My friend Patrick Poole reports that the U.S.-”vetted” and supported “moderate Islamist” group known as Harakat al-Hazm – part of the Free Syrian Army that Washington is banking on to become our “boots on the ground” in the fight against Islamic State terrorists — has forcefully condemned the U.S.-led bombing campaign against the Islamic State . . . just days after Congress approved President Obama’s proposal to spend $500 million U.S.-taxpayer dollars to train such “vetted” “moderates” at camps located in the very moderate Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. (I discussed the Obama plan, endorsed by the GOP’s McCain wing, in last weekend’s column.)
Harakat al-Hazm has received American aid and weaponry despite its open alliance with al-Nusra, the local al-Qaeda franchise in Syria.
Patrick points to this report from the L.A. Times:
One of the administration’s favored moderate rebel factions, Harakat Hazm, part of the Free Syrian Army alliance and a recipient of U.S. missiles and training, issued a statement Tuesday denouncing the “external intervention” — that is, the U.S.-led bombing campaign in Syria — as “an attack on the revolution.” The group said its main goal was toppling Assad. It is demanding “unconditional arming” of the Free Syrian Army, yet its members also acknowledge fighting alongside Al Nusra Front, the official Al Qaeda force in Syria.
Patrick’s report includes the statement issued by Harakat al-Hazm. It also includes two very good questions:
[N]ow that one of the primary groups the US is supplying heavy weapons to supposedly “roll back” ISIS gains has not only denounced the US for this week’s airstrikes on ISIS, declaring them an “attack on the revolution”, but is also partnering with a US designated terrorist group, Jabhat al-Nusra, what hope is there really that the “vetted moderate” Syrian rebel groups are going to accomplish that goal?
And one final question: in light of this catastrophe, who is vetting the vetters?