Tag Archives: Al Nusra

Reps Gabbard, Scott Introduce Bill to End U.S. Effort to ‘Overthrow Syrian Government of Assad’

Rep Tulsi Gabbard: End Illegal War Against Syrian Government of Assad, Focus on Destroying ISIS

On CNN “New Day,” Rep. Tulsi Gabbard explained why it’s critical that the US end its illegal and counterproductive war to overthrow the Syrian government of Assad and instead ally itself with France, Russia, and other countries to focus on destroying ISIS and other Islamic extremists who have declared war on western civilization.

Posted by Tulsi Gabbard on Sunday, November 22, 2015

Late last week, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) and Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA), two House Armed Services Committee members, introduced a bipartisan bill to “end U.S. efforts to overthrow the Syrian Arab Republic led by President Bashar al-Assad.”

In a press release, Rep. Gabbard, a veteran of the Iraq war and a vice chair of the Democratic National Committee, condemned the United States government’s desire to remove Assad from power and said that the U.S should “ally ourselves with any countries willing to focus on destroying the Islamic extremists who pose a genuine threat to civilization.”

Rep. Scott said that “our primary mission should be the war against ISIS, al Qaeda, and radical Islamic extremists that have operations both inside and outside of Syria and Iraq.” Scott said those groups “are currently threatening attacks on our homeland” and he expressed support for “eliminating these radical Islamic terrorists through any means necessary.” However, Scott noted that “working to remove Assad at this stage is counter-productive to what I believe our primary mission should be.”

“The U.S. is waging two wars in Syria. The first is the war against ISIS and other Islamic extremists, which Congress authorized after the terrorist attack on 9/11,” Gabbard said in a press release.

[pull_quote_center]The second war is the illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government of Assad. The war to overthrow Assad is counter-productive because it actually helps ISIS and other Islamic extremists achieve their goal of overthrowing the Syrian government of Assad and taking control of all of Syria—which will simply increase human suffering in the region, exacerbate the refugee crisis, and pose a greater threat to the world. Also, the war to overthrow Assad is illegal because Congress never authorized it.[/pull_quote_center]

In the press release, Gabbard listed ten reasons why she believes the United States should halt its attempt to overthrow Assad. Her first reason stated that “if we succeed in overthrowing the Syrian government of Assad, it will open the door for ISIS, al-Qaeda, and other Islamic extremists to take over all of Syria. There will be genocide and suffering on a scale beyond our imagination. These Islamic extremists will take over all the weaponry, infrastructure, and military hardware of the Syrian army and be more dangerous than ever before.”

Gabbard cautioned that “we should learn from our past mistakes in Iraq and Libya that U.S. wars to overthrow secular dictators (Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi) cause even more chaos and human suffering and open the door for Islamic extremists to take over in those countries.”

She also noted that “the money and weapons the CIA is providing to overthrow the Syrian government of Assad are going directly or indirectly into the hands of the Islamic extremist groups, including al-Qaeda affiliates, al-Nusra, Ahrar al-Sham, and others who are the actual enemies of the United States. These groups make up close to 90 percent of the so-called opposition forces, and are the most dominant fighters on the ground.”

Gabbard made similar remarks on CNN last month before the terror attacks in Paris, telling Wolf Blitzer that “by working towards overthrowing the Syrian government of Assad, we are not only strengthening our enemy- the Islamic extremists who will walk in and take over all of the country of Syria, right now they have about half of the country under their control- but it also put us in that position of a potential direct head-to-head conflict with Russia, which brings us to the brink of a potential larger conflict of a WWIII-type of situation.” She also criticized the government for providing arms to “our sworn enemies.”

In March, Ben Swann released a Truth in Media episode, The Origin of ISIS, that exposed how certain U.S. foreign policy decisions, including providing weapons to “rebels,” bolstered the rise of ISIS.



Exclusive Interview: Pastor Chuck Baldwin on Syrian Refugee Crisis, ISIS, Gun Control

In an exclusive interview with Truth In Media’s Joshua Cook, former Constitution Party presidential candidate and Pastor Chuck Baldwin discusses his views on the U.S. foreign policy in Syria, ISIS, the Syrian refugee crisis and gun control.

Cook asked Baldwin his thoughts on the current Syrian refugee crisis.

“We have to talk about the source of the problem,” said Baldwin. “The so-called war on terror is as phony as it can be. We have not been at war with ISIS. In fact, it is our own CIA, and Saudi Arabia intelligence, along with Turkey and the state of Israel that helped create ISIS. We are fighting a proxy war against Syria through ISIS. ISIS is nothing more than elements of al Qaeda that’s focused their attention from Iraq to Syria.”

“This idea that we are fighting ISIS and we’re trying to fight terrorism over there is just bogus,” added Baldwin.

Regarding the Syrian refugees, Baldwin said, “If they had their choice they would go back to a free Syria.”

“If America would get out of the Middle East and quit supporting ISIS and al Qaeda and al Nusra and all these other Sunni terrorist groups and let them live in peace, that’s where these people would go,” said Baldwin.

“The response from America should be first of all, that the American government owes the people of this country the fact that these people from Syria should be properly vetted. If they have any connections to the Sunni terror group they should not be allow entrance,” said Baldwin.

Cook asked Baldwin about gun control and the Christian response.

Cook asked, “Is there an obligation for Christians to obey the laws of the land no matter what?”

Baldwin said, “No Christian or citizen should ever consider disarming themselves.”

“No way, no how should we Christians or any freemen allow themselves to be disarmed. Any law that would require us to surrender our firearms is not only unconstitutional, it’s also immoral and biblical,” said Baldwin. 

Check out Pastor Baldwin’s book on the Second Amendment here.

In September 2015, Ben Swann examined the root of the refugee crisis in Europe and explored the question of US responsibility for this crisis, seen in the video below.


Al-Qaeda Linked Group Reportedly Seizes US-Donated Weapons from Moderate Syrian Rebels

When the Obama administration announced its plan to arm moderate rebel groups in Syria in an effort to stop ISIS’ rampage throughout the region, Senator Rand Paul warned that radical militant groups would likely seize the weapons and use them against the United States. Said Senator Paul on Fox News’ Hannity, “I’m not for arming radical jihadists, I’m not for arming radical Islam.  And I think most of the weapons – either intentionally or unintentionally – that have been given to the Syrian rebels, have basically just gone on through to ISIS.  If you give them to the moderate rebels – the so-called moderate rebels – that’s just a stopping point because ISIS takes them away.”

Now, International Business Times is reporting that Senator Paul’s prediction that American weapons would likely fall into the wrong hands may have come true. Over the weekend, al-Qaeda affiliated rebels with the militant group Jabhat al-Nusra defeated Harakat Hazm and the Syria Revolutionaries’ Front (SRF), two Free Syrian Army associated moderate rebel groups that were armed and trained by the US, after a five-day siege against the villages of Jabal al-Zawiya in Syria’s Idlib province. Rami Abdulrahman of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights told Reuters, “Dozens of [Syria Revolutionaries’ Front leader Jamal Maarouf’s] fighters defected and joined Nusra, that is why the group won.”

Following the battle, Twitter accounts associated with al-Nusra began boasting that US-donated weapons and food aid had been seized. The list of spoils included TOW anti-tank missiles like those being fired by US-supported rebels in the above-embedded Telegraph video. The reported weapons seizure has yet to be verified by an independent source. An example report by Ar Raqqah Media, which claims that al-Nusra also seized tanks, trucks, ammo, and more during the battle, can be seen in the below screenshot.


While ISIS and al-Nusra are not officially allied and have battled each other in the past, CNN reported last month that US-led airstrikes have recently been blamed for encouraging the two groups to put aside their differences in strategy and form a coalition against the US and its allies. Raed al-Fares, a local activist in the Idlib province, told The Washington Post, “When American airstrikes targeted al-Nusra, people felt solidarity with them because Nusra are fighting the regime, and the strikes are helping the regime… Now people think that whoever in the Free Syrian Army gets support from the U.S.A. is an agent of the regime.”

Syrian analyst Aymen al-Tammimi told The Telegraph, “As a movement, the SRF is effectively finished…Nusra has driven them out of their strongholds of Idlib and Hama.” Now that the Syria Revolutionaries’ Front and Harakat Hazm have suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of al-Nusra, President Obama’s strategy of using moderate Syrian rebels as ground forces in a campaign against ISIS appears to be crumbling.

US Sends 36 F-16s to Iraq, Trains Iraqi Pilots

In 2003, a US-led invasion all but obliterated Iraq’s air force. After living under US occupation for 8 years, leading to the rise of Al Qaeda affiliated groups in the region, the Middle Eastern nation has plunged into political chaos that may escalate into a civil war. In August of 2013, the US government agreed to send $2.6 billion to Iraq for the provision of an air defense system and contracted with Lockheed Martin Corp to provide the war-torn nation with F-16s. President Obama has also accelerated shipments of surveillance drones to the Iraqi government.

Reuters is reporting that the first of those 36 F-16s are officially ready to ship and will soon be on their way to Iraq. The US government will present the fighter jets to Iraqi Ambassador Lukman Faily at a ceremony tomorrow at a Lockheed Martin plant in Fort Worth, Texas. Iraqi fighter pilots have received F-16 flight training from the US Air Force in Tuscon. In an article by the 162nd Fighter Wing Public Affairs division of the Air National Guard, the Iraqi Air Force Chief was quoted as saying, “They (IqAF pilots) will return to our country – then transfer that American experience of training to the next generation of Iraqi air force pilots.”

Meanwhile, Iraq has also forged military contracts with Russia, and US defense contractors have begun to shift their focus from providing weapons for US military engagements to providing munitions like F-16s to foreign nations overseas.

The US government has often provided military weaponry and training to governments and rebel groups in unstable regions, sometimes leading to catastrophic results, such as when the CIA-trained terrorist Osama bin Laden turned against the US and launched the devastating 9/11 attacks, resulting in the deaths of thousands of Americans. As Iraq descends into a possible civil war, questions are being raised as to whether or not these weapons will remain in the hands of the US-backed government or whether a future political crisis might lead them to be used against Americans.

The US has also provided Iraq with 100 Hellfire missiles, assault rifles, and 11 million rounds of ammunition. In related news, PBS Frontline has just launched a new documentary in which Al Nusra affiliated Syrian rebels describe the training that they allegedly received at the hands of the US government. In January of 2013, the US government sent F-16s to Egypt, just months before a July coup in which the Egyptian military ousted then-President Mohamed Morsi.

As US tax dollars are being used to fund a weapons build-up in the Middle East, the nation faces an unprecedented debt crisis. On the other hand, Lockheed Martin Corp’s stocks are, quite predictably, on the rise.

What The Media Isn’t Telling You About The Syrian Chemical Attack

What The Media Isn’t Telling You About The Syrian Chemical Attack :

Al Nusra Front Also Has Sarin Gas

A senior Obama administration official has told the Associated Press that there is “very little doubt” that chemical weapons were used in Syria late last week.  That senior administration official went on to claim that there is very little doubt about who used them.

Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham are insisting that President Obama act now against the Syrian government.  In a joint statement they say:

“Using stand-off weapons, without boots on the ground, and at minimal risk to our men and women in uniform, we can significantly degrade Assad’s air power and ballistic missile capabilities and help to establish and defend safe areas on the ground”

As we reported over the weekend, the U.S. Navy has now moved warships into the Mediterranean and has readied Cruise Missiles for a possible strike against government forces.

Across the internet are dozens of videos showing civilians including men, women and children lying on floors gasping for breath, medics are struggling to save infants and across the internet pictures of rows of bodies of those who reportedly died in the attacks.  According to a report from the Local Coordination Committee, an Syrian opposition group, at least 755 people died in the attack.  Other reports are claiming much lower numbers citing “dozens” dead.  According to the Washington Post, ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/un-team-headed-to-site-of-alleged-chemical-attack-comes-under-sniper-fire-turns-back/2013/08/26/5ea074c8-0e3f-11e3-8cdd-bcdc09410972_story.html )

The nonprofit Doctors Without Borders estimates that 355 people were killed and more than 3,600 were injured. If confirmed, it would be the worst chemical weapons attack since Saddam Hussein gassed more than 3,000 people in an Iraqi Kurdish village 25 years ago.

Syrian state television claims the attack came at the hand of al Qaeda backed “rebel” forces.  As we reported on Friday, the U.S., Israel and Jordan have been training rebel guerrilla fighters for months just across the border from Syria in Jordan.  According to several reports, a wave of 300 or so fighters were sent across the Syrian border on August 17th, and a second wave on August 19th.

Since the reported chemical attack last Wednesday, the Obama administration and members of Congress have been pushing the line that Syria’s President Bashar al Assad ordered the use of a chemical weapon on the outskits of Damascus.

According to CNN, one U.S. officials claims “There is nothing credible to indicate that the rebels, either the Syrian National Council or even al-Nusra Front, have used chemical weapons,” the official said. “Only the Assad regime is responsible for chemical weapons use.”

But that statement is false.  When it comes to this latest incident, at this point we don’t know what kind of chemical might have been used.  Nor do we know who used it.  Some of the claims early on from “unnamed government sources” were that sarin gas was used in that Damascus suburb.  The use of sarin gas would point toward the Assad regime, would it not?

Not necessarily.  What our national media isn’t telling you is that in May Turkish security forces found a 2kg cylinder with sarin gas after searching the homes of Syrian militants from the Al-Qaeda linked Al-Nusra Front.  Where did the sarin gas come from?  We don’t know.  But clearly, Al Nusra Front has access to sarin gas and was planning a use for it.

President Obama and his administration keep talking about “the red line” that would have to be crossed in order to bring the United States into this conflict.  That “red line” is consistently touted as responding to chemical weapons.

As we’ve reported, the U.S. is already involved: