Stuff you should read

Wednesday, 13 Sep 2006

On the Syria US embassy attack

All of you, by now, have heard of the Syria US embassy attack. In case
you haven't, here is a quick recap:

Armed Islamic militants attempted to storm the U.S. Embassy in a brazen
attack Tuesday, the government said. Four people were killed, including
three of the assailants. There was no immediate claim of
responsibility, but an al-Qaida offshoot group was suspected,

Syria's ambassador to the United States said.

No Americans were hurt in the attack, in which the militants used
automatic rifles, hand grenades and at least one van rigged with
explosives.

The al-Qaida offshoot group, called Jund al-Sham, has been blamed
for several attacks in Syria in recent years, the Syrian ambassador,
Imad Moustapha, said in comments to CNN.

The US of course praised the Syrian authorities for responding to the attack, however, they seemed suspicious:

Secretary of State

Condoleezza Rice praised Syrian security agents for repelling the attack, but added it was too early to know who may have been behind it.

And it seems like their suspicions are not totally out of place, at least according to syrian bloggers. Take Yazan for example:

4 guys sneaked a van full of explosives and gas pots to just infront of
the US embassy. and our brave security forces caught them just in time.

but,
6 months ago, there were 2000 protestors whos been cheering violent
cheers in the middle of the embassy neihbourhood, for 2 hours, they
burnt down 3 embassies.. and were marching for the 4th when our [the
very same, mind you] forces took action.

I'm not gonna make any conclusions, I'm gonna keep my mind very much to myself, but here's a FACT we've come used to…

Everytime the Syrian TV rallies over something, there's gotta be something fishy about it…

Or Ammar .. 

 Previous “Islamist” attacks in
Syria have always looked suspicious, even staged, to most onlookers and
analysts, their particular sympathies, be they pro-regime or
anti-regime, notwithstanding. The reason for this was the choice of target, namely: empty buildings. Now, we have a seemingly more credible attack in terms of target selection, but the choice of methods and tactics is truly problematic.

For blowing up gas containers will not
cause even a dent in the heavily fortified walls of the American
Embassy, and the only people who are likely to be hurt in such an
attack are the security guards outside, and the line of innocent
bystanders, mostly Syrians, waiting to apply for an American visa.
Moreover, the pictures we saw on TV indicate that the car exploded at
the entrance of the narrow alley where people stand in line, near the
iron gate that leads into the Embassy, that is, in the area of least
people concentration and least likelihood of being affected by the
explosion. Add to this, the fact that one of the cars used in the
attack was a van.

The problem with this is latter fact is that everybody in Syria knows that vans are simply not
allowed to pass through certain sensitive areas and neighborhoods, and
the Malki and Abu Rummaneh neighborhoods where the US Embassy is
located, alongside many other western embassies and the domiciles of so
many diplomats and high level Syrian officials, including our
Illustrious President (may Allah increase him in stupidity and cut his
reign short), are definitely the prime areas in this regard.

As such, for a van to simply waltz into the neighborhood is not
exactly something that will go unnoticed by security agents.
Indeed,
security vehicles will be dispatched within seconds of the initial
sighting to intercept the hapless vehicle. So, we have a situation here
where either the terrorist group involved is made up of a bunch of
buffoons and nitwits who thought that they could somehow rush into the
Embassy and blow it up with gas containers before anyone could stop
them, or we have to conclude that the entire event was intended and set up to fail from the very get-go.

Hmm.. But we shouldnt venture into conspiracy theory territory, right? There is still a 4th suspect that got apprehended alive. If they had plotted this whole thing with them, that person wouldnt be alive now would he? 

Oh..Ooops:

The only Islamic militant arrested in the attack on the U.S. Embassy in
Damascus has died from his wounds, and authorities were unable to
question him, a Syrian official and the government media said Wednesday.

The man, who was shot as he fled an explosives-laden truck without
detonating it, died in a hospital Tuesday, said an official, who spoke
on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the
media.

Nevermind then! 

 


Trackbacks and Pings

8 Responses to “On the Syria US embassy attack”

  1. Ha Ana Za Says:

    First time for me to comment on your post Sand monkey and may I just say how much I enjoy reading it everday! Keep up the good work :-)
    This thing in Syria is completely laughable. I mean firstly we notice Bashar’s reticence throughout the Lebanon crisis, then his big-man-talk after the ceasefire and now he presents himself as defender of the Americans in order to watch is own ass????
    What has happened to the Lion of Syria?

  2. Yaman Says:

    Amazing how dispensable Syrian bystanders are to their government… the last one a few years ago happened on the same street my family lives on, and one of my cousins had to hide underneath a parked car for an hour as that oh-so-noble “firefight” went on between security and irhab.

  3. d00d Says:

    I know it’s a bit redundant, but is it too late to call bullshit on the death of the 4th ‘activist’ (as Rueters might call him) ?
    Like I really believe that they couldn’t interogate him or that he was so badly wounded he wouldn’t have survived. yep, smells a lot like bullshit.

  4. Hyscience Says:

    About That Attack On The U.S. Embassy In Syria

    … In in what the Syrians would certainly describe as pure happenstance, the only terrorist arrested in the embassy attack, the only one who could talk, ohas died of his wounds.

  5. Ron Larson Says:

    Sounds like Syria is where Saudi Arabia was 6 years ago. Saudi Arabia refused to believe that Islamic inspired terrorist were operating within KSA. Prince Naif himself tried to pin the violence on an ex-pat lead underground booze ring.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/saudi/story/0,11599,946231,00.html

    It wasn’t until these terrorist starting blowing up lots of buildings and killing actual Saudis (employing the same techniques used in this Syria attack) did it dawn on the Saudi government that these guys were for real.

    It took a long time for Saudi Arabia to even admit that the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis.

    Because of strongly held “It can’t happen here” attitude, other answers are offered up. These other answers explain the problem away by claiming that the government must be involved.

    Syria, like KSA, is finding out that playing with fire can get you burned. Funding and supported Islamic extremist radicals as a foriegn policy tool often ends up having these same nuts attacking the host/sponsor.

    These nuts that Syria hosts are the same nuts that commit mass-murder in Iraq against fellow Iraqis. They are the same nuts that want to fight for Hezbollah. It would be foolish to assume that Syria’s intelligence and /or military departments have not been infected or enamoured with their little terror creations.

    Pakistan has the same problem. The Pakistan ISI, there to protect the relatively secular government, is the greatest threat to that government because there are the biggest supportor of Islamic terrorist. They are sitting on a pressure cooker of disconent there. There is no reason to think that Syria is not in the same position now.

  6. valerieishot Says:

    Valerie Plame is HOT, spy or NOT!

  7. gary Says:

    ron larsen is exactly right. now lets see how long it takes the iranian hitler to order bashir assads asassination. lol

  8. gary Says:

    ron larsen is exactly right. now lets see how long it takes the iranian hitler to order bashir assads asassination. lol

Leave a Reply