[HTML1]

“The Obama administration quietly has cleared the way for U.S. residents to buy weapons for the rebels who are fighting to topple Syrian President Bashar Assad, granting a Washington-based advocacy group a rare license to collect money for arms and other equipment,” spokesman.com reports. “The license, which the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control issued last month without fanfare, gives the nonprofit Syrian Support Group the authority to take in money and pass it directly to armed insurgents. Previously, U.S. entities’ assistance to Syria was limited to humanitarian and educational programs.” Unlike the CIA, the Syrian Support Group will provide “detailed fund transfers and logs of how the money is used.” I wonder if The Company welcomes the “competition.” I also wonder if President Obama understands the meaning of the following quote . . .

“This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty… The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” – St. George Tucker (1752-1827)

15 Responses to Anti-Gun Obama Supports Arming Syrian Rebels

  1. Are you joking? Were meddling in the middle east AGAIN? Does our government seriously not understand blowback? Are they this foolish?

  2. Fast and Furious has opened another chapter. This time, instead of using US gun stores, the USG is in alliance with Syrian Americans.

    “We are committed to a pluralistic, civil and democratic Syria in which all Syrians are subject to the Rule of Law.”
    — Even if that is their true intention and not one of simply replacing the current Syrian ruling family with a different branch of Islam and a new ruling clan, the USG’s track record for manipulating events and trying to control change in the middle east is as always one big gamble. The Founding Fathers warned the US to avoid international alliances and to practice neutrality and friends with all.

  3. Unlike the CIA, the Syrian Support Group will provide ‘detailed fund transfers and logs of how the money is used.’ I wonder if The Company welcomes the ‘competition.’

    Somehow, I suspect The Company has been doing a lot more than what is reported, with competition or not.

    The Founding Fathers warned the US to avoid international alliances and to practice neutrality and friends with all.

    As far as the founding fathers warnings, They’ve already thrown out their beliefs where they disagree with their (modern government’s) plans and tried to redefine what they couldn’t. So why would they pay attention to their warnings?

  4. Only the government-i.e. police and military, should be allowed to have guns. Won’t someone please think of the children?

  5. libya, syria, egypt, afganistan, iraq. i keep hearing from the leftist that civilians who think they can stand up to their government with their guns are deluding themselves. i think i would like at least the same options as the people in the aforementioned countries.

  6. A lot of what the French guy says is probably true, but he loses credibility at the end when he says this is all an Israeli plot to destabilize Syria and invade it, which is completely ludicrous.

    It’s sad that we need to rely on Russian Gov’t TV for an alternative viewpoint — we need a real libertarian TV news network. I can only think of two libertarians on TV at the moment. The one who’s not John Stossel had this to say on Syria (He manages to zing Obama and Congress on the NDAA at the end!):

    http://youtu.be/NxqYnxrxHX8

  7. Excuse me for sounding oblivious, but the Obama administration wants to disarm US citizens but is ok with arming people in an unstable nation by allowing people in the US to puchase weapons and send it out there. Didn’t this happen with the IRA?

  8. So we’re being encouraged to help them buy guns that this same administration doesn’t let us buy for ourselves?

  9. So we can’t have evil high capacity ammunition clips or shoulder thingies that go up, but we can buy members of another country fully automatic firearms? Yeah…

  10. Syria: The next Afghanistan.

    My point is that if we help the MB get their way, they aren’t going to suddenly become friendly to “Western” nations or culture. They’re going to turn their backs on us just like the Taliban did when we helped them expel the Soviets from Afghanistan in the ’80’s. This isn’t any different.

    While they aren’t as religiously conservative as the Taliban, they would still suppress the rights of non-Muslims, segregate boys and girls in schools, not allow girls to be taught the same curricula as boys, force women to wear burkhas or other clothing that fits in with their “campaign against ostentation in dress,” punish women for “loose morals,” and even prohibit dancing. Yeah, they sound like a nice group of guys …

    • Something you should keep in mind is that Afghanis turned on Soviets precisely _because_ Soviets tried to force Western culture on them. They’ve build mixed gender schools and universities, trained females to become doctors, and promoted secular education. Needless to say the tribes were not amused with such travesty – what do you mean, girls and boys in the same class?? a MALE doctor inspecting my WIFE??! Die, infidels, die!

      FWIW, the biggest recipient of US aid during the Soviet-Afghan war Gulbutdin Hekmatyar, who lead the most extreme Islamist faction of all Afghan Mujahideen (eventually most of it, albeit not Hekmatyar himself, merged into Taliban). CIA really needs to stop listening to ISI…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *