They Want To Kill the Watchman and Take the Grapes. However …

There is a popular saying in our country: “Do you want the grapes or do you want to kill the person watching over the vineyard?”

Clearly, whoever came up with this saying wanted to distinguish between the desire to get the grapes, whether right or wrong, and the definitive decision to kill the watchman in order to do so. The latter is what constitutes a transgression and unjustifiable sin. But the people never imagined that the logic of corruption on Earth would reach the level at which the sinner strives to both kill the watchman and ruin the grapes so that he can continue his sin and wrongdoing.

Not much thinking is needed before this saying’s unequivocal application to the “Syrian case” becomes clear. Since the very first moments of the “indirect war” that the “Coalition of Eight,” led by the United States, launched on Syria, trying to kill the watchman to get to the grapes has been the dominant theme. We could even say that claiming to go after the grapes was just a pretext used to conceal the goal of killing the watchman.

They wrapped the grapes, which they were targeting as a cover for their real goal of killing the watchman, in sheets of cellophane with slogans of “freedom,” “democracy” and “human rights” written upon them by liars. Since the very beginning of the contrived attack, they have used these slogans as pretexts for using all devices of “indirect warfare.” They began making what they thought were impossible demands, the sought-after grapes. They talked about abolishing the state of emergency, so the emergency law — not just the state itself — was abolished. Then they talked about abolishing Article 8 of the constitution, so the entire constitution was redrafted and submitted to a referendum. But all of this didn’t alter the conspiracy’s path in the slightest, for they intended to escalate the armed conflict that aims to kill the watchman and conduct all kinds of sabotage.

Those striving to kill the watchman thwarted the both the Arab League monitoring mission in Syria, led by [Mohammed Ahmed Mustafa] al-Dabi’s team, and the mission of Kofi Annan and his observers. They used those two missions as a cover to smuggle weapons and fighters. Then they blockaded Lakhdar Brahimi’s mission, hoping to succeed in killing the watchman, and froze the things agreed upon at the Geneva I conference because they didn’t include the watchman’s death. And now they intend to pump more weapons into Syria before the Geneva II conference takes place on the pretext of creating a military equilibrium on the ground, guaranteeing equality between the watchman and those claiming to be an opposition, obtaining what they call concessions from “both sides” — which means dividing up the grapes — or guaranteeing a “power transition” that for them, would indirectly accomplish the goal of “killing the watchman.” They do this after the watchman proved his ability to protect himself as well as the grapes. Do their current positions on Geneva II mean that they have relinquished the goal of “killing the watchman”?

Before answering this question, we should sort the powers entrenched in the “war” on Syria so that we can see the truth behind their objectives. We can sort them as follows.

1. The fabricated, opportunistic external Syrian opposition. Up to this point, they have not concealed their attempt to kill the watchman and seize the grapes, which, for them, are power in Syria. They realize that there is no way for them to do that democratically and that whoever invites them to the ballot boxes is actually inviting them to divulge their bankruptcy and the loss of the sources of their opportunism.

2. The Zionist entity, whose strategic objectives the entire war serves. It wants to kill the watchman and obtain its share of the grapes in the form of control over part of Syria’s territory. It cannot get that without killing the watchman who guards said territory.

3. Al-Qaida, the terrorist organization, in all its forms. It sees in what is occurring an opportunity to try to raise a caliphate or Islamic emirates. That cannot be achieved without killing the watchman and seizing some or all of the grapes. In other words, it needs to seize part or all of Syria’s geography.

4. The United States, which leads the “Coalition of Eight.” As long as the watchman refuses to submit to its orders, the United States wants to kill him. Similarly, it is interested in controlling the geography and the confirmed and potential resources of the land. For it, “democracy” is just a pretext.

5. All the other Arab and Western parties participating in the “Coalition of Eight.” Some of these parties aspire to obtain shares of the grapes. Others hold grudges that make them want to kill the watchman and cause havoc in the territory. There are some parties that fear that they will be exposed to problems if they fail to kill the watchman.

Today, the grapes are Syria and every territory and person within it. Syria won’t accept being divided up and apportioned out. The watchman is the Syrian people in all its strata and capacities.

If the American liar dresses the “grapes” that he desires in the clothes of “freedom, democracy and human rights,” then he, along with his followers, should respect those clothes in the field. Nothing that contravenes the principle of respecting the Syrian people’s will and implementing it through democratic means should occur.

The grapes and the watchman have become a single, integral and compact entity. Regardless of whether the aggressors want to take them [sic] by force or diplomatic pressure, their attempts will inevitably fail.

Today, Syrians are united in confronting aggression. None of them deviate except for those who have sold their souls to the devil or lost their sight and visions. In contrast, cracks have begun to threaten the composition of the hostile forces.

Does this mean that their war on Syria is over? Do we expect Geneva II to be the last stop for conflict?

Let’s say this: A serious reading of the situation brings back the idea that this war will continue on the ground until it is resolved by force. There are two reasons:

1. There are organizations fighting that have no interest in stopping the killing and sabotage, the most prominent being those subordinate to al-Qaida. There is no central authority that could make them stop, especially if the United States and its followers avoid adopting the measures that isolate them and weed out their terror.

2. Seeing the fighting inside Syria continue to the very last terrorist fighter and the very last bullet is in Israel’s interest because Israel, which has been dreaming about even more than this, will benefit from it. It is now clear that there is a direct link between the Zionist entity and the terrorists.

Conclusive evidence that the Americans don’t want peace nor security for Syria is found in the huge quantities of weapons that they were shipping to the terrorists on the transport ship that split [in half] off the Yemeni shoreline in the Pacific Ocean before it could get to the smuggling destination in the al-Saud family’s kingdom. Rather, the United States is operating on a policy of revenge for what it considers to be an outrage — having failed to kill the watchman, to seize the grapes and to enable Israel to get what it wanted from them. The second piece of evidence favoring this conclusion is that the Taliban’s Afghan Emirate has opened an office in Doha, a measure that has surely come as a culmination of a prior agreement with the Afghan Taliban and al-Qaida, not just as a preliminary step toward this agreement. So nothing prevents the Americans, who are concerned primarily and before all else with Israel, from making a deal with al-Qaida and Afghanistan’s Taliban to, for Israel’s benefit, commit sabotage in Syria, then Lebanon and then Iran — even if that means abandoning [Hamid] Karzai and his government as American forces withdraw from Afghanistan.