August 07, 2012
The CFR And Al-Qaeda
Who would have expected this from the prestigious Council of Foreign Relations?
The Palestinian resistance would be immeasurably weaker today without al-Qaeda in their ranks. By and large, Hamas battalions are tired, divided, chaotic, and ineffective. Feeling abandoned by the West, resistance forces are increasingly demoralized as they square off with the Netanyahu regime's superior weaponry and professional army. 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, Hamas needs al-Qaeda now.
Posted by b on August 7, 2012 at 10:28 AM | Permalink
The Zionists would then have yet another reason to launch attacks on the defenceless people of Gaza.
Posted by: Bernie | Aug 7, 2012 10:48:13 AM | 1
Seymour Hersh wrote about it in 2007 in "The redirection"
and i quote
"This time, the U.S. government consultant told me, Bandar and other Saudis
have assured the White House that “they will keep a very close eye on the
religious fundamentalists. Their message to us was ‘We’ve created this
movement, and we can control it.’ It’s not that we don’t want the Salafis to
throw bombs; it’s who they throw them at—Hezbollah, Moqtada al-Sadr,
Iran, and at the Syrians, if they continue to work with Hezbollah and Iran.”
the article is here
Posted by: erraticideas | Aug 7, 2012 10:57:18 AM | 2
....."Wasn’t that the agenda that Zbigniew Brzezinski also espoused — in cohort with another Saudi KIng and a Pakistani military dictator — for Afghanistan circa 1980 and successfully executed? The US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan got a ‘regime change’ alright in Kabul, finally. It is a minor detail that Osama bin Laden and Jalaluddin Haqqani provided the steel frame at that time."
Posted by: Bernie | Aug 7, 2012 11:05:56 AM | 3
A truly shocking report from the CFR.
For anyone who doesn't have the time to read it. The Council on Foreign Relations piece, basically says that the FSA cannot bring the regime down on their own. They are too divided factionally and are getting demoralised. So of course their brilliant suggestion is to let Al Qaeda into their ranks. The American think-tank then goes on to make the above statement on how Al Qaeda are "discipled, have religious fervor, and have experience from Iraq".
And hey according to the American think-tank involving Al Qaeda more in the Free Syrian Army will "help improve morale".
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Aug 7, 2012 11:21:19 AM | 4
It makes you wonder how much US cooperation there was in Iraq with Al Queida ...
Posted by: somebody | Aug 7, 2012 11:23:21 AM | 5
Al Qaeda, the international salafist jihad financed by the medieval monarchies of the Gulf, has always been the backbone of the armed side of the Syrian opposition. The only change is that when it has become too obvious to hide the fact to the western audiences they have started to sell it as a good thing to bring down the 'evil Assad'.
Posted by: ThePaper | Aug 7, 2012 11:54:53 AM | 6
Surely the US would be positive to the Palestinians getting assistance from Al-Quaida against the evil Zionist regime?
Posted by: Alexander | Aug 7, 2012 12:15:52 PM | 7
Isn't it obvious that the US with Saudi Arabia is backing AQ in both Iraq and Syria because Iran is the greater enemy (says Israel), and also the US needs to keep AQ as a dependable "enemy" in the Global War On Terror?
Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 7, 2012 12:15:55 PM | 8
It's alCIAda,for the uninformed.From 1980,to 9-11,to the present.
Hey,Al Capone liked bats too,Obomba.
Posted by: dahoit | Aug 7, 2012 12:26:04 PM | 9
And, also, Bernie @ 1, the US would have even more reasons to do nothing to help the Palestinians. Indeed, maybe they could label the whole lot of themas terrists.
Interstingly, last Friday morning, NPR's Morning Edition had a segment from Dina Temple-Raston which talked about how the US is now realizing [Really, Dina? Maybe they've known quite awhile, eh?] that Al Qaeda is trying to infilgrate the ranks, even leadership, of the Syrian rebels. And the US has warned the "rebels" that Al Q may try to infiltrate and, oh, yeah, teak over the whole thing for their own agenda. So, take care, guys, mmmkay?
Syrian rebels, the West's gang, get warnings; the Palestinians will get sanctions, loss of utterly necessary aid, no hope for terrritorial integrity, etc. The short end of the stick again. As always from the West/US.
Posted by: jawbone | Aug 7, 2012 12:45:11 PM | 10
thanks for the link. i was look of that brazen statement from hilary
Posted by: erraticideas | Aug 7, 2012 1:30:10 PM | 12
... looking for...
Posted by: erraticideas | Aug 7, 2012 1:30:45 PM | 13
Nicholas Nassif on what Prime Minister Riad Hijab's defection means (ie mainly symbolic since it will be the military campaign that decides it).
