99% of Syrian Rebels Are Islamic Extremists And Jihadist Terrorists

[Zippyjuan]

The British broadcasting channel is your source? did you not find anything from the State dept website? I will look up my source and give it to you. You have to understand that this uprising started around the time the US and NATO had started harassing Qaddafi for going just what they accused Assad of doing.

Sorry but I cannot believe that Assad seeing what is happening will do exactly that which got Qaddafi in trouble.

Perhaps I may suggest Al Jazeera? http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/int...654512841.html

The uprising against President Bashar al-Assad's rule has cost thousands of lives, both civilians and military.
As rallies began in March 2011, protesters were calling for reform and an end to corruption. But as demonstrations were met with live bullets, the departure of the president became an unconditional demand.

What started with street protests has increasingly turned into an armed conflict.

Click on the map to follow events province-by province and to learn more about neighbouring countries' stances towards the crisis.

Just the beginning part of their timeline (they count from the bottom up on their list with latest news at the top):

Mar 30





Assad addresses the nation
Assad delivers a speech for the first time since the protests began. He blames foreign conspirators for the unrest but declines to elaborate on major reforms.


Mar 29

The government resigns.



Mar 23





Syria unrest continues
Syrian forces reportedly kill six people in an attack on protesters in the Omari mosque complex in Deraa, and later open fire on hundreds of youths marching in solidarity. An official statement says later that Assad has sacked Faisal Kalthoum as governor of Deraa.


Mar 23

A week into the protests, Assad sacks the governor of Deraa as activists report the death of at least 100 people in the province.



Mar 20

Activists say tens of people have been killed in Deraa in less than a week. Crowds there set fire to the headquarters of the ruling Baath Party.



Mar 18

Security forces shoot a number of people dead in Deraa, as thousands of people take to the street calling for freedom while accusing Assad's family of corruption. The crackdown triggers days of protests and more civilian deaths.



Mar 16

Security forces break up a silent gathering in Marjeh square in Damascus of about 150 protesters who hold up pictures of imprisoned relatives and friends. Witnesses say at least 30 people are arrested.



Mar 15

"Day of Dignity" protests begin in Damascus, demanding the release of political prisoners. At least 35 people are arrested. Simultaneous demonstrations take place in cities including al-Hassake, Deraa, Deir al-Zor and Hama.

[itshappening]

I saw some 'rebels' in Damascus on the BBC where they control a third of the city.

They were wearing islamic garb, the commanders had beards and head dresses mixed with camouflage clothing. BBC said many of their leaders were defections from the Syrian army and were very careful to stress they were not jihadists or radicalized but they looked it to me. The 'colonel' said Assad will be no more 'in a few weeks'.

They all had AK47's and about 30-50 of them were firing them off in unison in some woods for the camera in what looked like a training exercise so they have plenty of weapons and ammo it seems.

[juleswin]

Perhaps I may suggest Al Jazeera? http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/int...654512841.html



Just the beginning part of their timeline (they count from the bottom up on their list with latest news at the top):

Sorry if I seem to be dismissing your sources but again Al jazeraa is the Qatari equivalence of BBC and if we know anything about Qatar, it is one staunchest supporters of Islamic rebels. Be it in Libya or in Syria now. Also the fact that Syria was listed in PNAC paper as one of the countries to topple, I find all these event awfully convenient to be happening just as they are about to zero in on Iran.

The General Clark speech, the PNAC document and a man like me start putting 2 and 2 together.

[kcchiefs6465]

Couple points. One- the Islamic extremists are being more successful because they have more experience fighting (in Iraq and Afghanistan)- the locals lacked both weapons and training- and second, the Syrian rebels turned to them because they needed help and though they asked, none was coming from Western governments s so they sought it wherever they could find it. "An enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Publicly* We have been 'helping' Syrian rebels off and on for 60+ years. I would be willing to bet my last dollar that CIA proxies are very well operating in Syria.

[Todd]

Here's an update to some links on the Syrian situation. Its from another anonymous US official again.

http://news.antiwar.com/2012/12/10/u...mical-weapons/

The US and some of its European allies “are using defense contractors to train Syrian rebels on how to secure chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria,” according to “a senior US official and several senior diplomats,” CNN reports.

My problem is this: If I can't believe these anonymous US intelligence sources that Syrian government is arming themeselves with Chem Weapons, then why am I to believe another anon US official that we are now training rebels to secure them?

[Zippyjuan]

Sorry if I seem to be dismissing your sources but again Al jazeraa is the Qatari equivalence of BBC and if we know anything about Qatar, it is one staunchest supporters of Islamic rebels. Be it in Libya or in Syria now. Also the fact that Syria was listed in PNAC paper as one of the countries to topple, I find all these event awfully convenient to be happening just as they are about to zero in on Iran.

The General Clark speech, the PNAC document and a man like me start putting 2 and 2 together.

I take it then that since you are only criticizing my sources you have not found anything "better" to support your claim that the snipers started everything?
Have you found anything yet? Thank you for trying anyways.

