Home > Conspiracy of the Week Award, Keeping Bloggers Honest > Alexander Higgins – Winner of the Second Ass’ad Abu Khalil Tin-Foil-Hat Conspiracy Award

Alexander Higgins – Winner of the Second Ass’ad Abu Khalil Tin-Foil-Hat Conspiracy Award

September 18, 2012

It’s been less than 24 hours since the inaugural Ass’ad Abu Khalil Tin-Foil-Hat Conspiracy award was awarded (to the very deserving Ass’ad Abu Khalil), and yet we already have a blog entry worthy of another award. If this keeps up, we won’t need to make it a weekly event.

The second Tin-foil hat award goes to Alexander Higgins (who ironically has a section on his blog entitled “Aluminum Foil”), for his blog entry entitled “Syria Rebels Are The Same Salafi Extremists Attacking US Embassies“. Higgins claims a giant Salafi conspiracy, stretching from Saudi Arabia to Northern Africa, of which the Syrian Revolution is just one aspect. Bashar Assad is described as a man in a “dilemma”. To make his point, Higgins (in typical Leftist hysterical fashion) has a giant black banner on the page, with the words “SYRIAN REBELS ARE THE SAME SALAFI blah blah blah etc etc”.

Higgins links an image from the Turkish newspaper Hurriyet Daily, supposedly showing all the scary Salafi groups in Syria. Problem is, when the image Higgins uses as his main source is examined, it soon becomes comically apparent that, in true Leftist tradition, Higgins has not bothered to read or examine his sources. In fact, the same image Higgins links to is proof of the intellectual bankruptcy of his entire theory. It’s articles like these that give Leftists a reputation for being the equivalent of a Three Stooges episode; the idiot is claiming that Kurds and Turkmen are in on the Salafi conspiracy.

Here is the image in question, which Higgins uses to “prove” his point.

Hurriyet Daily, armed groups in Syria

If you aren’t laughing hysterically at this point, you should be. The graph lists the PYD, which Higgins, in his comical ignorance, assumes is a Salafi groups. Actually, the PYD is Kurdish militia armed and supported by the Assad regime. It has actively worked against the Syrian revolution and silenced Kurdish supporters of the revolution, such as the late Mashaal Tammo, who was assassinated by the regime’s thugs in 2011 (it is of course beyond Higgins’ Laurel & Hardy level of intellect to adequately explain how the “dilemma”-ridden Bashar Assad could have mistaken Mashaal Tammo for a Salafi).

Another group which the graph lists and which Higgins claims is a “Salafi group” is the so called Turkmen’s Brigade. Syrian Turkmen are a distinct ethnic group, with their own distinct language and culture, and by no stretch of the imagination can be labeled as “Salafis”. Does Higgins even know what the term “Salafi” means before applying it wholesale to everyone from Saudi Arabia to North Africa? Highly doubtful.

Going down the list of the other groups mentioned in the graph and which Higgins uses as a source, one is actually impressed with the diversity and moderate character of the groups that make up the Syrian Revolution;

Al-Faruq Brigade, which the graph describes as having a number of Christian and Alawite members.

Tawafiq, which the graph describes as “secular”.

Al-Sham and Al-Fatah are described as Islamist, but not as radical as Al-Qaeda (FYI, an FSA soldier who happens to sport a beard is no more a Jihadists, than an American GI sporting a cross is a “Crusader”).

In fact, the only truly Al-Qaeda type radical group mentioned anywhere in the graph is Jabhat Al-Nusra, which is widely seen as a front for the regime, whenever it needs a convenient scapegoat for bombings etc. It has repeatedly been disowned by the FSA and Syrian revolutionary political figures. Which of course, would be news to an amateur pundit like Higgins.

Now, let’s examine Higgins’ article, and see if we can’t find more comedy fodder for what passes as Leftist intellect. Higgins writes;

“These Salafi extremists are now waging attacks on the embassies of the United States and its allies across the globe.”

Actually, the only people to attack the US and other Western embassies in Syria were the shabiha scum and supporters of the Left’s beloved Bashar Assad. Even the usually impotent UN Security Council managed to agree long enough to condemn the “dilemma”-ridden Assad for orchestrating attacks on the embassies. Ambassador Robert Ford, one of the bravest and most courageous diplomats in the world today, was repeatedly attacked by Higgins’ beloved shabiha and his life put in danger. Apparently, Leftists are fine with attacks on embassies as long as they are carried out by one of their favored despots.

Higgins goes on to write;

“While the western mass media has categorically dismissed claims from the Syria government that they are fighting armed terrorist groups.”

