاعدة، التي تخضع الى أمرة سعودية أخرى، نظرا الى أن الزعيم الأسبق، أسامة بن لادن، هو ابن الملياردير الراحل محمد بن لادن، أبرز رجال أعمال السعودية، ويتبعون لأمرة المخابرات السعودية بدليل تهديد رئيسها، الأمير بندر بن سلطان، الرئيس الروسي فلاديمير بوتين بتفجير الوضع أثناء الأولمبياد الشتوية عبر “جنوده” في الشيشان، الذين يشكلون جزء لا يستهان به من تنظيم داعش. وبذلك الأزمة في الشمال السوري “يعود اشعالها الى الأطراف الاسلامية المتشددة، بتمويل وقيادة سعودية” تضيف مريم.

عمر عبود (اسم مستعار)، ناشط إعلامي منذ بداية الأحداث في سوريا في شبكة “الثورة السورية ضد بشار الأسد 2011″، أبرز الشبكات الاخبارية للمعارضة السورية، أكد ” أن “السعودية تعمل بأيدي خفية في سوريا لفرض سيطرتها بعد استلام زمام الأمور الاقليمية من قطر وتركيا… تعمل شيئا فشيئا الفصائل الممولة منها على الغاء الجيش الحر، عبر الانسحاب من المعارك وتركه في مواجهة النظام”، كما حصل في دمشق وخسرت المعارضة الريف الدمشقي بالكامل وتراجع الى جبال القلمون، “بالاضافة الى اغلاق طرق التموين الحدودية والغدر به في مناطق سيطرته من قبل داعش والجبهة الاسلامية”، ويقول بامتعاض أن “المصيبة الأكبر هي وجود سلطة سياسية، كالائتلاف السوري المعارض، لا تمثل المعارضة على الأرض، مما يجعل “الحر” وحيدا في الثورة”.

August 10, 2013

Why Remove Assad if the Majority Wants him?

by mkleit

posted by clearsteam June 16, 2013


The proxy war being fought on Syrian Territory by “FSA rebels”

#Cantmossadtheassad part2


According to this report, the Al-Quaeda affiliated Islamist group Jabhat al-Nusra is recruiting Syrian revolutionaries into its ranks at an alarming rate.

The populations of towns under FSA (Free Syrian Army) control originally welcomed the foreign fighters, as they were less corrupt than their Syrian counterparts who had systematically looted any infrastructure; whole factories with new machinery, exported piece by piece over the border to Turkey to be sold as scrap metal, allegedly to pay for more weapons and ammunition.

Syrian support for Assad stood at 55% yet this was not reported by any western media back in January with the exception of The Guardian UK which hid it within the Comment is free section.

A picture released by the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) showing supporters of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad take part in a pro-regime rally in Damascus (October 2011)

A picture released by the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) showing supporters of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad take part in a pro-regime rally in Damascus (October 2011)

Popular opinion has changed markedly since then as the realities of sharia style rule have begun to have an impact. Most notable was the execution of a fourteen year old boy for being blasphemous by Jihadists affiliated with the FSA, FSA fighters basically, though you would never believe it from this BBC report, which is intentionally trying to mislead western minds who find it hard to differentiate between the different factions…

so if the FSA condemns the killing, they must have been Assad’s troops that did it right? Entirely wrong, this killing was done by fighters  in support of the FSA using FSA supplies if not uniforms.

Putin described it best inside Ten Downing street today with an unimpressed David Cameron:

Do you want to supply arms to those who kill their enemies and eat their organs, this has nothing to do with the humanitarianism you profess

As people we have proven ourselves extremely easily lead into fear and hate, and our divisions exploited for profit. The Sunni/Shia divide is an exceptionally easy one to provoke, oddly causing Hamas Palestinians to be in support of Israeli actions against Assad’s Alawite, Christian, secular and Shia army, merely because they are  predominantly Shia, and so the circle of sectarian violence continues and spins as eye for an eye philosophy continues to make the world blind and poor.

So, if Assad is supported by a larger percentage of people than would vote for your own president or prime minister, why is the sectarian violence being provoked? Superficially you could say that they were a threat to Israel, part of the axis that supports Iran, banking reasons etc,.

According to this startling interview with General Wesley Clark in 2007, this has been planned out for years, however oil discoveries and pipelines have brought this situation to a head.



%d bloggers like this: