These freedom fighters accused these two Christians of “aiding and abetting” the enemy; that is, Bashar Assad’s military. We’re all supposed to be on the side of the rebel forces, because we’re supposed to hate Assad. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, right? That’s why the media have been working so hard to demonize him to try to rally support for our intervention there.
Now, I’m not saying that Assad is this great and just leader. But if he’s a dictator, then as long as he minds his own business and stays there, we should not be involved in trying to oust him or meddle with their political affairs. It’s none of our business.
But the Obama administration wants desperately for Syria to be our business. So, via the CIA, they’re sending “light arms” to terrorist organizations there. “Light arms,” like anti-tank missiles. (If those are the kinds of weapons that constitute “light arms” in Syria, I wonder what “assault weapons” would be like.)
Thanks to the Obama administration’s support for Islamic terrorist organizations, civilians, including Christian men, women and children, are all at risk of being killed. But it’s all collateral damage, right? I wonder if that’s what Obama would say if he saw the recently surfaced video of two Christians being beheaded by terrorists while a group of people watched and cheered:
“A priest and another Christian were beheaded before a cheering crowd by Syrian insurgents who say they aided and abetted the enemy, President Bashar Assad’s military, foreign media reported. An undated video that made the Internet rounds on Wednesday showed two unnamed men with tied hands surrounded by a cheering crowd of dozens, just moments before their heads were cut off with a small knife, Syria Report said. The attackers in the video then lifted the head for show, and placed it back on the body. The incident took place in the countryside of Idlib, the media report said.”
And these are the psychopaths that the U.S. is helping by sending more weapons and providing them training. Do people still think we’re fighting a “war on terror?” Hasn’t this whole “war on terror” thing become completely laughable? Does anyone actually believe our military is there in the Middle East to fight and kill terrorists? On what planet does providing weapons, training and food supplies to terrorists constitute “fighting terrorism?”
It’s true that in other places in the Middle East, our military are killing actual insurgents…or freedom fighters. I guess it depends on what country they’re in. If all these “insurgents” in Iraq and Afghanistan would just move to Syria, they’d be called “freedom fighters.” I suppose the definitions are rather flexible to meet whatever political goals the current administration might have at any particular moment.
The war on terror has never been about fighting terrorism or keeping us safe from the terrorists. The war on terror at home has been about controlling and silencing political opponents. As for the war on terror abroad, has it been about securing “our” natural resource interests, which would be entirely unnecessary if we would just use the oil in our own country? Does it have to do with controlling the heroin trade? Who knows? But if it were really about fighting terrorism, they wouldn’t be giving terrorists financial and military support. James Madison’s words ring true today: “If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”