Monday, February 20, 2012

Peter Oborne on the western/al-Qaeda alliance in Syria

So, it’s official. Al-Qaeda is acknowledged as an ally of Britain and America in our desire to overturn the Syrian government.

Think about it. Ten years ago, in the wake of the destruction of the Twin Towers, we invaded Afghanistan to eliminate al-Qaeda. Now the world’s most notorious terror organisation wants to join a new “coalition of the willing” in Syria (not just al-Qaeda: yesterday the Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir staged a march through west London in support of their Syrian brothers and the establishment of the Khilafah state).

You can read the whole of Peter Oborne’s brilliant piece on the west’s allies here.

The only point I’d take issue with in Peter’s piece is his line that:

This may be the most profound turnaround in global politics since the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact of 1939 converted Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany from bitter enemies into allies –

For, as I’ve said here and here, the west and al-Qaeda being on the same side is really nothing new.


Douglas said...

At this point, I'm recalling a book I read many years ago about Ronald Reagan's campaign for Governor of California in 1966.

His opponents made vigorous attempts to link him to right-wing extremist organizations, most notably the John Birch Society. Reagan developed a great snappy comeback "My supporters support me because they subscribe to my views, not because I subscribe to theirs."

When the US entered Afghanistan, people went on an on about how we once supported Osama bin Laden and other mujahadeen against the Russian invasion. As if that has anything to do with anything. We supported them, they betrayed us, showing that their perceived duty as Muslims trumps all other concerns.

I've already expressed my concerns about meddling in what I perceive to be an Islamic civil war. On the other hand, I consider the fact that the US and Al-Qaeda are on the same side to be strictly coincidental.

If Assad stopped killing civilians tomorrow, and instituted a genuine democracy, I believe Al-Qaeda would still be in opposition to his regime.

I also believe that if President Obama thought it was important to do something about Syria, he would have done something by now. He has already demonstrated that he considers the War Powers Act to be a pointless, trivial formality.

Neil Clark said...

Hi Douglas,
I'm not a huge Ronald Reagan fan as you might imagine, but that is indeed a 'great snappy comeback'!

distantdrummer said...

Hi Neil, just to let you know that you have fans on this side of the pond. Keep up the great work. As the song says; "all we are saying, is give peace a chance". It is ironic that Obama does not do more to help and make a difference. He could end the war in Afghanistan today (!), but he lets it continue. No leadership!! Just more; Thanks.

brian said...

FYI: on Marie Colvin death:

'First: this narrative has entirely originated with the “opposition”
For nearly a year, covering the Syrian destabilization, the words emanating from the “oppostion” have almost always been far from fact . Far from fact!'

'Fourth: Marie Colvin is supposed to be an American, working for the British press and yet it was the French government who confirmed her death? But even that early reporting is disappearing.
French Minister: French journalist killed in Syria was the original headline to this news story

In the body of the story the info is still present

In Paris, French government spokeswoman Valerie Pecresse said those killed were French photojournalist Remi Ochlik and American veteran war reporter Marie Colvin
Youtube videos had her as either french of british…is this why?

brian said...

' I consider the fact that the US and Al-Qaeda are on the same side to be strictly coincidental. '

You are not very bright...
no its not...these two sinister entities have long had an interesting relationship: now as enemey now as ally: in Balkans and Libya as afghanistan as enemies...if the US had no enemies itd be necessary to invent them.
Assad is not killing civilians.if you stopped reading the MSM youd not have your head full of suc rubbish. Repeating a lie like that does not make it truee.But its the aim of any Colour Revolution(Regd TM) to portray the target as the villain, in order to wni home support...form people like you.

Ian said...

brian, I love those satire pieces you link to. The send up of conspiracy theorists is so accurate: "Marie Colvin isn't dead, in fact she never existed", wonderful pillory.

Either that or they are real, but you would have to not be very bright to believe that.

Douglas said...

@brian - I consider your response to my comment unsportsmanlike. Neil and I disagree on any number of things, and he never says I'm not very bright, and I never say he's not very bright.

What I've started saying when I encounter someone with a radically different worldview than mine is "I say, we live in different worlds, don't we?" Or more succinctly "We live in different worlds."

I am actually one of the relatively few Americans who occasionally watches RT on television. I get it through MHz Worldview. However, I consider it a propaganda channel.

I am opposed to any American intervention in Syria. Unfortunately, President Obama doesn't ask my opinion about such things.

brian said...

With people like Ian, who needs propaganda!

The point for me of the piece is Colvins collusion with KLA and her clear support for sedition...shen is/was no journalist.

Ian said...

Thanks brian.

You may have taken out of that article her links to the KLA which seems odd as it is not mentioned at all in the article you linkd to (first turns up in the comments but only after the late Miss Colvin has been called a wh*re a few times).

I took out of it the repeated allusion to her not being dead or ever existing. You handily missed out all the bullet points that suggested the BBC and Sunday Times journalist doesn't actually exist when you posted 1 and 4 above.

There is an awful lot to be said about the potential propaganda use of the death of a journalist in Syria at the moment. And it is already being used for political purposes.

And I would not be in the slightest bit surprised if the late Miss Colvin has association with many organisations that are not based on Fleet Street (i.e. your KLA link)

The article you link to doesn't say that at all. Rather it puts forward a 7 point plan as to how Miss Colvin is not dead or has never existed. And just to make it a little more 'conspiricist' Penny caries on in the comments section to chuck out a few vulgar names, wonderful insight I must admit.

with bloggers like Penny, there is no need to undermine the alternative view, they are doing it already.