Monday, October 06, 2014

Israel working with Al Qaeda

The headline for this post may lead you to think that I'm trafficking in bizarre theories of 9/11. Nope. I'm talking about demonstrable events on the ground right now.

The Nusra Front, one of the main players in Syrian rebellion, is the Syrian offshoot of Al Qaeda. (To prove the point, simply Google the words "Nusra" and "Al Qaeda.") Despite this unsavory origin, an Israeli think tank says that America should support Nusra -- that is, Israel wants us to work with the people who attacked us on 9/11, or at least with their latter-day heirs.

We've seen a number of reports indicating that Israel has been giving Nusra/Al Qaeda fighters aid and protection in the Golan Heights.

Why would Israel work with Al-Qaeda-Under-A-New-Name (a.k.a. Nusra)? Because Al-Qaeda-Under-A-New-Name (a.k.a. Nusra) and Israel seem to have played "Let's Make a Deal"...
Some U.S. paid mercenaries from the Free Syrian Army took a Syrian government position at al-Hurrah half way between the Jordan border and south Damascus. They came from a western direction where they, together with Jabhat al-Nusra, have positions next to the Golan height demarcation zone with Israel and are protected by Israeli artillery. Videos showed them using plenty of U.S. provided TOW anti-tank missiles.

A group of Jabhat al-Nusra fighters coming from the Golan zone tried to attack a Hizbullah position in east Lebanon. They were ambushed and lost some 30 fighters.
This BBC article talks about the Nusra raid on Hezbollah but never mentions the Israeli connection, even though that link is obvious. Why else would Nusra fighters go blazing into Lebanon, if not to please their Israeli partners? One would think that Nusra would have its hands full in Syria, what with the civil war and all.

Why on earth would Israel partner up with a tentacle of Al Qaeda? Because Israel needs mercs. As Norman Finkelstein has pointed out, Israeli society is very strange -- for all of their bellicosity, the Israeli citizenry won't tolerate the loss of many soldiers. Now they have Al-Qaeda-Under-A-New-Name (a.k.a. Nusra) to do their dirty work for them.

Some time ago, Nusra/Al Qaeda had a falling out with ISIS, the other big Islamic extremist group which seeks to remove Assad. It was a tiff between brothers: Like Nusra, ISIS began life as an Al Qaeda offshoot (Al Qaeda in Iraq), although ISIS now considers Al Qaeda "classic" (the Bin Laden boys) to be yesterday's news.

American airstrikes have prompted the two rival jihadi factions to patch up their quarrel:
The two most powerful Islamist groups in Syria -- the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and al Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra -- have spent much of the last year killing each other. But in an interview with CNN, a senior al-Nusra commander says the two groups now have a common enemy: the "crusaders' coalition."
ISIS has released captured Nusra officers, and the two groups are now forging strong ties.

"Crusaders" is the way Nusra/Al Qaeda refers to Americans. Of course, America is the great friend of Israel, which has become the great friend of Nusra/Al Qaeda, which is once again friends with ISIS. The word "anti-intuitive" does not even begin to describe this mad situation.

Perhaps a simple equation may help us sort things out. Israel is best buds with Nusra/Al Qaeda, and Nusra/Al Qaeda is best buds with ISIS. By the transitive property of best bud-ship, Israel is effectively best buds with ISIS.

Maybe that's why Israel is giving free medical care to jihadis. Also see here:
By providing free air support for the Syrian rebels, Israel is actually helping ISIS approach its goal of establishing an Islamic caliphate in Iraq and Syria.
ISIS has attacked Israel with words, but never with deeds. Netanyahu has attacked ISIS with words, but not with deeds.

Come to think of it, Pastor John Hagee is best buds with Israel. By the transitive property of best bud-ship, Hagee should be considered a friend to ISIS. Or is that carrying this "transitive property" thing too far?
It's difficult to even read these articles of 'strange bedfellows' anymore because of the complete madness involved. Craziness is sweeping the globe.

When you make a pact with the devil, the results are rarely good. Assad has proven himself a butcher but his enemies are looking equally, if not more unhinged.

This will not end well.

Despite this unsavory origin, an Israeli think tank says that America should support Nusra -- that is, Israel wants us to work with the people who attacked us on 9/11, or at least with their latter-day heirs.

Do you actually have a source for this, or are we supposed to believe it just because Washington's blog says so? Washington links to a Huffington blog post, which links to a blog post in Foreign Policy, which (while being strongly critical of WINEP) doesn't actually make this particular allegation.

Where does this assertion really come from?

Well, my guess is that it comes from here:

But you and "Washington" are, in this case, so sloppy that there's no way to connect the dots.

Now what the Washington Institute piece actually does advocate is direct U.S. support of the probably apocryphal "moderate opposition" in Syria, coupled with combat operations against ISIS/L. The al-Nusra Front is not mentioned by name.

I will concede that there is quite likely no such thing as a "moderate opposition" in Syria. I don't know that for a fact, but we have a pretty bad track record for picking "freedom fighters" to support (and not just in the Middle East). However, it is a pretty big leap to go from "an American pro-Israeli think tank founded by a pro-Israeli lobby organization (AIPAC) which receives funding from wealthy supporters of Israel (and maybe covertly from the Israeli government) advocates destabilization of the Syrian government and direct military action against ISIS/L" to "Israel working with Al Qaeda". I don't think you've made your case.

Prop, my source goes back to a McClatchy story...

That's where the Jeffrey White of WINEP quote comes from. And we know from that insider account that WINEP would say nothing about Israel without Israel's approval.

I admit that I should have provided a direct link to that article in my post. Sorry about that.

But I think I HAVE made my case. The White quote. Oren's quote. That quote from the Ostrovsky book. The downing of the Syrian aircraft going after Nusra. The protection of Nusra in their camps by the Israelis. The fact that Nusra, in the middle of a civil war in Syria, went adventuring in goddamned Lebanon to harass Israel's enemies.

C'mon, dude. There comes a point where you have to give these events the most obvious reading. Israel wants Assad gone because Assad helps the Palestinians. The Israelis are focused on that issue like a laser and fuck everything else.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?