If only families of victims of Sep. 11 would know: New York Times offers a pathetic apologia for Al-Qa`idah terrorists

This is a most disturbing piece on many levels.  It basically offers an apologia for Al-Qa`idah terrorists and makes it clear that it was Israel and Jordanian regime which lobbied the Obama administration to shower the Syrian rebels with weapons.  And with all the talk of "meager" US support (this has been the line of all Western correspondents in Beirut) now we know that the CIA program alone ran for 1 $ billion.  And who does this piece interview for an objective assessment? None other than Charles Lister (hear him talk here about his contacts with Al-Qa`idah). And what does Lister tell them? He tells them that 1 $billion was not enough. That there were more weapons needed for the job.  And here New York Times tells readers that Al-Qa`idah means no harm: "Unlike other Qaeda affiliates such as Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the Nusra Front has long focused on battling the Syrian government rather than plotting terrorist attacks against the United States and Europe." It does not mention the bombings and kidnapping which it perpetrated in Lebanon.  New York Times does not want to talk about the forced conversion of Druzes and genocidal threats to minorities.  And whenever you read that Netanyahu and some Arab leader persuaded a US president, you know it means that Netanyahu persuaded the US president (the name of an Arab leader is used to cover up the Israeli involvement in the making of US foreign policy).  "The president’s reversal came in part because of intense lobbying by foreign leaders, including King Abdullah II of Jordan and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel".  But the Times offers us a glimpse of the CIA-trained "moderate Syrian rebels": "White House officials also received periodic reports that the C.I.A.-trained rebels had summarily executed prisoners and committed other violations of the rules of armed conflict. Sometimes the reports led to the C.I.A. suspending cooperation with groups accused of wrongdoing."  And look at this disturbing sentence: "Although the Nusra Front was widely seen as an effective fighting force against Mr. Assad’s troops," Can you imagine? This is like saying that Bin Laden was seen as effective in fighting the US.  But here the Times lies: "Pentagon program that envisioned training and equipping 15,000 Syrian rebels over three years, was canceled in 2015 after producing only a few dozen fighters.)"  In fact, the head of Central Command admitted before Congress that only five fighters remained of that program.