South Front

Government forces are developing their advance in the southern part of the Idlib de-escalation zone.

The Syrian military has deployed a new batch of reinforcements, including battle tanks from the 4th Armoured Division, to the frontline. According to pro-government sources, these reinforcements will take part in the ongoing Syrian Army offensive in northwestern Hama and southern Idlib.

On August 13, a firefights took place east of Sukayk, but no notable changes on the frontline took place. Syrian Army units made an attempt to capture Tel Tari, but the attack was repelled by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. In a separate development, government troops liberated Kafr Ayn.

An increased usage of anti-tank guided missiles was also reported.

On August 12, a Turkish military convoy accompanied by militants visited Tell Tuqan, Surman and Morek. According to local sources, Ankara is now actively working behind the scenes to rescue militants besieged in northern Hama.

The Syrian Army and its allies are preparing to capture Kafr Zita and Khan Shaykhun and cut off the rest of supply lines to the key militant stronghold of Lataminah.

The Syrian Air Force and the Russian Aerospace Forces continued their bombing campaign against militants’ infrastructure in the area. According to data released by the Russian Defense Ministry, the priority targets of the bombing campaign is underground hideouts, gatherings of military equipment and convoys of the terrorists.

10 villages in the Syrian province of Raqqah have signed a reconciliation agreement with the Damascus government, the Russian Defense Ministry’s Center for Reconciliation of Opposing Sides in Syria said on August 12. According to the released report, the total population of the villages is around 20,000 people. The Russian Defense Ministry provided no further details regarding the development. The Syrian Democratic Forces and the US-led coalition have not commented on the situation yet.

Such developments are a notable blow to the US-led efforts to isolate the US-occupied, northwestern part of Syria from the rest of the country.

Related Videos

Related News


Pouring Gasoline on the Fire

 photo housefire_zps3fedf7ed.jpg

By Richard Edmondson

The US and Turkey have come to an agreement under which US military personnel will begin training so-called moderate rebels to fight in Syria. The announcement was made Tuesday. This is not just a foolish move; it is the equivalent of pouring gasoline on a fire.

There are no moderate rebels. The moderate people in Syria support their government. If Obama is really serious about fighting ISIS he should join forces with the Syrian government and with Hezbollah–because they are the “boots on the ground” who are taking the fight to the terrorists.

How will the US know the “moderates” it trains aren’t really ISIS secret agents? That may sound funny, but I’m serious. In a report here we are told that the US has so far “screened” about 1200 rebel fighters  said to have been drawn from “several moderate groups in Syria.”


According to the report, the “screening” process is being headed up by Maj. Gen. Michael Nagata. The plans are to train about 5,000 “moderates” per year, but the process is going slowly because each applicant is supposedly being thoroughly checked. Some 100 US personnel are already in the area setting up three training camps–in Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia–and eventually about 1,000 US troops are expected to be involved in the program.

Question: how does Nagata know that at least some of the “moderates” being recruited for this effort aren’t in reality deep-cover ISIS operatives? Answer: he doesn’t. And even if they are moderates now, what’s to stop them from going over to the other side once they get their American training and equipment?

We saw an instance, late last year, in which two “moderate” rebel groups who had received US training–Harakat Hazm and the Syrian Revolutionary Front–laid down their weapons and surrendered after coming into military conflict with Al-Nusra. The two groups had been supplied with GRAD rockets and TOW anti-tank missiles. All of this equipment ended up in Al-Nusra’s possession. It is said that Harakat Hazm gave up “without firing a shot,” and that some of its members even defected over to the takfiri militants. These events took place in early November of 2014, and they proved somewhat embarrassing for the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, or WINEP.

In April of 2014, WINEP fellow Jeffrey White published an article in which he referred to Harakat Hazm as “rebels worth supporting.” I discussed White’s piece in a post entitled The Myth of the ‘Moderate’ Rebels, which I put up on October 15 last year. At that time, Harakat Hazm had not yet surrendered to Al-Nusra, but the post included a video about the organization that placed its supposed “moderation” into considerable doubt. Below is that video. Starting at about 1:04 in you will see footage showing five men seated at a table. The one in the center is Salim Idris, former chief of staff of the Free Syrian Army–another supposed “moderate.”

In my article I noted that the best way for the US to defeat ISIS, perhaps the only way, is to join forces with the Syrian government. But this will not happen, I also mentioned, because it runs counter to the wishes of the Zionist lobby in America, which wants to see regime change in Syria.

Now, just a few months later, one has to wonder: was it Maj. Gen. Michael Nagata who made the decision to give GRAD rockets and TOW missiles to Harakat Hazm? Nagata was already on the job training Syrian rebels in October of last year, and you can go here to see a report filed at that time that offers a little bit of insight into his background. The report doesn’t leave you with a great deal of confidence in him.

Once the initial 1200 “moderates” have undergone their training, what happens then? Will they simply be wished the best of luck, sent off into Syria, at which point that’s the end of it? Hardly. According to a report here, once they are in Syria, the “moderate” rebels will be given the power to call in US airstrikes, which opens up a host of possibilities, including a scenario in which US air power is manipulated by those on the ground for purpose of attacking rival rebel groups. And this, too, has happened before–in Afghanistan.

How much of our tax dollars are being wasted on this enterprise? How much is being wasted now–and how much will be wasted in the years to come? Another consideration is the chance that all this will escalate. Those who remember history will recall that the Vietnam war started out with just a small number of US “advisers” in the country to train South Vietnamese troops. In 1959, a total of just 760 US personnel were in South Vietnam; in 1960, the number grew to 900. By 1968, America had more than a half million troops stationed in the country.

As mentioned above, one of the US training camps being set up is in Saudi Arabia. The Wahhabist ideology was born in Saudia Arabia, and the kingdom today remains its epicenter. Exactly what sort of persons do you suppose Nagata will be providing training for in his camp there? Perhaps they will include the enlightened followers of a Saudi cleric who recently explained why, in his view, the earth doesn’t rotate. The cleric has been identified as Sheikh Bandar al-Khaibari:

The above video surfaced earlier this week. The following video, below, was posted three months ago and shows Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah discussing, in a somewhat bemused manner, the beliefs of clerics like al-Khaibari:

Not only is the “moderate rebel” a myth, but the notion that Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Qatar are sincere partners in fighting ISIS is also a myth. All three countries have been heavily implicated in providing assistance to the very terrorists the Obama administration claims to be fighting. Due to the low price of oil, filling up gasoline cans is cheap these days.

The only people who attempt to put out fires with gasoline are either, a) the very stupid; or, b) those who only pretend to want to see the fire put fire out but who in reality are seeking to create a bigger fire.

In a speech given on Thursday, February 19, Obama asserted that the world is “united against the scourge of violent extremism and terrorism.” This is a fairly accurate statement as far as it goes; the vast majority of the world’s people are indeed united on that point. The question, of course, becomes: does Obama really not know who his friends are in this fight?

The Middle East is really not that hard to figure out. The best, the brightest, the most patriotic of the region–these people already know what side they are on; they have joined the ranks of Hezbollah, the Syrian and Lebanese Armies, and the Syrian National Defense Force. They will fight and they will defeat America’s trained proxies, and then when nothing is left but for America to send in its own ground forces, they will fight America as well.

This is the course our leaders are presently headed on–all for Israel.

Norwegian film director reveals viral “Syrian hero boy” video a hoax to Invade Syria

NATO Using Fake Viral Syrian Hero Boy Video To Invade Syria


Norwegian film director reveals viral “Syrian hero boy” video a hoax
Published Saturday, November 15, 2014

A viral video showing a Syrian boy rescuing a girl under gunfire, watched online by millions of viewers and widely shared by media agencies, was faked by a Norwegian film crew, media reported.

Posted on Youtube on Monday, the “Syrian hero boy” video was shot on location in Malta last May with professional actors, and directed by 34-year-old Norwegian director Lars Klevberg, who claimed he hoped to create a debate on children in war zones.

“The film appears to show an authentic phone- or amateur video recording, but is in fact a short fiction film released in the hopes to create political action and debate and focus on innocent children growing up in war,” Klevberg said in a statement released on Twitter on Friday.

View image on Twitter

In the film, a young boy braves sniper fire and appears to be shot while rescuing a girl hiding behind a burned car in what was meant to look like war-torn Syria.

The video, which had been seen more than six million times by Saturday amid an online debate about its authenticity, received 280,000 kroner ($41,492.85) in funding from the Norwegian Film Institute (NFI) and the Norwegian government, the BBC reported.

According to the BBC, the filmmakers said their intention was to upload the video without specifying whether it was real or fiction.

The video spread after the production team uploaded it on Youtube trying to maximize its virality and sent it out on Twitter to generate a “debate.”

The issue of authenticating footage of the conflict has been a major issue in the Syrian civil war, as the country has become an increasingly difficult terrain for media and monitoring outlets to confirm attacks and casualties.

The Syrian government often claims video footage of the conflict are fabricated, which has led to fears by many that the Norwegian movie would be used as ammunition to corroborate these claims.

In June 2011, it was revealed that a widespread blog entitled “A Gay Girl in Damascus” was in fact a hoax by an American man based in Scotland.

Many people took to Twitter to express their anger over the hoax.


.@LarsKlevberg do you know how many Syrian citizen journalists have died to tell the truth of what is happening in #syria? Shame on you

Estimates on the number of people killed in the four-year conflict vary between 124,000 and 191,000, and more than half the population of the country has been forced to flee. According to the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, more than 9,400 children had been killed in the conflict as of August.

(Al-Akhbar, AFP)

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Damascene Conversions – Isis, Assad And The Bombing Of Iraq

This time last year, Western corporate media were focused on a single, grave threat to human life and civilised values. An endless stream of atrocity claims – some real, some fabricated with ‘evidence’ posted on YouTube – depicted President Assad of Syria as the latest incarnation of Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, bin Laden, Gaddafi: namely, the Official Enemy to be targeted for destruction.

Once again, ‘quality’ media generated a sense of inevitability – this Enemy was also so monstrous that the US-UK alliance had to ‘intervene’, to ‘act’. It later transpired that the plan was to ‘completely eradicate any military capabilities Assad had’.

The massacre claims were part of a rolling propaganda barrage intended to clear a path through public opposition to an attack. It was a close copy of the 1991 Gulf War media campaign described by the late historian Howard Zinn:

‘The American population was bombarded the way the Iraqi population was bombarded. It was a war against us, a war of lies and disinformation and omission of history. That kind of war, overwhelming and devastating, waged here in the US while the Gulf War was waged over there.’ (Zinn, Power, History and Warfare, Open Magazine Pamphlet Series, No. 8, 1991, p.12)

This summer, the Assad atrocity stories splashed across newspaper front pages and TV broadcasts for so long have mysteriously dried up. If the BBC website looked like this last year, it now looks like this, this and this. The Independent published an article with a title that would have been unthinkable even a few months ago:

‘Putin may have been right about Syria all along – Many cautioned against the earlier insistence of the Obama administration that Assad must go’

Has the man universally loathed and reviled by corporate commentators undergone an appropriately Damascene conversion? A more prosaic explanation was supplied by the Financial Times:

‘US and allies must join Assad to defeat Isis [Islamic State], warns British MP’ (Sam Jones, Financial Times, August 21, 2014)

The MP in question, Sir Malcolm Rifkind – chairman of parliament’s intelligence and security committee, and a former foreign secretary – declared:

‘”[Isis] need to be eliminated and we should not be squeamish about how we do it… Sometimes you have to develop relationships with people who are extremely nasty in order to get rid of people who are even nastier.”‘

One year ago, Rifkind called for a ‘military strike’ on Syria of ‘a significant kind’:

‘If we don’t make that effort to punish and deter, then these actions will indeed continue.’

Richard Dannatt, former head of the British army, observed last month:

‘The old saying “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” has begun to have some resonance with our relationship in Iran and I think it is going to have to have some resonance with our relationship with Assad.’

Again, unthinkable in the recent past, when Media Lens was smeared as ‘pro-Assad’ for challenging obviously suspect, warmongering claims.

Fighters hailed by the media last year as heroic ‘rebels’ opposing Assad’s army are now decidedly ‘jihadists’. In 2012, the New York Times reported:

‘Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists…’.

Assad, it seems, is yesterday’s ‘bad guy’ – Isis is the new ‘threat’. On this, almost every media commentator appears to agree. A Guardian leader of August 11, commented:

‘President Obama had no real alternative to the air strikes he ordered last week against Islamic State (Isis) forces… Quite apart from the threat to the future of Iraq as a whole, the US and Britain have a humanitarian duty to the endangered minorities, and a debt of honour to the Kurds.’

It is pretty remarkable that journalists are still able to believe (presumably dismissing Gaza as a blip) that US-UK foreign policy is guided by notions of ‘duty’ and ‘honour’. The UK’s leading ‘liberal-left’ newspaper is apparently not appalled by the prospect that the killers of half a million children through sanctions and in excess of one million people as a result of the 2003 invasion are once again affecting to ‘help’ Iraq. Why, because the editors can perceive ‘ignorance and incompetence’ in Western actions but not self-interested criminality. Thus, for the Guardian, ‘America is right to intervene.’

The editors offered the vaguest of nods in the direction of one of the great bloodbaths of modern times:

‘After all that has passed in recent years, hesitation about any kind of intervention in the Middle East is entirely understandable. But the desperate plight of the Iraqi minorities and the potentially very serious threat to the Kurds surely warrants a fundamental reconsideration.’

Alternatively, ‘all that has passed in recent years’ might provoke ‘a fundamental reconsideration’ of the idea that the US-UK alliance is guided by concern for the plight of Iraqi minorities.

As Steve Coll wrote in The New Yorker last month:

‘ExxonMobil and Chevron are among the many oil and gas firms large and small drilling in Kurdistan under contracts that compensate the companies for their political risk-taking with unusually favorable terms.’

Coll added sardonically:

It’s not about oil. After you’ve written that on the blackboard five hundred times, watch Rachel Maddow’s documentary “Why We Did It” for a highly sophisticated yet pointed journalistic take on how the world oil economy has figured from the start as a silent partner in the Iraq fiasco.’

The conclusion:

‘Obama’s defense of Erbil is effectively the defense of an undeclared Kurdish oil state whose sources of geopolitical appeal – as a long-term, non-Russian supplier of oil and gas to Europe, for example – are best not spoken of in polite or naïve company…’

‘We Tried To Set The Middle East To Rights’

Like the rest of the corporate press, the Guardian view of the world is heavily influenced by structural factors – internal corporate needs conditioned by external political and corporate pressures. On August 15, another Guardian leader commented:

‘[R]arely in modern history can military force have been exerted over such an extended period to such little purpose. We tried to set the Middle East to rights, but succeeded only in deepening its divisions and intensifying the violence we had hoped to curb.’

‘We’ – US-UK state-corporate-military-media power – ‘tried to set the Middle East to rights’. For the people, we are to presume, not Big Oil, the ‘silent partner in the Iraq fiasco’. However:

‘We have been burnt before, we should not be burnt again.’

The great lesson to take from our devastation of an entire country – ‘we’ suffered.

A further Guardian leader on August 18 opined:

‘The situation in Iraq is very threatening. But Britain is only one of many countries under threat.’

According to the FBI and Homeland Security, even the US is not at risk from Isis even after the recent airstrikes. Associated Press reported:

‘The FBI and Homeland Security Department say there are no specific or credible terror threats to the U.S. homeland from the Islamic State militant group.’

Richard Barrett, who ran counterterrorism operations for Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, argues that the latest Western war in Iraq ‘does rather play to the [jihadist] narrative that these bad regimes are being supported by outside powers and, therefore, if you get too close to overthrowing them, the outside powers will come and beat you up’. The people who were ‘going to fight Assad or [former Iraqi prime minister Nouri Al] Maliki are now seeing a broader enemy’ in the form of the US and UK governments. Barrett adds:

‘The argument that they could also achieve the same [result] by [conducting] terrorist attacks in Western countries becomes stronger [though] not necessarily inevitable… Their justification will be: “If it hadn’t been for air strikes we would be fine, establishing our caliphate [in Iraq].. Why did you mess with us? Now we’ll mess with you.”‘

Barrett suggests that military action should always be a last resort and is not the ‘tool that is going to solve the [Isis] problem. Look at Libya, look at Afghanistan, look at Iraq in 2003. It’s just reaching for a hammer because it is a hammer and it’s to hand’.

The potential for the imagined threat to become real was emphasised by the brutal murder of journalist James Foley captured on an Isis video. A Guardian leader of August 21 observed:

‘The video is one of a number of developments that have sharpened our understanding of the risks inherent in a new military campaign in the region, even if limited and carefully conducted – that is, as limited and carefully conducted as an undertaking aimed at blowing up things and people can ever be.’

Presumably the Guardian has inside knowledge indicating that the campaign is ‘limited and carefully conducted’. But even the Guardian’s own logic suggested Isis would become a threat to the West only when ‘we’ attack them:

‘Bluntly put: if we target them, they will target us.’

So Isis are not in fact ‘our’ enemy until ‘we’ make them ‘our’ enemy! But of course it is ‘our’ job to sort them out:

‘We should not be alone in a contest with Isis. Regional powers should take on a greater role, perhaps even military, but certainly a more coherent diplomatic role.’

At the Guardian’s dissident extreme, Owen Jones wrote on August 20:

‘Nobody is pretending that Isis is going to be defeated by a few rousing renditions of Kumbaya.’

So we can take for granted that the focus should be on defeating the new enemy identified by Western elites:

‘Surely only then can the Iraqi military hope to defeat these sectarian murderers.’

But then should we not also aspire ‘to defeat’ the notoriously vicious and unaccountable Iraqi military? And Jones quoted veteran Middle East correspondent Patrick Cockburn to the effect that ‘Saudi Arabia and the Gulf monarchies are the “foster parents” of Isis’. So should we not also be focusing on the need ‘to defeat’ Saudi Arabia and Qatar? And how about the US and UK governments who supply the weapons and other support empowering these tyrannies?

But even dissident ‘mainstream’ journalists conform to propaganda demanding that Official Enemies be targeted for ‘defeat’. Favoured allies, and of course the West, are treated quite differently. The public is to believe that the sheer evil of the Enemy means that negotiation, compromise and accommodation are out of the question – war is often presented as the only option. Why? Because it allows the West to play its trump card, high-tech violence; to get what it wants on its own terms. When negotiation, later is mysteriously found to be possible even with the likes of Gaddafi (2004) and Assad (2014), few ask why it was once declared out of the question.

Jones concluded:

‘Because Isis has proved so successful in spreading terror, it will be difficult to have a rational debate about how to defeat them.’

Because Western governments are so successful in spreading terror, it will be difficult for journalists like Jones to have a rational debate focused on something other than defeating the enemy du jour.

Modern Enlightenment Culture

A leader in The Times commented:

‘Modern enlightenment culture [sic] finds it hard to grasp the notion of radical evil. When theocratic fanatics destroyed the Twin Towers on 9/11 and bombed the Spanish train network in 2004 and the London Underground on 7/7, the instinct of many western commentators was to wonder what Europe and America had done to provoke such hatred. The correct answer was “nothing”.’ (Leading article, ‘Beating the barbarians,’ The Times, August 12, 2014)

Modern enlightenment culture also finds it hard to grasp the notion that it has itself committed crimes of awesome violence.

The Times lamented the failure of ‘a decade of efforts to build democracy in Iraq’ – a level of wilful blindness that would have stunned the philosophes. Inevitably, The Times supported yet another war as the only enlightened option:

‘A coherent strategy of striking jihadist targets, arming the peshmerga and supporting a new, inclusive Iraqi administration could salvage stability in Iraq. Anything less hands victory to barbarians.’

In 2005, journalist Seymour Hersh reported that between autumn 2003 and late autumn 2004, the US 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing alone had dropped ‘500,000 tons of ordnance [on Iraq], and that is two million, 500-pound bombs’. Perhaps these latest US bombs will do better.

The Times echoed the Guardian on Isis:

‘The organisation is a threat to the peoples of the region, to the stability of the Middle East and to Britain directly.’ (Leading article, ‘State of Violence,’ The Times, August 18, 2014)

David Aaronovitch has been playing his usual role of demoniser-in-chief, with his familiar calls for war to prevent – what else? – ‘effective genocide’, this time in Iraq (Gaza being someone else’s problem). As usual, the Nazis are the obvious comparison:

‘Isis are very like the SS in occupied eastern Europe. There is the same idea of a mystical destiny that doesn’t just permit killing, but demands it… In service of that vision, the pits had to be filled with bodies.’ (Aaronovitch, ‘Isis will just keep killing – until we stop them,’ The Times, August 11, 2014)


‘Just like the SS, Isis men will kill more and more… stopping only when they are utterly defeated and every executioner – even if he is such a gentle boy from Purley – is dead or tried.’

