Tuesday, March 13, 2012

Foxnews and US Conservatives: Assad's Unlikely Allies

If anyone has failed to notice as I have, the issue in Syria, you know, the biggest event in world news currently happening and the number one issue in the Middle East other than discussions of Iran's nuclear program is all but completely off the radar.

Lets make it clear the word "Syria" does not exist on a single headline on their webpage.  Now granted most of fox's regular viewers are a bunch of xenophobic, Muslim hating pseudo-fascists, so I suppose not having major reports against Assad shouldn't be a big surprise, but really, a "pastor" in Iran potentially facing a death sentence for apostasy ranks higher that nearly 100 people killed every day in Syria?  The cover up is outlandish.  We should not be surprised.  Anyone who falls American conservative media would realize that many of the self-ordained conservative "human rights" squawkers, and pro-Israeli conservatives (IE evangelical Zionists as opposed to actual Israeli and Jewish Zionists, most of whom are far less scary).

WND (World Net Daily) avoids the Syria discussion on its front page as readily as Fox. A search of pork eating "Jewish" Pamela Geller (used lightly for a woman who derides kosher and halal slaughter whether by accident or on purpose and who has a problem with Muslims not wanting to eat pork and Muslims residing in the US in general unless not actually Muslim), reveals that in the last 12 months since the rose of the Syrian revolution very few references to the mass slaughter there. Her strange bed fellow and hero "Wafa Sultan" is a self proclaimed ex Muslim, who tells everyone the "evils" of "Islam" by deriding Sunni Islam, a religion she never belonged to, and knows nothing about.  Her criticism of Islam, are entirely those of an outsider, as a loosely secular Alawite, a religion that is pretty far and wide from being a average Muslims.  Wafa preaches the Syrian government lies about the 1982 Massacre and accepts the Assad regimes propaganda on the subject and the Muslim Brotherhood, hook line and sinker.  So when it comes down to it Assad and Geller have a lot in common when it comes to the demonization of the "Muslim brotherhood" and make for interesting allies.  I have no doubt that Sultan is supporting Assad's bloody regime, albeit silently with her Christian extremist friends and believer of nothing Geller. 

I think what would be interesting is that many of these individuals would give lip service against Assad but then say things like "What about the Christians".  Their sin is one

Sunday, March 4, 2012

Not Actually "Debunking" State Department photos?

So Sharmine Narwani thinks she can just lambast the State Department and all Western journalists and the thousands of deaths in Syria with intellectual dishonesty and subterfuge.  Well I will not allow her too.  She discusses a potential mistake by CNN as if it were damning but as all secretly pro-regime liars do relies on the fact that aid and journalism agencies are banned from reporting the truth or having a presence in Syria.  She takes full advantage of the subterfuge created by the regime to point out how "unverified" everything is.

On the other hand she makes a very clear and hypocritical mistake and shows the extent to which her bias and intellectual dishonesty when she sites the "Moon of Alabama" site as if it were true.  While she lacks the journalistic integrity to scrutinize he "work" let alone the ability, I have managed to do so myself.  Here is what I came up with:


1. First I have to ask how the "author" knows SO much about where and what is a military base in Syria unless he is part of the paid Shabiha paid to make up revolution facts...
2. While the Author points out the distances required between equipment in military manuals... he neglects to point out a variety of points to include a reference to such a manual. To assume Assad's goons actually follow rules in manuals is the first mistake. One assumes that the Syrian Army is a professional organization carefully implementing safety rules, but anyone who has ever served in or with a military in the Arab world knows better than this. Of course as it is easy to see here the artillery being used to pound Homs or Baba Amru is in fact sitting in the middle of an area seeming to have craters. An Army concerned with the safety of its Soldiers and equipment would not operate in such an area without cleaning it up first.

2. He is right that "There are many dug out U-type emplacements that shield from the front and the sides and allow to pull out to the back." This is absolutely correct, except for none of them are being used for that purpose here, but rather they are being set up facing directly at Baba Amro to the point where straight line distances are quite obvious, a point neglected by the author for obvious reasons it is very damning.