Bullshit. Complete and utter crap. The Syrian conflict has been mainstream media’s finest hour, and they have reported on every armed group, every so called “crime” committed by groups fighting under the FSA’s banner. MSM reporters have risked their lives to report on events from inside the heaviest hit areas of Syria. The BBC’s Paul Woods in particular has shown immense courage and professionalism.

Why don’t we see Russian or Chinese or Iranian journalists taking the same risks? All that Chinese media is good for is copy/pasting from SANA and other regime propaganda outlets. To Higgins’ tyrannical friends, a free and independent press inside Syria is scarier than ten NATO divisions on Syria’s borders. It is the “dilemma”-ridden ASSad who has banned any form of independent media from the country. Apparently, intellectually bankrupt arm-seat pundits like Higgins have to whine and bitch, even if it means manufacturing a grievance.

“These are the same type of attacks these Salafi Jihadists carry out in Syria except the attacks on Syria are much more brutal.”

Sho ya tezi inta? More brutal? The worst “atrocity” that can be attributed to the FSA is the murder of 20 captured soldiers near Aleppo a week ago. Twenty dead is an hour’s work for Higgins’ beloved shabiha scum, who were responsible for such horrendous massacres as Houla and Daraya, places apparently “The Fourth Stooge” here hasn’t even heard about. The ICG’s latest report stated that not a single mass massacre of Alawite civilians has occurred in 18 months of this conflict, and if Higgins’ hasn’t heard of the ICG, I’d be happy to draw the bateekh a crayon drawing to have it explained to him.

“They are all controlled by Saudi Arabia’s religious leaders who also happen to be top-level Saudi government officials and they and do the bidding of Saudi controlled Islamic organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Oh dear sweet heaven, enough already, it hurts my head to think down to the level of a Leftist. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf in general gave the poorly-produced “Innocence of Muslims” film exactly the attention it deserves; zero. The Saudis have at their disposal numerous satellite channels, not one of which gave the film any attention at all. To claim that the Saudis control extremists in Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Pakistan, Lebanon etc etc etc by remote control from Riyadh is to credit the Saudis with a level of control that not even Stalin in his heydays enjoyed. The people who attacked the US embassy in Libya and Sudan were not waiting for anyone to give them the go ahead; anything would have set these people off.

Throughout his article, Higgins engages in the casual racism of the Left, which paints societies as diverse as Libya, Egypt, Lebanon and Syria with the same brush. The logic goes that because some nuts in Libya attacked an embassy, that automatically makes Syrian society just as extreme and blood thirsty. When it suits them, Leftists like Higgins are happy to engage in the lowest forms of racism, the kind of which not even Fox News would allow on its programing.

Let is examine Bashar Assad’s “dilemma” a bit more. This is a man who hasn’t set up a single refugee camp inside Syria itself, nor has any of his officials bothered to pay a visit to any of the areas they claim were “massacred by terrorists” (Daraya and Houla to mention just two).

This is a man who has not bothered to attend a single military funeral anywhere in the country. To Assad and his close circle, even his own Alawite constituency are as expendable as rounds of ammunition or barrels of tank fuel.

This is a man who feels the need to cut the Internet and mobile coverage to 85% of the country, which is a far truer indication of his complete and utter lack of popularity inside the country than all the staged and forced pro-regime demonstrations.

The only “dilemma” facing Bashar Assad is the fact that he has proven himself in way over his head. This is a man who enjoyed every advantage a tin pot dictator dreams of; Russian veto cover, a compliant army willing to murder its own, weak neighbors, and a stable of intellectually and morally bankrupt Leftists like Alexander Higgin willing to prostitute themselves to indulge in their “I HATE MY DADDY THEREFORE I HATE AMERICA!”  infantile tantrums. This is a man who faces a politically divided and lightly armed opposition, AND YET HE STILL CAN’T SUBDUE THE COUNTRY! Does Bashar Assad need his dick held for him when he pisses too?

Now, I fully expect the intellectually bankrupt and comically inept Alexander Higgins to mention the fact that I am currently in Saudi Arabia. I look forward to it, and I’ve long since prepared a response to people who have nothing else to fight back with. The incompetence of one’s debating skills is, I’ve learned, directly proportional to how quickly they whine that I live in Saudi Arabia.

So well done to Alexander Higgins, the recipient of the 2nd Ass’ad Abu Khalil Tin Foil Hat Conspiracy award. I hadn’t dreamed that anyone would so quickly provide new material to justify a new award. But the Left never dissapoints when one looks for examples of intellectual hypocrisy, as exemplified by Alexander Higgin’s mistake ridden and intellectually shallow article. Intellectual shallowness, the bread and butter of Assad’s Leftist supporters.

%d bloggers like this: