{"id":186846,"date":"2013-09-18T10:03:00","date_gmt":"2013-09-18T15:03:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2013\/09\/18\/your-syria-update\/"},"modified":"2013-09-18T10:03:00","modified_gmt":"2013-09-18T15:03:00","slug":"your-syria-update","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2013\/09\/18\/your-syria-update\/","title":{"rendered":"Your Syria Update"},"content":{"rendered":"

Let us start with the thought that maybe Binyamin Netanyahu should tell his political allies to shut the F%$# up<\/a>: <\/p>\n

‘Israel wanted Assad gone since start of Syria civil war’<\/span>

<\/span> “Tehran-Damascus-Beirut arc is the greatest danger,” says outgoing Israeli envoy to US Michael Oren.<\/span>

<\/span> \u201cBad guys\u201d backed by Iran are worse for Israel than \u201cbad guys\u201d who are not supported by the Islamic Republic, Israel\u2019s outgoing ambassador to the US Michael Oren told The Jerusalem Post in a parting interview.<\/span>

<\/span> Oren, in the interview that is to be published in full on Friday, traced the evolution of Israel\u2019s message on Syria during the three weeks of the chemical weapons crisis.<\/span>

<\/span> \u201cThe initial message about the Syrian issue was that we always wanted [President] Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren\u2019t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran,\u201d he said.<\/span>

<\/span> This was the case, he said, even if the other \u201cbad guys\u201d were affiliated to al-Qaida.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Seriously. In one interview, he dissed the United States by saying that al Qaida is not that bad, and effectively endorses Bashir Assad, because if Israel is for it, then the Arab world is against it.<\/p>\n

Oh, for f%$# sake, shut the f%$# up!<\/p>\n

BTW, in the whole soft on terrorist sh%$, we have Obama waiving the rule against supplying weapons to terrorists<\/a>: <\/p>\n

President Obama, in order to arm Al-Qaeda linked Syrian rebels, has waived a provision of federal law designed to prevent the supply of arms to terrorist groups.<\/a> Not surprisingly, federal law currently bans giving weapons to terrorists. Though it seems Obama does have the authority to bypass the restriction and he is choosing to do so by arming the Syrian rebels who have links to Al Qaeda, a group still listed as supporting terrorism.<\/span><\/p>\n

The president, citing his authority under the Arms Export Control Act<\/b>, announced today that he would \u201cwaive the prohibitions in sections 40 and 40A of the AECA related to such a transaction.\u201d<\/span>
Those two sections prohibit sending weaponry to countries described in section 40(d): \u201cThe prohibitions contained in this section apply with respect to a country if the Secretary of State determines that the government of that country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism,\u201d<\/b> Congress stated in the Arms Control Export Act.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

<\/span>The Syrian rebels not only include factions that are explicitly loyal to Al Qaeda but, according to US intelligence and experts analysts, those factions are now dominant within the opposition.<\/a> So it is highly likely that some of the arms being shipped into Syria right now by the CIA will fall into the hands of Syrian rebels loyal to Al Qaeda.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This has epic fail written all over it.<\/p>\n

As to the UN report it is not conclusive<\/a>, but it does point toward the Syrian government as being the perps.  Note however though that some people disagree with this strongly<\/a>. <\/p>\n

I’ve looked at the UN report<\/a>, I have a number of thoughts:
It’s 41 pages long, and pages 9-41 are appendices.  (I like this format, it allows you to take in the information quickly.) <\/p>\n