Sources close to the regime say Hijab was never a regime insider. Some say the reason Assad made him prime minister on June 23 was that he was viewed as being acceptable to the opposition. But Hijab’s defection may also be less significant than the media clamor that was raised over it yesterday may suggest, in that it has no bearing on the balance of power, especially military power, on the ground.
Until either Assad or his armed opponents achieve a major military victory that translates into immediate political gains, thus forcing the external players to negotiate, there will be no alternative to continued military operations and further fighting.
According to Lebanese sources who recently met with senior US diplomats in Washington, the Americans are becoming more actively involved in efforts to force Assad out of office, as the Turks, Saudis and Qataris are insisting he must be. The US administration, according to the sources, believes Assad has enough military capacity to prevent his overthrow in the near future, and perhaps for a long time, and definitely to deny the opposition the kind of balance-tipping military victory it seeks. However, Washington is also convinced that the Syrian regime – as established by Hafez al-Assad in 1971 and inherited by his son in 2000 – is finished.
Source: Al Akhbar - The Military Option
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Aug 7, 2012 1:47:41 PM | 14
jawbone @ 10
In Norwegian news one of these days last week, the Norwegian reporter in Syria interviewed a guy putting on his "No god but God" head-banner, and she commented that he, like most other rebel fighters wore the trademark Free Syrian Army slogan. Failing to note, or maybe sha actually didn't know, that it really is the Al Quaida trademark. That says something about the saturation of Al-Quaida among rebels in Syria. It's actually quite funny, in a tragic sort of way.
Posted by: Alexander | Aug 7, 2012 3:03:56 PM | 15
"We have to send very clear expectations about avoiding sectarian warfare. Those who are attempting to exploit the situation by sending in proxies or terrorist fighters must realize that will not be tolerated," Clinton said. (h/t dh)
Really. She said that. The actions of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey won't be tolerated. So, using the usual rule of opposites for evaluating political speech, we can safely assume that Clinton is doing the opposite especially since there is no evidence of intoleration toward these close US allies.
Posted by: Don Bacon | Aug 7, 2012 3:19:34 PM | 16
Assessment by Carnegie endowment
"Will the escalating violence break the political and military deadlock?
Not yet. July witnessed a series of dramatic events: the bombing of the regime’s “crisis management cell,” the so-called Damascus volcano launched by armed rebels, and the rebel offensive in Aleppo. These were important developments that served to underscore the failure of the regime’s “security solution.”
But they also generated overly optimistic predictions that the regime’s fall is imminent—a matter of weeks—and unrealistic assessments of the military balance. It took relatively few lightly armed rebels to give off the impression, for about a week, that the regime had lost control of large chunks of its own capital. Rebel commanders in the north quickly capitalized on this and sent their units into Aleppo, posing a far more serious challenge to the regime.
This, however, may prove to be a costly mistake. The rebels caught their enemy off balance, but instead of withdrawing to conserve their strength and gradually wear down superior government forces through repeated maneuvers, they committed wholly to the battle. Insiders say that local Free Syrian Army commanders who preferred caution found their hand forced by the militant Islamist “Tawhid Brigade,” which insisted on immediate confrontation. If the rebels lose, the casualties they sustain will be far more significant than those they suffered in Damascus or its countryside.
The picture may be radically transformed if significant numbers of troops now encircling the city defect en masse, triggering a wider breakdown within the army. But otherwise a military setback in Aleppo could threaten rebel strongholds in a swathe of territory around the city and will be a political and psychological blow that will take time to overcome. This could hinder behind-the-scenes efforts to negotiate a peaceful exit for Bashar al-Assad or possible power-sharing formulas."
more on Tawid Brigade and Fatah al Islam
plays in the shadows ...
Posted by: somebody | Aug 7, 2012 5:37:28 PM | 17
US $emocracts have a history of using alqaeda...Clinton in the war on Yugoslavia and now Obomber with the Clinton monster as war lord.
Posted by: brian | Aug 7, 2012 6:04:20 PM | 18
Well Don, #17, Hillary obviously is talking in the present tense:
"We have to send very clear expectations about avoiding sectarian warfare. Those who are attempting to exploit the situation by sending in proxies or terrorist fighters must realize that will not be tolerated, [however the proxies and terrorist fighters who saturated the field over a year ago will not only be tolerated, but supported to the max]"
Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Aug 7, 2012 6:22:59 PM | 19
Re #9, Richard Labeviere's pre-9/11 book Dollars for Terror already detailed the intimate connnection between Al Qaeda and the CIA.
Posted by: lysias | Aug 7, 2012 6:47:46 PM | 20
CTuttle @ 21
If this news is true and not like the other fsa propaganda, things will be worse for the fsa handlers in Turkey..There might even be regime change in Turkey itself..