[BlackTerrel]

The truth is that the CIA is deliberately funding and arming Jihadist terrorists to destabilize Syria and change its regime. Regime change in Syria has been a U.S. aim since the false flag September 11 events, and going back further, since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

"Islamic extremists and Jihadist terrorists" seem to appear out of thin air when convenient.

When there is a terrorist attack against the US (or Spain, or India, or Israel, or England) it is never their fault apparently. It's either a) a false flag or b) they're justified in hating us because we occupy their lands and give money to Israel.

How come "Islamic extremists and Jihadist terrorists" hate Syria so much, and how come they never attack the US?

[Muwahid]

For Ron Paul supporters I'm sometimes surprised at how quickly you label people extremists. If you go to the Middle East, the only people who believe in something called "extremists" the way westerners do, are very liberal-secular people (tiny minority). I suggest you guys learn about the Middle East from Michael Scheuer. If you give the Middle East it's democracy you will get Shar'iah law in some form, you will get some form of a theocracy and you will have people calling for "jihad" against the "infidels".

The Egyptian protests didn't start peacefully then extremists came in, that didn't happen in Libya, and it isn't happening in Syria. There are various interest groups that want to see rulers deposed, in the case of Syria it's most Sunnis and non-Allawites disregarding people with cushy government jobs who would like to see the regime stand firm. Among these millions of people there are sub-categories, the people who want an American style democracy, the people who want an Islamic theocracy, the ones who want a mix, you have seculars and Islamists and probably even smaller religious groups like the Christians.

People are confused about foreigners being involved in the opposition. But that always happens, in Iraq so many Saudis flooded in, same with Afghanistan, Somalia, and so on. Where there is a "jihad" Muslims go without seeing borders.

This isn't to say the United States doesn't have its interests there and it isn't to say foreign governments wont try to sway the civil war in a direction they choose, it's very obvious this is occurring but not just from the United States, but from Russia, and Iran. People here seem to herald Iran as some non-interventionist victim of the Middle East. Iran sent people to Iraq to torture people under the American-installed regime, there are many stories of Farsi speaking interrogators. They're doing the same thing in Syria, and have sent men to help the Assad regime.

If you guys are all shocked about men in the Middle East wearing Islamic garbs and saying "Allahu Akbar" I guess it hasn't crossed your minds that they are Muslims and if they die they want to die not for a secular reason, that's not extremism. Extremism in the traditional western sense hardly exists anywhere, because it couldn't survive in any civilized environment, people would reject it as an abomination.

[Zippyjuan]

Thanks for sharing the info!

[kcchiefs6465]

.... If you go to the Middle East, the only people who believe in something called "extremists" the way westerners do, are very liberal-secular people (tiny minority). I suggest you guys learn about the Middle East from Michael Scheuer...

Husni Zaim referring to a US backed coup of Syria during the '50s

When demonstrations led to the resignation of the prime minister, the U.S. assistant military attaché, who was in reality a CIA officer, began to meet with the Syrian chief of staff, Husni Zaim, to plan a coup. Soon after, Zaim “requested U.S. agents provoke and abet internal disturbances which ‘essential for coup d'etat' or that U.S. funds be given him this purpose.”- © U.S. Foreign Policy in Perspective: Clients, Enemies, and Empire, 2009

I'd suggest you check out http://us-foreign-policy-perspective...dex.php?id=323 as well as read the book Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II by William Blum
Here's another website with a few excerpts from his book should you need help deciding whether or not it's worth the read.
http://killinghope.org/

Here is something I'd posted a little while ago. (shamelessly copied to save me the time of saying precisely the same thing)

There are reasons to why we pick and choose a country to "help." I feel for those oppressed in Syria as much as the next person but our involvement is not on moral grounds and is not random. We will undoubtedly choose a C.I.A. backed puppet or the country will be constantly warring with different warlords assuming and losing power. Either way, the country's average people will blame us and more 'extremists' will be bred. Who knows what new terror organization they are creating just by supplying the S.L.A. with weapons. (Which I am sure they already have.. flown out of another country with no ties to America- AK47s and such labeled as humanitarian aid) All of this shit needs to stop. Not now, yesterday. And people scratch their heads when planes are blown up and embassies attacked. History does repeat itself. And it seems we haven't learned a damn thing. I've been disappointed to see a few RPF members fall for the propaganda being spewed. We do this shit every year.

We need not entangle ourselves in the quagmire that will undoubtedly be created in Syria. I don't have enough fingers and toes to list the countries we have been in. I don't have enough patience to add up the countless billions (trillions really) missing. I feel for the truly oppressed people of Syria, I really do. But respectfully if you all feel that you are financing the right people/regime then more power to you to send any aid you can. (Up to and including fighting against Assad for all I care) I don't want a damn dime of my money being spent on this nonsense which quite frankly, is none of our business. Aside from the fact that those feeling they are on the compassionate side are being played like fiddles. Same as incubator babies and WMD's. Oh wait, they really didn't use the WMD propaganda again did they?..........