Tag Archives: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

The Definition Of Insanity

Posted on by

Although we don’t actually know who said, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result,” there is a lot of truth to that saying. We are seeing that truth in action in Syria right now.

With few exceptions, one of them being the American revolution, revolutions seem to bring to power people worse than the ones who were ousted. America is not guiltless in playing a part in some revolutions in the past century. In 1953, America installed the Shah of Iran. We saw how that worked out (actually it did for a while). In 2011, the Arab Spring was supposed to bring freedom to the oppressed Arabs in the Middle East. In 2011, we helped overthrow Muammar al-Qaddafi in Libya. That didn’t work well. Also in 2011, we helped remove Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, resulting in a temporary take-over of the country by the Muslim Brotherhood, followed by a military coup. Now we are dealing with the consequences of a Syrian revolution. The carnage that is the result of that revolution is unimaginable, but was not unpredictable.

In December 2024, Fox News reported the following:

The Biden administration has lifted a $10 million bounty on the head of Ahmed al-Sharaa, leader of the group that overthrew Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

In exchange, al-Sharaa, also known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, agreed to a U.S. demand not to allow terrorism groups in Syria to threaten the U.S. or Syria’s neighbors. 

“We had a good, thoroughgoing discussion on a range of regional issues,” Barbara Leaf, the U.S.’s top envoy to the Middle East, told reporters of her Friday meeting with al-Sharaa. 

In January 2025, former al Qaeda member Ahmad al-Sharaa, formerly known as Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, was named as Syria’s president for a transitional period.

There was a reason for the bounty. Al-Sharaa is a Sunni Muslim who was formerly a member of Al Qaeda under Abu Musab al-Zarqari.

According to a Reuters article of March 10th:

Sharaa, in a speech on Sunday, said remnants of the Assad government, supported by external parties, were seeking to create strife and drag Syria back into civil war with the aim of dividing it.

He promised to form a fact-finding committee and said its findings would be made public, vowing to bring to account anyone involved “in the bloodshed of civilians” or mistreating them.

He has also announced the formation of a committee aimed at preserving civil peace, which would be tasked with communicating with the people of the coast and providing them with the support they needed to guarantee their protection.

In a Reuters interview, Sharaa said mass killings of Alawites were a threat to his mission to unite the country, and promised to punish those responsible, including his own allies if necessary.

In evaluating the above statement, you need to consider the Islamic concept of taqiyya. This is a concept in Islamic law that translates as “deceit or dissimulation,” particularly toward infidels. It is generally described as lying for the sake of Islam.

The mainstream media has been rather quiet about the genocide going on in Syria. That genocide should not be a surprise to anyone familiar with    the history of Al-Sharaa.

Islamic terrorism is not dead, and America needs to be very aware of its intentions both here and internationally.

The Fiction Of Moderate Muslims In Syria

Posted on by

Yesterday Andrew McCarthy posted an article at National Review Online about the Obama Administration’s policy toward Syria.

The article states:

In particular, there is the story line that Syria is really teeming with secular democrats and authentic moderate Muslims who would have combined forces to both overthrow Assad and fight off the jihadists if only President Obama had helped them. But his failure to act created a “vacuum” that was tragically filled by Islamist militants and gave rise to ISIS. At this point in the story, you are supposed to stay politely mum and not ask whether it makes any sense that real democrats and actual moderates would agree to be led by head-chopping, mass-murdering, freedom-stifling sharia terrorists.

In point of fact, there simply have never been enough pro-Western elements in Syria to win, no matter how much help came their way.

Any effort to pacify Syria will only result in events similar to what happened in Egypt. Actually, there no longer is a Syria–the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, and their buddies do not recognize the borders drawn by western nations in the Middle East. What is happening in Iraq and Syria is an attempt to combine Iraq, Syria, and Iran into a caliphate. America‘s involvement in the situation is helping no one.

The article further reports:

The ball to keep your eye on here is al-Qaeda. The al-Nusra terrorist group is just al-Qaeda in Syria. Even ISIS is just a breakaway faction of al-Qaeda. And the Khorasan group is just a top-tier group of al-Qaeda veterans doing al-Qaeda’s work in conjunction with al Nusra — i.e., al-Qaeda.

The Obama administration disingenuously emphasizes these various foreign names to confuse Americans into thinking that there are various factions with diverse agendas in Syria — that al-Qaeda is no longer a problem because Obama has already dealt with it, and what remains are sundry groups of “moderate rebels” that the administration can work with in the effort to vanquish ISIS. Meanwhile, you are supposed to refrain from noticing that Obama’s original Syrian project — remember, he wanted Assad toppled — has given way to fighting ISIS . . . the very Sunni jihadists who were empowered by Obama’s lunatic policies of (a) switching sides in Libya in order to support the jihadists against Qaddafi and (b) abetting and encouraging Sunni Muslim governments in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey to arm Sunni militias in the fight against Assad — those militias having all along included al-Qaeda elements, some of which split off to become ISIS and now threaten to bite off the very hands that once fed them.

If there is a way to aid the refugees without sending troops, we need to do that. Sending troops to Iraq after President Obama squandered the victory that American troops had won is simply not smart.