And then the CIA allied again with alQaeda when fighting Assad.

And round and round it goes. Too bad the public is made a to be a sucker every time.

They didn't 'ally with Al Qaeda', they just both happened to be opposed to the same guy while also being opposed to each other. It's a complicated situation out there. Even at the height of the Cold War, sometimes the CIA and KGB would share information of mutual benefit. That didn't mean the CIA was allying with communism. Even Trump has learned this when his 'bombing Syria is the wrong thing to do, what Assad gets up to is non America's business anymore' policy lead to Assad feeling free to start nerve gassing civilians again. Oops. Turns out him being against Islamic State doesn't make him our friend either. It's a horrible nasty mess, but even trying to stay out of it just makes you even more vulnerable to even greater problems in the long run.

And yet, the press has done an about-face on Al Qaeda's, referring to its Syrian branch as 'Al-Nusra, a moderate rebel group.'

If I didn't know any better, I'd say that we are being primed for the CIA getting into bed with Islamist terrorists, in order to combat Russian influence in the Middle East. Again.

They've been Al Nusra since 2013 and while they did affiliate with Al Qaeda for a while they split with them about a year ago. They're no angels, for sure, and I wouldn't describe them as moderate, but let's at least get the facts straight. If they can provide intelligence and tactical support against ISIS why turn it down? Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the better-than-nothing.

Even Trump is beginning to understand some of this. It's just a shame so many people in Khan Sheikhoun had to die first.

"And yet, the press has done an about-face on Al Qaeda's, referring to its Syrian branch as 'Al-Nusra, a moderate rebel group."

Substantiate your claim.

"CIA getting into bed with Islamist terrorists"

This is tiresome, just because US govt allies with Muslims that Russia calls terrorists doesn't make them so. In fact, last time I checked Russia works on the ground with Hezbollah, a designated terrorist group. This argument can easily go sideways for people hoisting it up as a mantra.

"The other areas listed are largely dominated by moderate rebel factions or Islamist groups, such as Ahrar al-Sham and the al Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front." [1]

Right. They aren't bad dudes like ISIS, they are just, ah, al-Qaeda's Syrian arm. They are totally on the level.

> This is tiresome, just because US govt allies with Muslims that Russia calls terrorists doesn't make them so.

That's true. Just because Russia says they are terrorists doesn't make them terrorists. And, perhaps, using car bombs, suicide attacks, assassinations, and forced conscription of child soldiers doesn't make them terrorists either.

Strangely enough, all of this seems to be sufficient for the the United States to also designate them to be an islamic terrorist organization. [2] (And then issue diplomatic protests when Russia bombs them.)

[1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-seeks-parliaments-approva...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Nusra_Front

"(And then issue diplomatic protests when Russia bombs them.)"

US has literally never complained when Russia has bombed Nusra. People complain when Russia bombs people then calls them ISIS/AQ. Inanimate grain silos? IS oil facilities according to RU MoD. Hospitals? Nusra strongholds according to RU MoD.

This is what people complain about. If you want to say otherwise please substantiate your claim.

CIA allied with groups that have died fighting al-Qaeda. Just because theft and corruption means material aid given to the groups ended up in AQ's hands doesn't mean CIA allied with al-Qaeda, it shows quite the opposite. SAA goods end up in ISIS's hands by the tons but that doesn't mean they allied with them either.

"Too bad the public is made a to be a sucker"

Who is the sucker here?