The Kurdish spring has also begun and Erdogan is f*cked!! Like I said before, these things are hard to control when they start..NATO, GCC and Turkey banked on a quick and easy victory when they started this campaign of terror in order to achieve regime change. It has backfired and they now look more and more desperate...
Posted by: Zico | Aug 8, 2012 2:03:04 AM | 22
Russia has denied any death of their general..In fact, no such general with that name exists..I think we have to be very careful at taking the fsa claims as facts..
These guys have been lying their way throughout their struggle for power since the beginning of the Syrian conflict..In fact, they've been caught many times with Al-Jazeer, fixing the news to fit the narrative...
Posted by: Zico | Aug 8, 2012 6:06:19 AM | 23
I have one question, to everyone here; Is the black ribbon with the writing "No god but God", in arabic, the trademark of Al-Quaida? The Norwegian journalist who interviewed a Syrian rebel with that black head-band disputes that it is the mark of Al-Quaida, but a more generic islamist statement. Who is right, me or her?
Posted by: Alexander | Aug 8, 2012 7:33:00 AM | 24
I should specify, it is a black cloth, whith white letters, in arabic, "No god but God".
Posted by: Alexander | Aug 8, 2012 7:35:40 AM | 25
Short answer is Yes! But it could be a group which is inspired by Islam and Islamic history - and not necessarily have the ideology of Al-CIAeda. You have to look at other things before deciding whether they are Al-CIAeda - name of the group, who is their leader, what scholars are they following,what slogans/language are they using and the flag they are waving. But looking at all the videos and articles I bet my money on them been Al-CIAeda.
Muslims are an emotional people who are very quick to use the religion for their cause - whatever it may be.
Posted by: Irshad | Aug 8, 2012 8:17:00 AM | 26
26 Irshad, why/how do you attach that to Muslims? Americans are an emotional people who are very quick to use their religion for their cause. That's the human condition. Of course the West has better propagandists. Muslims can't agree on what day Ramadan ends, they are more disparate, more individualistic than American Christians.
Posted by: scottinDallas | Aug 8, 2012 8:56:17 AM | 27
@26 - I will argue Muslims are more an emotional people - then others. I know couse I have seen and and experienced it (btw I am Muslim)as have others. And Muslims get very emotional about when Ramadan should start and end!
Posted by: Irshad | Aug 8, 2012 9:23:27 AM | 28
Thank you, I can't imagine them being anything but Al Qaida. Although, the Norwegian reporter I'm challenging on this says Hamas in Gaza are using it, as do some salafists and other islamists - she wrote.
Though, specifically a solid black cloth, with white arabic letters.. She doesn't convince me the "FSA rebel" she interviewed in Syria wasn't Al Qaida.
Posted by: Alexander | Aug 8, 2012 2:21:49 PM | 29
from the link posted by somebody at 17: (on Aleppo)
This, however, may prove to be a costly mistake. The rebels caught their enemy off balance, but instead of withdrawing to conserve their strength and gradually wear down superior government forces through repeated maneuvers, they committed wholly to the battle.
This conflict cannot be won but only lost by the party that gives up or collapses first.
For that reason, with lesser forces, it is best to avoid battles, concentrate on surprise attacks and harassment, political and social advantages, targeted assassinations, and to consolidate the ‘areas’ already held, in some way or another. Particularly, one has to avoid losing forces - ppl - and prepare volunteers for the long haul, endurance, and have support/supply systems in place, insofar as possible. I am no military strategist, this seems a no-brainer to me from stories of WW2 from family. The conflict in Syria is just as much psychological as it is military.
Aljazeera offers an ‘interactive’ model of Syrian defectors:
(i have been away and not read several posts and attendant comments..)
Posted by: Noirette | Aug 9, 2012 12:51:12 PM | 30
According to Lebanese sources who recently met with senior US diplomats in Washington, the Americans are becoming more actively involved in efforts to force Assad out of office, as the Turks, Saudis and Qataris are insisting he must be.....Source: Al Akhbar - The Military Option
Posted by: Colm O' Toole | Aug 7, 2012 1:47:41 PM | 14
the joke here is that we have the turks(basically dictator Erdogan) saudis qataris (dictatorships) and the americans (another dictatorship disguised as a party system 'democracy') lined up behind alqaeda to bring to an end a free secular state... itd almost make a good movie!
Posted by: brian | Aug 9, 2012 6:20:03 PM | 31
In Libya, the Americans would not say explicitly that they wanted regim-change, it was implied, but international law prohibits them from going blatantly for that objective. In Syria however, the idea of stopping the violence is not the main objective, not even seemingly. The say outright that regime-change, that Assad must go, is the main goal. There are laws and conventions against rogue states (United States) causing regime-change in other countries. The Obama-regime clearly has gone off track and become rogue, blatantly disregarding all international law they are obligated to follow.
Posted by: Alexander | Aug 10, 2012 5:13:12 AM | 32