Al-Qaeda is not sacrificing its "martyrs" in Syria merely to overthrow Assad. Liberation of the Syrian people is a bonus, but the main aim is to create an Islamist state in all or part of the country. Failing that, they hope to at least establish a strategic base for the organization's remnants across the border in Iraq, and create a regional headquarters where mujahideen can enjoy a safe haven. If al-Qaeda continues to play an increasingly important role in the rebellion, then a post-Assad government will be indebted to the tribes and regions allied to the Jabhat. Failing to honor the Jabhat's future requests, assuming Assad falls, could see a continuation of conflict in Syria.So, there you have it, folks - the Council on Foreign Relations certainly should be believed in this matter, especially since this aspect of the "rebels" in Syria has been stated by Assad himself.
Thus far, Washington seems reluctant to weigh heavily into this issue. In May 2012, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta publicly accepted al-Qaeda's presence in Syria (Guardian). And in July, the State Department's counterterrorism chief, Daniel Benjamin, rather incredulously suggested that the United States will simply ask the FSA to reject al-Qaeda. The unspoken political calculation among policymakers is to get rid of Assad first—weakening Iran's position in the region—and then deal with al-Qaeda later.
However, back in NATO's wonderland of disinformation a shadow of doubt must be cast, so within our media it's not just simply terrorists, it's 'terrorists'. Because, we don't believe Assad... right?
Assad praises army for fighting 'terrorist gangs'
And from today - Al-Qaeda building well-organized network in Syria: U.S. intelligence officials.
So, which is it NATO? Is Al-Qaeda terrorists? or 'terrorists'? They can't be both. Or are they "rebels"? When Assad says to us that he will use all available tools to fight the terrorists how is that any different from when we say we will use all available tools to fight the terrorists? They're even the same terrorists!
Sooner or later the U.S. will probably convince the U.N. to implement a no-fly zone, should that happen, I ask you all to email your MP (strange, I know) and let them know that by aiding the U.S. in another no-fly zone we are taking part in their war of aggression, and we are taking part in war crimes. If Assad is guilty of "atrocities" against these terrorists, then so are we. We can't have it both ways. Indiscriminate drone strikes, depleted uranium, bombings, executions, the list goes on.
I know Elizabeth May is receptive to this information, and during the Libya votes was the only MP to raise the issue of the fact we were aiding Al-Qaeda in the House of Commons.
To conclude, I'd like to say - the reason we've been fighting Al-Qaeda and spending billions of dollars for the last 10 years in a security state is because the U.S. funded and created Al-Qaeda to fight the Russians and now, they're doing it again. It should be obvious, now more than ever, that Al-Qaeda is a tool used by the west to do our dirty work and give us the excuses we need to wage wars of aggression. We go in, we put in a puppet democracy - not unlike the democracies we have here at home - and then we proceed to contract out to western corporations. Same old, same old. I don't want this blood on my conscience, do you?
Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.
Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading.