Monthly Archives: July 2012

Re Syria: Please see my other blog


Whilst reading about the defection of a politician from Aleppo in Syria, I have discovered some interesting truths about the Ba’ath Party in particular that I feel needs quite a bit of research and follow-up. As a result I am transferring my posts on the subject to another blog that deals specifically with this form of Middle East subject. I have a post up on History of the World San Revisionism that is dealing with this subject.

What I have discovered relates to the Ba’ath Party, and its origins. I am not sure how many people are aware of the Nazi connection to the Ba’ath Party but the fact remains that there is both a Nazi and a Communist connection.

When commenting upon the situation in Egypt, Syria and Iraq in particular one needs to have a general understanding of the Ba’ath Party and its political aims. This is something that cannot be seen in isolation from the fact that these are generally Muslim countries. I read some stories about how the Christians in Syria are about to be punished, but I keep in mind that the tribe of Druze who are majority Christian have in fact supported Bashar al-Assad, and if they are in fact punished after this is over, then they probably have themselves to blame. Like the Alawites, the Druze are a minority within Syria.

Something else that I have learned is that there is a group of foreigners that have entered into Syria. They are the ones that appear to have ties to Al Qaeda, which is counter to what I have seen claimed about the opposition within Syria. My information came from a report that I saw regarding the kidnap of a British journalist and Dutch photographer who were held captive by this particular group. It was the Syrian Free Army who turned up and got them released. This group had been extremely threatening towards the journalist and photographer, demanding that they convert to Islam. What they noted is that many within the group had British accents, and they also noted that some of the group were from Pakistan. This is the group that is giving the Syrian Free Army a bad name and bad reputation. In other words their activity is destroying the reputation of the SFA amongst the world at large.

My interest will be turning to the origins of the Ba’ath Party since I think that this is something that needs to be explored in order to open up some eyes regarding the truth about the forces that have been strong in that particular region. I had heard some things about Saddam Hussein regarding the Nazi Party in particular. What I find confusing are the claims about the CIA and the belief that that the Ba’ath Party was somehow anti-Communist. I suspect that it is not true in light of the fact that Nasser in Egypt was in fact a Marxist, and that he had been moving Egypt towards Communism when he was overthrown by the military.

Whatever the outcome of any of my research, I do think it reasonable to refer to these particular Islamic countries as Islamic-facism under the Ba’ath Party. It is this Fascism that I think has been hidden from view because too many people do not want to face the reality that Fascism is not dead and buried, but that it continues to thrive in the Islamic environment.

Something else that I note here is that most people have continued to not understand the true nature of Libya when it was under the rule of Gadhafi. If they had taken the time to discover more about those years, they would have seen that Gadhafi had followed Mao Tse Tung with his little Red Schoolbook, with his own version called the Green book. What I did learn is that this green book was hated by the older Libyans. Most people do not understand that Gadhafi had turned Libya into a Socialist state following a Communist model. This was something hated by the majority of the population, especially when they had their goods and businesses seized by Gadhafi and given to others. There was plenty of motivation to get rid of Gadhafi that had nothing to do with religion. On the other had there were religious and ethnic motivations as well  including the fact that Gadhafi had suppressed the language of the Bedouin who lived in the mountain regions (this was the group of Bedouin who led the charge into Tripoli when Gadhafi was finally overthrown). Other groups were motivated because their mosques had been closed down by Gadhafi.  The truth is that within Libya the Salafists were a minority and they needed the majority of Libyan citizens to revolt in order to bring about the regime change that has taken place. This is a far cry from the Egyptian scenario in particular where Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists have the upper hand.

When looking at these factors, I go back to the declaration about Libya by Jalil who had declared that Libya would follow Sharia Law. Actually, what he meant is that Libya would be throwing out the Communist influences that Gadhafi had introduced and that the country would return to a purer form of Sharia, just as the people had wanted in the first place. There is only one other difference and that relates to Commercial Law where Libya had been following a French model. This would suggest that in terms of Commercial Law there will be some kind of reform within Libya. The point is that Sharia Law already existed in Libya and the people had voted to retain Sharia Law many years prior to their people’s revolution.

I will be continuing to watch the Libyan situation in light of the fact there remains some instability, and of course the fact that the Gadhafi family with their money have not been rounded up. At the same time I point out that the guns being used by the Islamists in Mali were supplied by Gadhafi money!!

Advertisements

Understanding God’s Will


When George Zimmerman gave his interview on Sean Hannity’s Show he stated that it was God’s Will that he survived. This comment outraged the Scheme Team. Is it any wonder, because that statement exposed them in ways that they have not understood, and the same can be said about the people who are not part of the Scheme Team, but who were offended because George Zimmerman mentioned God.

The point is: George Zimmerman is a Catholic, and a statement such as the one he made suggests that he has a somewhat strict view where his Catholicism is concerned. Today during Mass I found myself thinking about what George said within a Catholic context. To some extent the statement is fatalistic. What I think George meant is simply that when he was able to reach for the gun first and fire off that shot it was God’s Will that he survive, and perhaps even undergo some of the persecution that he has been receiving. It seems that George is leaving everything up to the Will of God.

Some of the nastiest comments about this simple statement came from Tracy Martin, and what really sticks out was the comment about “not being the same God”.  It was a very anti-Catholic statement, and the truth is that it was a statement that jarred with me to the point that I cannot get it out of my mind. I have some genuine problems with people who espouse anti-Catholicism, and for this reason alone, I have genuine problems with Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton and their form of Christianity. As a Catholic I probably have a very black and white point of view on certain things, especially regarding who will enter into the Kingdom of God. (my own reasoning is very personal and relates to family matters associated with members of my family who ended up becoming Baptists – I was never impressed by those things). My point here is that if a person dies in the act of stealing or beating up another person and especially with the intention of killing that person, then I cannot see how such a person would be allowed to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.

The point is: how can the statement regarding God’s Will be reconciled in such a way that people are not offended (even though I am very offended by the remarks made by Tracy Martin). I think of it this way: It is not God’s intention that we should all go to hell. On the contrary it is God’s desire that we reside with Him in the Kingdom of Heaven. However, the wicked, that is those who reject God will not be able to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Only those who are clothed in the Wedding garments will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven  and that Wedding Garment is grace.  Whilst it is God’s Will that we will be saved and enter into the Kingdom of Heaven, inevitably there will be many who reject the Will of God, and who are denied entry into the Kingdom of Heaven, thus ending up in what we call Hell.

What about Sybrina claiming the same thing about her thug son? My response to that is perhaps she is right, but not in the way that she means. What if George Zimmerman had been the one shot and killed that night? What if Trayvon Martin was the one who ended up being arrested? He would have been just another black boy stastic in the prison system – one who truly should have been charged with murder in the second degree because he is the one who had bashed George Zimmerman, and who was the perpetrator of the violence on that fateful night. Since it was Trayvon Martin who had been in the act of committing a crime when he died, one could argue that it was God’s Will that he be spared the trauma of going to prison for a very lengthy stay. It can be easily argued that a life cut short in that manner is better off than a life where the person ends up in prison. It can be argued that it was God’s Will that Trayvon Martin’s crime spree was cut short because of those events that night. It can be argued that it was God’s Will that Trayvon Martin was removed so that he could not be responsible for selling drugs on the streets, hence being responsible for the possible deaths of other human beings.

It is only when one looks at the lives of both people that perhaps one can see the Will of God in action, but perhaps what we see is not in accord with how others see the same events because of their own upbringing. In other words, yes, the Will of God was very much present that night, just not the way that we might see God working in that particular situation.

The Jawa expresses an opinion


I love reading MyPetJawa because I find most of the articles quite informative most of the time. As I have written many times, I am very uncertain about the Free Syrian Army. However, who can choose between the horrific actions of the current Assad regime and those who want to be rid of a dictator from a minority tribe? There are no guarantees that those who supported Assad during the past 17 months will get off scott free and I might add this includes the Druze Christians who preferred to cast their lot with a man who has been supported by Iran, and who has been funding Nazrallah from Hezbollah in Lebanon, and who has been funding Hamas. Rusty does a lot of work exposing the jihadis and terrorists, and therefore the opinions on this site tend to be reasonably good analysis – the writers understand the reality of the situation.

It is for this reason that I highlight some of the comments made at the Jawa Report, which in fact reflect my own attitudes on the issue of “Al Qaeda” being involved with the Syrian Free Army. I would add here that I think it is more than likely that this is a group of individuals with differing ideology working together to rid the country of a very corrupt regime. At the same time I think that this also fits with what took place in Syria where such elements were also present, but they were not the majority within the conflict, or the majority afterwards.

Here are some of those comments from MyPetJawa:

Of course al-Qaeda is involved. However since the deaths of UBL and al-Libi al-Qaeda is not quite what we think of as al-Qaeda in the 9/11 sense. The Pakistani core is much less relevant. The deaths of the core leaders have in effect given the green light for inspired lower level Jihadis who now know that there is no hope in waiting for al-Qaeda’s core leadership to act.

al-Qaeda now is more of a Salafi state of mind rather than the defined group of Islamic mobsters that it once was.  That state of mind gaining in popularity with the rise Arab spring conflicts and in spite of the deaths of the core leadership.  The truth is that al-Qaeda and other Salafi Jihadi groups will be active in any conflict in the Middle East. There is no way around it. 

So one might say that we’ve won the battles of Iraq and Afghanistan on the ground and al-Qaeda has lost.  Many times al-Qaeda fighters lost favor in the areas they controlled by their own brutal hand more than by the force of our arms. But if the standard by which you measure al-Qaeda’s success are its inspiration of Salafist Jihadi movements. Well, the results are much less clear.

The hard core Jiahdis will seek to impose their will on the population. Of course they will seek to insert themselves into any place where anarchy allows them to gain power by force. I’m even willing to tolerate a few Jihiadis helping Muslims fight to be free, given that its their business and its up to those in those nations to determine their future. Its given that the end result will be somewhat less radical than al-Qaeda. Also, so long as al-Qaeda is engaged there they are less likely to attack us in the west except in cases of extreme opportunity. I mean why would they need to attack us at home? We’re not particularly in their way at the moment.

Afterward will come the real danger. When peace returns the dedicated Jihadis will once again turn his attention to Israel and its allies in the west. And with these new “Democracies” made up of 60 percent Islamists and 20 percent radical Jiahdis I’m not feeling particularly optimistic about it.

The real question that needs to be answered here is whether or not the Syrian population will want to head down the Salfist road. This depends upon who else is part of this coalition called the Free Syrian Army. If the Jihadi component is small then Syria might follow in the footsteps of Libya in its self-determination. If not, then this will end up as a country that has in power those opposed to Iran.

I agree with most of the things stated by Howie in this piece but I am not sure whether I should be optimistic about the future of Syria or whether I should be pessimistic. That is why I try to look at the whole picture. I look at the international scene to see who is supporting the regime, and who, if anyone, is supporting the Syrian Free Army. What I see is Turkey supports the Opposition in Syria, and on the other side is Iran, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Russia and China. Russia has been attempting to ship arms to Syria, but has been caught out such that the shipments have failed to get through a number of hurdles (insurance for shipping). Also, Russia and China have been preventing the UN from taking any kind of action against the Assad regime. In the meantime the slaughter of the people continues.

When Libya became a contentious issue during its own civil war, we saw a similar line-up complete with Russia and China involving themselves on the propaganda front being prepared to tell the lies of Libya’s propagandists. On the other side in that conflict we had the France, Italy, Holland, UK, USA, Qatar and a number of smaller countries who were willing to give some form of assistance. Russia and China did not vote in the Security Council, enabling the action that took place which in the end led to the defeat of Gadhafi, and that defeat had always been inevitable ( I have never bought the line that he was a changed character because what he did was to shift his activities towards Africa whilst pretending to behave. He was a very ruthless man). Iran was also a “friend” to Gadhafi, but Iran was at least a little bit smarter than Russia and China because it provided some very necessary welfare to the Libyans in opposition but they provided guns to Gadhafi.

The same forces are lining up in relation to Syria at least on the surface. In this case the USA has remained impotent and it is probably best that they do not try anything. Iran has been providing its Quds forces and Hezbollah has also provided support with Nazrallah offering Hezbollah forces to Assad. In essence, this has become a Shia vs Sunni conflict, with the Shia being supported by Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Sunni being supported by everyone else. As Howie wrote, it is inevitable that there are Al Qaeda, Salafist elements in this conflict and it is probably better to have them fighting on their home turf than to have them in Iraq where they could be adding to the destabilization in that country. Turkey is involved on the sidelines because so many have sought refuge across the border in Turkey, and there has already been a potentially dangerous situation that could see an escalation into a full blown war. Turkey has moved missiles to the border region. If Turkey ends up in a conflict with Syria, then it could end up that once again NATO will get involved.

I agree with the fact that Assad has to step down. The Syrians need the opportunity for self-determination. It is simply too soon to know whether Syria will go with Muslim Brotherhood or with the Salfist movement. Will it be good or bad? That might depend upon any relationship that is then built with Russia, China and Iran in the future. If the Syrians go the same way as Libya though, this could turn out somewhat differently than some are prepared to state at this point in time. On the other hand the Druze Christians who have supported Assad could find themselves in real trouble because there will be a bit of blood-letting via revenge to come.

Thunderstruck


First it was Stuxnet that slowed down production in Iranian nuclear facilities. When that was discovered, a new piece of malware was designed. Now it is Thunderstruck :). According to the Daily Mail, the new malware has interfered with two facilities, one at Natanz and another nearby facility. The worm itself has disabled the automated network but there has been a twist.

It has also been reported that some of the workstations have been coming on in the middle of the night and that they are playing Australian rock band AC/DC’s “Thunderstruck”.

Someone who is devising all of this malware is having a lot of fun at the expense of the Iranians. This is the latest effort to stop the facilities from becoming completely operational. The Thunderstruck addition in my view is extremely funny…..and I do not listen to AC/DC!!

Syria – who are the Syrian Free Army?


The answer to my question remains: I do not know much about them. The fact is that I remain deeply disturbed by the length of time that the Syrian crisis has taken to resolve. That length of time has been sufficient to rally those forces that we prefer not to have involved in conflict – namely elements that are involved with Al Qaeda and other lesser known outfits. This is a major difference between the conflict in Syria and that of Libya. In Syria there has been sufficient time for outside forces to enter the country via the Iraq and Turkish borders and the real problem is that those foreign fighters are aligned to Al Qaeda.

It appears that the Syrian Free Army is a very mixed group of men. A lot of them are Syrians and not necessarily with links to Al Qaeda. However, there are others who are now a part of the SFA and these are the ones with links to Al Qaeda as well as other jihadist groups. I am not going to neglect to mention that such an influence in Syria.

What is really troubling about the Syrian situation is in fact the foreign or outside interference. What I mean is not the same as the propaganda that comes from the Bashar al-Assad regime, because the regime is ignoring that they rely upon Russia, China and Iran for assistance. The Russians have been caught attempting to transfer arms to Syria, yet they get all shit-faced because the activity of Bashar al-Assad has literally invited a more extremist outfit to enter that country.

Then there is the latest regarding the Turkey-Syrian border- the Turks are now moving missiles to the border region. Can anything healthy emerge in this conflict?

Syria Update


What to make of the situation in Syria? Who are these opposition forces? During the whole of the conflict I have seen absolutely nothing about those opposed to Bashar al-Assad. I am not prepared to go all doom and gloom because I actually see no real difference if there is a changing of the guard, except that they might move away from Iran as an ally. The difficulty that I have is based upon the tribal make-up in Syria and in particular the role of the Druze within the conflict. Members of the Druze clan are in fact Christian and what bothers me the most is that they have supported Assad.

I am not going to take the approach that a change will see more bloodshed for Christians in Syria. In fact I am going to state the obvious, that will happen during a period where there is a seeking of revenge. By backing Assad those Druze Christians have sealed their own fate in any further conflict. In other words “if you sleep with dogs you will wake up with fleas”.

I am looking beyond what might be obvious Islamist connections for the moment to the world scene because the outcome of this particular conflict could help shape further conflicts in the Middle East. This is why I keep emphasizing the roles of both Iran and Russia. Those roles are important.

The Alawites are a form of Shia, but they are in fact a minority within Islam. The Assad family have aligned themselves with both Iran and Russia. Iran has been sponsoring Syria, and Syria has been sponsoring Hezbollah in Lebanon as well as Hamas in the Gaza strip. Can you see how that works.

What do we know about the opposition? The most I can glean is that the oppostion consists of people who are Sunni, as well as other Islamists, including the Syrian form of Muslim Brotherhood. Is that a red flag about the opposition in Syria? I do not know because how can you easily swap one form of terrorism for another form of terrorism? The Sunni Syrians appear to be aligned to the Iraqi Al Qaeda. From what I have gleaned it is claimed that many of these same Syrians crossed the border into Iraq and fought against the Americans. However, such statements are often made without evidence. What I do know is that there are Sunni involved in the conflict. I also know that Syrian military under the direction of Maher Assad have been killing innocent villages, and to this I add that Maher has ordered the death of any soldiers who will not fire upon these innocent villagers. In this sense the activity of Assad is no different from the attempts by Gadhafi to try and crush a rebellion. There are other similarities because Gadhafi used foreigners to inflict punishemnt about Libyans especially in Benghazi where the strife began in the first place. and Assad has used the Iranian Quds force for the same purpose. On top of that there is the level of the language being employed to call those opposed to Assad thugs and similar names.

After more than 16 months of struggle it appears that the Assad regime has reached the point of “the beginning of the end”. There is a civil war in Syria, and Damascus is finally feeling some of what Syrians in other parts of that country have experienced over the past 16 months. Perhaps the tables are turning. This can only happen if there are massive defections and a willingness of those who are still in their jobs to inflict harm by whatever means possible.

Thus we hear that there has been a large explosion in the heart of Damascus, and that several men at the top have either been killed or injured. Among the dead is the brother in law of Assad, as well as one of his top defence chiefs. What we do not know is whether or not either Maher Assad or Bashar al-Assad were present when the explosion took place. The only other thing to emerge about this story is that two groups, The Syrian Free Army and an Islamist group have claimed responsibility. Perhaps they worked together to get the bomb into the room. It is believed that there were two bombs, one in a box of chocolates and the other in a pot plant.  I guess we have to wait for all details to emerge, because reporters are not allowed in the country.

Whilst I am not pre-occupied about the religious make-up of this opposition, I remain pre-occupied with the implications of any regime change. Since Russia, China and Iran have been supporting Assad, will a change in regime make a difference? Will a new regime automatically form an alliance with Iran, Russia and China, or will it seek to form an alliance with the west? I think that this is a difficult question. It is not one that I see can be easily answered.

RNC accuses Obama of Crony Capitalism – what took so long?


The Daily Caller is running the story on a statement by Reince Priebus regarding Obama California bundler Steve Westly. In rather strong terms Priebus points out that someone needs to come clean on the matter. In his words: “It reeks of crony capitalism” .

I have a suggestion for Mr. Priebus, and that is, do not stop at what has been given to Steve Westly as a payoff. The crony capitalism, which is on display over the grants given to various solar companies is only the tip of the iceberg. It is far greater than Steve Westly.

The RNC needs to pull their fingers out and do some real investigation especially in regard to the activities in Chicago. Everything about Obama reeks of crony capitalism. There is none more corrupt than Obama. He makes Richard Nixon look like a saint… and I might add here that I have not heard one single accusation of crony capitalism levelled against Richard Nixon, George Bush, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. However, even before this jerk was elected to the Presidency there were rumours and proof of his corruption.

The real question is why no one has bothered to probe these improprieties. On top of that why, when it is against the election Act, (what remains of McCain-Feingold provisions) to raise campaign funds overseas, we have a President who is boldly raising funds in overseas countries. The RNC needs to pull their fingers out and protest to the FEC about campaign donations raised in that way. Hillary Clinton had to give back funds provided by overseas interests in 2008, well, the same should be the situation right now. The Supreme Court did not strike down the clause that related to funds from overseas corporations or individuals. In fact that remains in place.