3. We must ask therefore, why "training" has all the artillery facing a residential area that is well within range of the equipment? Obviously not to fire live rounds for "training purposes"

4. "They point into various directions." The Author is correct: the training dugouts are indeed pointing in various direction in fact in a formation likely useful for training for conventional warfare. As a major road in fact this site is probably seen as a major holding point were any conventional war to occur, except... the author dishonestly points to the direction of the dugouts and not the artillery pieces that are clearly pointed at the city. The dugouts point to large fields: ideal places to fire at. Again the artillery face the city.

5. "There are also blast holes in the ground likely from the earlier use of training ammunition in the area." This proves the lack of concern of authorities for everyone with knowledge in this area knows that unexploded ordinance is a huge risk in using former bombardment sites. Later uses in the page about "manual safety" neglect to point out that the regime is already not adhering to safety standards.
6. "The guns shown are out in the open, not camouflaged" the author makes this point as if it matters. What he forgets or NEGLECTS to mention is the fact that camouflage of positions in such a case are for hiding positions in conventional warfare. That they feel no need to do so to fire on the innocent civilians of Homs who have no air support or ability to use artillery in return speaks volumes.

7. "and with no ammunition stacks or the like visible nearby." We can actually see several trucks that could easily deliver ammunition, we also see near many of the guns small structures that could easily in fact be the very ammunition stacks that this "piece" claims aren't there.

8. His point about the site of the bombardments speaks volumes. This individual assumes that these pieces could not be fired at Homs simply because it is already military ground, and claims a barracks is nearby. That doesn't prove anything... ooops.

9. "So while the State Department says these picture are showing guns "operationally deployed" It is clear that they are in fact "deployed" in such a function despite the authors feigned cry of foul.

10. The rest is at best speculation from an individual who claims the State department chose regular images of a "known military training area" but I have shown this to be false.

11. The Author claims to be a former tank officer: for which army is my question, and what does the set up of tanks have to do with knowledge of detailed knowledge of efficient deployed artillery which relies on very different range, positions, maneuverability, etc. so much for his "expert" opinion.
What a bunch of obscene pro-regime propaganda. Viva la revolution!

The popular revolution in Syria still continues even while the pro-regime defamers of the revolution push hard against it with both propaganda and lies. The brave members of the free Syrian Army and Baba Amro have pushed back hard against it, and showed brave resistance in the face of massacres and adversity.

People like Narwani who use subterfuge and spout pro-regime propaganda and secretly wish for Syrians to die or be silent, while they deny the facts on the ground as verified by a number of dead and injured journalists  who actually bravely report and speak the truth.

Friday, March 2, 2012

For the Silent "Minorities"

While as a Muslim I have my own holy book to draw from, I would like to remind our forebears, the silent Eastern Christians of the teachings of the wise and holy man Jesus of Nazareth:

'Away with you, you cursed ones, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his demons.  For I was hungry, and you didn’t feed me. I was thirsty, and you didn’t give me a drink. I was a stranger, and you didn’t invite me into your home. I was naked, and you didn’t give me clothing. I was sick and in prison, and you didn’t visit me.’
“Then they will reply, ‘Lord, when did we ever see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and not help you?’
“And he will answer, ‘I tell you the truth, when you refused to help the least of these my brothers and sisters, you were refusing to help me.’

I have been looking through the bible for a part where it says "thou shalt ignore the suffering of others if  thine acting could be to thy detriment" or "though shalt obey and support tyrants who permit you to celebrate Easter and Christmas in peace to slaughter unbelievers."

What I found instead was "They shall know we our Christians by our love".  Perhaps open support of a brutal dictator who mocks you with a Sham of a constitution is what Paul meant by love?  Perhaps silence during oppression and turning away from murder due to bigoted stereotypes about "Salafis" and extremists make their blood have less value.

Is this what Jesus meant when he pronounced "Love thy neighbor"?  Perhaps it is a matter of interpretation?