Can you imagine the Washington Post giving a platform to someone who writes honestly about how Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and supremacism? Can you imagine the WaPo running a piece calling upon mosques in the U.S. to institute programs teaching against the understanding of Islam held by the Islamic State? I can’t, either.
According to the Telegraph in November 2013, Ahrar al-Sham “often fights alongside ISIS though it does not share its al-Qaeda ideology.”
The Washington Post has long been a disgrace to journalism. Now it is just becoming more obvious.
“Washington Post runs article from Syrian Islamist group,” AFP, July 11, 2015:
Washington (AFP) – The Washington Post ran an opinion piece from Syrian Islamist group Ahrar al-Sham criticizing US policies, giving an unusual platform to a group that has allied with supporters of Al-Qaeda.
The piece, posted online late Friday and penned by the group’s foreign relations head Labib Al Nahhas, excoriates the strategy of US President Barack Obama’s administration in Syria, calling it an “abject failure.”
In its quest to not support radical groups in Syria, American policy has so narrowly defined the term “moderate” that it excludes most opposition groups in the country, including Ahrar al-Sham, Nahhas said.
Nahhas says Ahrar al-Sham has been “falsely accused” of being close to radical group Al-Qaeda and “unfairly vilified” by the Obama administration.
The Islamist group Ahrar al-Sham, one of the most powerful rebel groups in Syria, has allied with Al-Qaeda affiliate Al-Nusra in fighting against the Syrian regime and the Islamic State extremist group….
Nahhas said the US needs to stop taking such a narrow view of the conflict and start recognizing the legitimate mainstream Syrian opposition like Ahrar al-Sham.
“Stuck inside their own bubble, White House policymakers have allocated millions of US taxpayer dollars to support failed CIA efforts to support so-called ‘moderate’ forces in Syria,” he wrote.
Washington should “admit that the Islamic State’s extremist ideology can be defeated only through a homegrown Sunni alternative —- with the term ‘moderate’ defined not by CIA handlers but by Syrians themselves.”
Papa Whiskey says
Washington should “admit that the Islamic State’s extremist ideology can be defeated only through a homegrown Sunni alternative —- with the term ‘moderate’ defined not by CIA handlers but by Syrians themselves.”
This struck a very familiar chord — and I realized it was the very line taken by Somali “community leaders” in the Twin Cities, who want any “deradicalization” programs for errant, ISIS-bound youth to be run by them, not law enforcement agencies. And of course, they also want all federal funding for any such efforts to go directly to them.
Kepha says
Well, the O’s Syrian policy has been an abject failure. He’s both committed us to supporting the same kind of folks who brought us 9/11 and also drawn red lines for the Assad regime from which he’s retreated, occasionally with Putin’s help.
SpiritOf1683 says
It’s no different from Cameron’s policies. Both leaders are wrong-headed, and if Camerion had been up against a competent leader seen as electable 10 weeks ago, he’d have been out.
jewdog says
Another example of the absurdity of trying to defeat the jihad by proxy. This one is really grasping at straws. What next, the moderate wing of ISIS?
Angemon says
From the looks of it, the supposed “homegrown alternative” would be more of the “good kidnapper”* rather than the dashing hero swooping in at the last second to save the day.
*the one who tells you, in a calm, soothing voice, “we’re just after money, pay up and no one gets hurt”, in contrast to ISIS’ “bad kidnapper”, the one who cuts off one of your fingers just to let you know he means business before repeatedly punching you in the face and screaming “GIVE ME YOUR BANK CODES MOTHERF***ER”
gravenimage says
Washington Post runs piece from Syrian jihad group that has allied with Al-Qaeda affiliate and fought alongside the Islamic State
……………………………
I see the fruitless search for “moderate” Syrian rebels proceeds apace. Notice that even the MSM has largely dropped references to the “Arab Spring” at this point.
Ahrar al Sham’s stated goal is a Sunni Islamic State in Syria. Ahrar al Sham has both worked with ISIS and in opposition to them—they worked together to attack a Shi’ite Hizb’allah target, but then helped drive ISIS temporarily out of Raqqa. So their opposition seems more about a power struggle than any ideological opposition to ISIS’s goals.
By the way, “Ahrar al Sham” means “free men of Syria”. “Ahrar” can also be translated as “liberal”. More proof that Muslims use words differently than we do…
shams78 says
You forgot to mention that the Washington Post is a Jewish owned, pro-Zionist newspaper.
And that israel has been cheerleading for Syrian rebels against Assad without giving a damn about Chrisians or any minority in Syria
mortimer says
shams wrote: “You forgot to mention that the Washington Post is a Jewish owned, pro-Zionist newspaper.”
Evidence?
Most American media companies are owned by Protestants. Look it up and then shut up.
Deborah says
Go home shia muslim.
chanah says
And you suffer from Zionistophobia, hmm does the West care abt the persecuted Christians in the M.E Asia and Africa? The answer is NO, they take 1000’s of muslims in and leave the Christians to be slaughtered, and here’s a thought maybe Israel should expel the 1 million arabs living in the land in exchange for 1 million Christian sounds good?
mortimer says
More and more Arabs in the Levant are suggesting that ISIS is normative Islam.
The US policy makers are unaware of why ISIS is seen as standard Sunnite Islam.