Så här resonerar USA:s/Natos allierade i Egypten. Mannen som intervjuas i videon nedan står för samma inriktning inom islam som många av USA:s/Natos legoknektar i Syrien omfattar och som dessa krigsgalna stormakter stödjer, tillsammans med denna inriktnings moderland, Saudiarabien och också Qatar. Vad den här mannen säger är  hårresande. (Videon är kort och textad på engelska)

Salafis in Egypt Want to Destroy Pyramids & Sphinx – What Will they Destroy in Syria? (utlagd 11/11 2012)

Videon presenteras med följande text:

In a televised interview, an Egyptian Salafi cleric answers questions related to claims that hardline Salafis in post ”Arab Spring” Egypt intend to destroy some of the world’s best known remnants of humanity’s ancient civilizations and cultural heritage, namely the Pyramids and the Sphinx. The Salafi cleric says that according to his version of Islam, all these statues and edifices must be destroyed just like the Statue of Buddha of Bamiyan was destroyed in Afghanistan.

(Min översättning: I en intervju i egyptisk TV svarar en salafistisk präst på frågor relaterade till påståenden om att hårdföra slafister i den postarabiska våren i Egypten ämnar förstöra en del av världens mest kända lämningar från mänsklighetens äldsta historia, nämligen pyramiderna och Sfinxen. Den salafistiska prästen säger att enligt hans muslimska inriktning måste alla dessa statyer och byggnader förstöras, precis som buddahstatyn i Bamian förstördes i Afghanistan.)

Man blir väl inte direkt förvånad. USA:s politiska ledare har ju aldrig visat något intresse för kultur och äldre historia. Inte så konstigt kanske eftersom de inte har någon egen imponerande historia att peka på och de amerikanska urinvånarnas historia verkar man nu inte vara överdrivet intresserade av.

Dagens svenska journalister förefaller inte heller vara allvarligt nedtyngda av kunskaper eller omsorg om kulturhistoriska värden, som stöttar dessa antiintellektuella och kunskapsfientliga massmördare i Syrien.

Varför, undrar man, önskar dessa svenska journalister syrierna samma öde som drabbat Irak, Afghanistan och Libyen? Varför skriver och talar de inte om vad som pågår i Irak fortfarande (1) eller i Libyen idag? (2) Är det genant? Eller undviker de bara nogsamt att informera sig?

Tala om stenåldergrobianer.

Jag vet inte om det stämmer, som påstås, men håller det inte för osannolikt, att Västs allierade, FSA-salafisterna, demolerar lika gamla eller ännu äldre byggnadsverk i Syrien, som också är en viktig del av vår västerländska kulturs vagga.


1) Kriget mot Iraks kultur, Motvallsbloggen 21/8 2012
2) Mer om kaoset och dödandet i Libyen – resultatet av den s.k. lyckade operationen, Motvallsbloggen 20/10 2012
An Era of Conflicts. The New Political Map of the Middle East, Patrick Cockburn, counterpunch.org 12/11 2012 (Citat: Given what has happened in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, it is strange that there are siren voices in the US suggesting it should increase its involvement in the Syrian civil war to tip the balance against Bashar al-Assad. Many critics have given reasons why this is a bad idea, but two important points are seldom made. One is about the nature of anti-government militias: militiamen, be they in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Libya or Chechnya, may start off as heroic fighters for freedom and democracy. But these unpaid irregulars, unless restrained by the tightest discipline, tend to become local warlords or criminal gangs and batten on the population. I remember how, in Chechnya in 1999-2001, local people came to hate the insurgent bands, whom they once would have died for, even more than the Russians. The same happened in Baghdad in 2006-07 and in Libya over the past year. ………
For the moment, the Middle East and west Asia is probably a good place for the US and other foreign powers to keep out of. Libya is a recent example of what can go wrong. Up to a few months ago, Washington thought its behind-the-scenes role in Gaddafi’s overthrow was a model of foreign intervention. It forgot that the war effort by the rebel militia brigades was something of a propaganda sham, the real war being fought by Nato air power. But, come the assault on the US consulate in Benghazi on 11 September this year, the local CIA detachment was reportedly pleading in vain to local militiamen to come to their aid.)
Bani Walid in Ruins, globalciviliansforpeace.com, 10/11 2012
Slouching Towards Sirte: NATO’s War on Libya and Africa, Stephens Gowans, globalciviliansforpeace.com, 10/11 2012(Citat: Forte takes this view apart, showing that a massacre was never in the cards, much less genocide. Gaddafi didn’t threaten to hunt down civilians, only those who had taken up armed insurrection—and he offered rebels amnesty if they laid down their arms. What’s more, Gaddafi didn’t have the military firepower to lay siege to Benghazi (site of the initial uprising) and hunt down civilians from house to house. Nor did his forces carry out massacres in the towns they recaptured…something that cannot be said for the rebels……“NATO’s intervention did not stop armed conflict in Libya,” observes Forte—it continues to the present. “Massacres were not prevented, they were enabled, and many occurred after NATO intervened and because NATO intervened.” It is for these reasons he urges readers to stand idly by the next time that empire comes calling in the name of human rights.)
A Black-Hole Prison in Benghazi, Moon of alabama 12/11 2012 (Mycket intressant-om informationen är korrekt. Bör läsas. Citat: A well-placed Washington source confirms to Fox News that there were Libyan militiamen being held at the CIA annex in Benghazi and that their presence was being looked at as a possible motive for the staged attack on the consulate and annex that night.
According to multiple intelligence sources who have served in Benghazi, there were more than just Libyan militia members who were held and interrogated by CIA contractors at the CIA annex in the days prior to the attack. Other prisoners from additional countries in Africa and the Middle East were brought to this location.
The Libya annex was the largest CIA station in North Africa, and two weeks prior to the attack, the CIA was preparing to shut it down. Most prisoners, according to British and American intelligence sources, had been moved two weeks earlier. CIA får enligt lag inte ha sådana verksamheter, men forts. citat: But the CIA denial is irrelevant. The people who talked to Foxnews are claiming that prisoners were ”held and interrogated by CIA contractors”, not by the CIA itself. The Executive Order only refers to the CIA, not to the military. We know that ”former” special operation soldiers were operating from the ”annex”. How much ”former” these are is a yet unknown. The drone that came to observe the situation as the annex was attacked was operated by the military for observation of some alleged militant training camps near Benghazi. Also unknown is which ”contractors” the CIA hired for that dirty part of the business it is no longer allowed to do itself.)
Fler länkar:
Robert Fisk rapporterar från Damaskus, Third World 13/11 2012 (Tack för tipset Björn Blomberg. Robert Fisk har tidigare varit tämligen tyst och dessutom förföll i början ta parti för ”oppositionen”. Han har blivit lite mer balanserad i sina ståndpunkter de senaste månaderna.)