Therapists describe a phenomenon called ‘projection’ – the ‘enemy’ acts as a screen on which the analysand projects precisely the qualities he or she is unwilling to face in him or herself. Thus, since 1945, the West has endlessly left pits ‘filled with bodies’ driven by the mystical ‘manifest destiny’ of ‘American exceptionalism’. Aaronovitch himself summed up the thinking on August 14:

‘Something broke in western policy when Ed Miliband won the vote preventing action in Syria after the chemical attacks this time last year… The message was clear to everyone and is the worst you can ever send – that the cops have left town.’ (Aaronovitch, ‘Only military action will defeat the jihadis,’ The Times, August 14, 2014)

‘We’ are ‘the cops’. Who voted ‘us’ Globocop? No-one, ‘we’ seized the role by right of military might. And so we find that the claim can again be exactly reversed. Are we really playing the role of ‘cops’? Well, cops are not supposed to illegally invade countries, overthrow governments, flatten cities, steal resources, commit mass torture. What kind of people do that? Villains, criminals, terrorists.

To look hard in the mirror of the Official Enemy is to see the truth of who ‘we’ really are.



JAWBAR:  Once Jawbar is conquered, the East Ghouta will be completely secure.  This is the end for the rats.  Once Al-Maleeha fell, not only did Zahraan ‘Alloosh obtain his own death warrant,  but the entire south-to-eastern fronts fell apart.  Yesterday, more blocks in the direction of the Al-Tayyiba Mosque and other areas were subject to the inevitable march of the SAA and NDF.  Artillery fire is precise and devastating.  Yesterday, the SAA killed these identified marsupials:


Sa’eed Jaassem Al-Tabtabi (var: Al-Tabatabaa`iy.  He probably changed the spelling to de-Jaafarize it.  KUWAITI CREAMPUFF)  

Qaassem Daleel

Waleed Hamaama

‘Abdul-Kareem ‘Ayyaash

Another 12 were not identified.


Al-‘Aaliya Farms:  In the Doumaa area.  This is where ‘Alloosh will find the Devil.  A pack of rats belonging to the Jaysh Al-Islam (now merged with Al-Ittihaad Al-Islaami Li-Ajnaad Al-Shaam, yawn) was wiped off the map:

Muneer Fawwaaz

Mahmoud Al-Khutba

Faarooq Jamaaleddeen

Waleed Dalwaan

Muhammad Khibya (This family has about run out of males)

‘Ali Al-‘Alawi

Raateb Sulayk  (var: Saleek)

Mahmoud Bakri


Khaan Al-Shaykh:   Annihilation was the motto of the SAA yesterday as more than 67 rodents met their end here.  Almost all were foreign mercenaries.  Near the distillery (Ziad’s favorite), the Agricultural Foundation, Nestle Street and behind the Sundus Building, scores of rats went down the pipe to the Main Sewer in Hell.  No names are available since the majority are foreigners carrying invalid identification.  It is very likely we will never know who these rats are since their carcasses will be rendered into a trillion particles of ash.


Khaan Al-Shaykh:  West of the Villas area near the Al-Manshiyya School.  No details about a pack of rats and their voyage to the Orifice of Oblivion.


Al-Zabadaani:  At the Radio Station Quarter and ‘Aara Neighborhood, these cockroacheds were dispatched to the Stygian shores:

Ahmad Muraad

Saleem Al-Aghawaat

Husaam Al-Tareeda

Mahmoud Ghannoom

‘Uthmaan ‘Alaa`uddeen

Sabri Mansoor  



Salaam Highway:  An attempted infiltration into this area resulted in 10 carcasses, wrapped and ready to go straight to Satan’s Buffet.  No names.


‘Adraa Town:  A skirmish at the olive oil press resulted in 6 Jabha Al-Islamiyya hyenas yelping their way to the polar climes of Hades.  No names.


Fighting reported also at these locations: Al-Sindiyaana, Al-Hijaariyya Farms, Al-Husayniyya Farms.


Daarayyaa:  East of the Sayyida Sukayna (var: Ruqayyaa) Shrine, the SAA killed this worm:

“Abu Khaaled Shu’ayb (Id pending. Rat leader)




This front is going the same as Der’ah.  There is a big surprise awaiting the Zionist Settlers, too.  The FSA offshoot which is commanded by Chief Yokel, ‘Abdul-Ilaah Al-Basheer, might as well be led by Mr. Rogers.  This King Rat is about as smart Joan Rivers in her hospital bed.


Qunaytra City:  At the empty hospital, a pickup with 23mm cannon donated by Saudi Arabia was turned to dross by an SAA rocket.  Also, at the bank and the cinema (they’re still advertising 2001: A Space Odyssey) another pickup was targeted and destroyed.  No names available.



