Tuesday, September 28, 2021
HomeFeatured EntriesBaathist Syria vs. the Muslim Brotherhood, Part II

Baathist Syria vs. the Muslim Brotherhood, Part II

The Baathist Party of Syria, under Hafez al-Assad took power in Syria in 1970. The are an old style dictatorial regime ruling with an iron fist. The Baathists, while paying lip service to Islam was/is essentially a secular political regime, in the same vein that the Democrat Party in the United States is a secular regime. True Muslims, even of moderate sensibilities, never liked them.

Invited into Lebanon in 1976 to help put down sectarian violence there, the Syrians slowly began to make common cause with Shi’ites, especially Hezbollah. They never left until the 1990s, and a new government organized, but even then, 200,000 migrant Syrian workers were granted Lebanese citizenship as part of the departure deal.

Now catch this, Hezbollah (Shiite) helped train Hamas, a recognized terrorist organization which now controls Palestine and Gaza, and Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, a fundamentalist Sunni organization, which, in 1976 opened up an armed rebellion against Assad in Syria.

That rebellion lasted seven years, ending when Hafaz al-Assad leveled an entire city, Hama, in 1982, killing upward from 10,000-20,000. Ruthless in his treatment of the fundamentalist Sunni Muslim Brotherhood, who some historians claim (texts are being redacted as we speak) arose from Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, and ally of Adolf Hitler in WWII, Assad stifled the revolt  until it began anew in early 2011, against his son Bashar, as a part of the “Arab Spring”, sponsored by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

There’s a lot of sleeping around, as you can see.

To date, roughly 20,000 Syrians have been killed. It is impossible to know how many of those killed were agent provocateurs of the Muslim Brotherhood, or useful idiots or genuinely freedom loving youths, filling the streets as was seen  in Cairo in February. But inquiring journalists can find out. Only no one is inquiring.

The real question is why is no one asking? Egypt must still have a national election over its new constitution, but the actions of the Egyptian military and police are telling, by standing idly by while Christian churches, (these days considered to be soft targets) are torched, or Egyptian citizens professing a Christian faith (illegal under fundamentalist Islamic law) are beaten and probably murdered, without police reporting or investigation.  Also, they stood idly by while allowing Hamas to carry out its most recent raid in Israel from Gaza, using Egyptian uniforms. Clearly there’s a new sheriff in town.

The American media, including Fox, never mention the Muslim Brotherhood connection to the uprising in Syria, or Libya, or recent outrages in Egypt now that the “people” seem to be in charge there again.

Another question; why is the United States routinely supporting a fundamentalist religious organization in all these countries while coming out against secularist regimes that have been fairly open-minded in most social issues, while taking the exact opposite position in domestic affairs in America?

I know, it’s hard to choose sides between two evils. That’s why all our presidents going back to Nixon, didn’t try. Obama has and there has to be a reason.

But no one is asking.

True, the killing will stop if the Muslim Brotherhood prevails in Syria. But oppression will not. In fact, it is likely to intensify, only in a manner consistent with the aims of not only Obama, but the European Union and the Islamists.

 

Thank you for keeping this important, unfolding story on the table, Mr. Chumm.

Bernard Chumm
Partner, The Sands Institute, head of the fearsome Scat Patrol, and Protector of the Innocent

1 COMMENT

Leave a Reply

1 COMMENT

  1. Another question; why is the United States routinely supporting a fundamentalist religious organization in all these countries while coming out against secularist regimes that have been fairly open-minded in most social issues, while taking the exact opposite position in domestic affairs in America?

    Uhhhm… Campaign Contributions? It takes a lot of contributors to raise a billion dollars.

  1. Another question; why is the United States routinely supporting a fundamentalist religious organization in all these countries while coming out against secularist regimes that have been fairly open-minded in most social issues, while taking the exact opposite position in domestic affairs in America?

    Uhhhm… Campaign Contributions? It takes a lot of contributors to raise a billion dollars.

Must Read