Shipping Weapons to Al Nusra Terrorists

By Patrick Henningsen

The crisis in Syria is developing new and acute symptoms which threaten the region on more levels than were previously thought, which should be of immediate concern, not just for the region itself, but for the international community as a whole.

Many readers are already aware that the ‘al Nusrah Front’, one of the dominant ‘al Qaeda’ groups currently being supported by the US and Britain in Syria, is being funded and steered by Saudi Arabia’s intelligence agency. But few are aware of why Saudi is so keen to transform the sovereign – and secular state of Syria, towards a more extremist Wahabi-style Islamic society.

Citing the Paris-based Intelligence Online Newsletter, Al Manar TV of Lebanon reported as early as January 2013:

    “Saudi intelligence, led by Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz, is bringing the militants fighting the Syrian forces under the umbrella of the al-Nusra Front. The report said Prince Bandar is organizing these terrorists through Jordan and Lebanon. “Thanks to funding from the General Intelligence Department (of Jordan) and support from the Saudi Intelligence in Lebanon, al-Nusra was able to swiftly arm its forces, and make the Syrian regime suffer painful blows through its expertise in Iraqi bombings,” the Intelligence Online report noted. Bandar bin Sultan, who is Tony Blair’s partner in crime, was made the Saudi intelligence chief on July 19 at the height of the crisis in Syria.

Saudi Prince Bandar of the Bush Family’s Carlyle Group and his involvement in the destruction of Syria was quite a revelation back in Janurary, but with the evidence coming through about NATO’s own ‘Fast and Furious’ illegal weapons transfer into Syria via Europe, the totality of the Gulf and NATO’s Syrian Project has now become clearer. NATO, through its member states the US, Britain and Croatia – and arguably France via their massive ‘aid shipments’ to Jordan recently, have already broken the EU arms embargo to their ‘Syrian Opposition’ and have also violated any remaining vestigial observations of International Law through their massive gun-running operation into Syria via Jordan.

Only this past Wednesday in London, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stood at a joint press conference opposite his British counterpart William Hague, and decried NATO’s under-the-table operation as a flagrant violation of International Law:

“International law does not allow, does not permit supplies of arms to non-governmental actors and in our point of view it is a violation of international law,” Lavrov said.

Recent human rights reports out of Syria also confirm what many have suspected all along, that most of the real war crimes and atrocities carried out during this conflict have been done by the confab of rebels and terrorist paramilitary gangs throughout the country.

Now, both Britain and France are scrambling to cover their legal tracks as is evidenced by David Cameron and Francois Hollande’s hijacking of the EU economic summit today which saw both leaders publicly begging fellow EU representatives to lift the European arms embargo to the terrorists in Syria . This result leaves both Britain and France no other alternative that to act ‘unilaterally’ in Syria, with the US also waiting to join in. What happened here was a clear separation of the politics of Europe and the military desires of NATO – a fracture which could ultimately end NATO’s political support in Europe.

One could say that the EU’s rejection of Cameron and Hollande’s campaigning to further violate International Law in Syria is the first example of the EU attempting to earn the Nobel Peace Prize which it was awarded in 2012.

With so many foreign fighters and terrorist organizations flooding into Syria, it has become almost impossible for the western media to grasp the enormity of the proxy war, let alone analyse it. This is one of the reasons why politicians like Cameron, Hague and Hollande have been able to get away with their morally shaky, and high compromised positions on the conflict.

Two years ago when the crisis in Syria began, much of the West’s agenda was concealed behind propaganda and cloudy diplomacy. The difference between then and now, is that in 2013… the agenda is laid bare for the whole world to see.

In the case of Syria, and with all the evidence now available in full public light, it can now be argued beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the West, NATO and its allies – are on the wrong side of history.

M.D