Umm Baatina/Umm Al-‘Izhaam:  2 pickups with 23mm cannons were destroyed.  All aboard reportedly killed.


Al-Samdaaniyya School:  6 rodent flatbeds with rodent cannons went bye-bye yesterday.  Total dead?  14 with 11 wounded and warbling.


Burayqa:  1 pickup with 23mm cannon destroyed here.  No names.


East of ‘Ayn Al-Darb:  Another pickup with 23mm cannon was sent to Mephisto’s Junkyard along with its passengers.


Tal Kuroom (Hill of Grapevines)/Jibba:  Another flatbed bites the dust along with its cannon.


Al-‘Ajraf:  And another pickup with 23mm cannon destroyed.  It seems like the Zionist Settler gangsters are setting these rubes up for disaster.


Hirsh Majdoolyaa:  Whoah there Pilgrim!  Are you saying another pickup with 23mm cannon was destroyed?  Yep.


Bi`r ‘Ajam:  And another Toyota flatbed with 23mm cannon was destroyed.


South Umm Baatina at Al-Mushrifa Lands:  8 rodents were trapped and dispatched by the Orkin Man.


Al-Ruwayhana/Umm Baatina Road:  A convoy coming from behind Zionist lines was subject to massive artillery fire and destroyed.  The rats who survived are being treated and newly-created field hospitals run by Zionist veterinarians.


Fighting also in: Jibbaa, Rasm Al-Shawaali, Tishreen Farms 
Read more

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

ISIS Terrorists Trained in a US Base in Turkey

ISIS Terrorists Trained in a US Base in Turkey
Published 19-06-2014
Members of the terrorist organization, ISIS, which killed thousands of people in Iraq and Syria, are alleged to be trained in the US İncirlik Base in Adana, Turkey.

According to Turkish media sources, it has been discovered from Washington that ISIS members received their training in Turkey, and that the Riyadh administration is funding $3 billion for this terror organization.  A senior official from Iraqi government confirms that one of the training camps of the ISIS is located near the Incirlik Air Base in Adana Turkey.


Last week, the main opposition party, the CHP’s MP Sezgin Tanrikulu, brought to the agenda the fact that four Turkish intelligence officers trained the insurgents linked to the ISIS terror organization in Iraq. These four Turkish intelligence officers were taken into custody by the Iraqi soldiers, and their confession brought to the agenda of the assembly by Tanrıkulu.

Hollande admits France Recently Armed Syria ISIL Terrorists

Hollande Says France Recently Armed Syria Takfiris

France President Francois Hollande says his country has recently supplied weapons to the foreign-sponsored Takfiri militants operating against the Syrian government.


The French leader said on Thursday that Paris delivered weapons to the Takfiri terrorists in Syria “a few months ago,” stressing, “We should not stop” supporting the anti-Damascus militants.

Hollande also called on the United States and European Union countries to join the campaign and said Paris cannot “go it alone.”

In an interview with France’s Le Monde daily published on Wednesday, the French president said the international community shoulders a “heavy responsibility” with regards to the turmoil in Syria, which has also spilled over into neighboring Iraq.

He also said the ISIL Takfiri militants would never have come into existence if the Syria crisis had been properly handled, adding that other armed militants operating in the country “deserve all our support.”

France has been among the major supporters of the Takfiri extremists operating to topple the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad since March 2011.

In January, Hollande said some 700 French nationals had taken part in the fight against the Damascus government, adding that Paris needs to warn young people against joining the ranks of extremist groups in the Arab country.

According to some sources, more than 170,000 people have so far been killed and millions of others displaced due to the violence fueled by Western-backed militants in Syria

Press TV

Eretz Zen releases video showing the connection between the Islamic State, and the western backed opposition to Syria.

One of the key US men in Syria, the “Free Syrian Army” (FSA) Col. Abdel Jabbar al-Okaidi, who operated mostly in the Greater Aleppo area, was open about his daily communication and collaboration with extremist jihadists from the “Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) and al-Qaeda’s official branch in Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra. He refers to their fighters as brothers. In one footage after the rebel capture of Menagh military airbase, he even appeared standing next to an Egyptian jihadist from ISIL, Abu Jandal, while thanking him and his group for their contributions. The US is known to have funneled military aid to al-Okaidi and others in the FSA throughout the last couple of years.

Eretz Zen

%d bloggers like this: