When our wars come home

The response to the attacks against Charlie Hebdo have been varied, from sympathy for the victims, to journalists promising to publish more, from Wikileaks calling for the release of more cartoons, to racist Islamaphobes calling for the death of all Muslims.  But one question has still not been asked. Why did they do this? Yes they can claim it was about cartoons, and it might be that simple that it is about only blaspheming Muhammad in satirical cartoons, but remember that our Judeo/Christian 10 Commandments teach against blasphemy as well. (See also here where I wrote more about this)

Blasphemy is contrary to the respect due God and his holy name. It is in itself a grave sin.

but if it turns out to be true that they were, or identified with, Al Qaeda in Yemen (as appears to be the case), then we can see a larger picture emerging that is not being talked about here.  Yes this was an attack on a newspaper possibly only over cartoons.  But it was still an attack in the streets of Paris, and while it is a rare event, it is happening more frequently.

Our wars are coming home.

We have been at war for more than a decade in almost a dozen countries.  We no longer fight them in our home countries or on our borders.  We send thousands of troops to the other side of the planet and occupy countries for 10 years, arresting all of the men, raping the women, torturing prisoners, bombing neighborhoods and massacring the population.  We don't hear about the everyday atrocities in the news.  Instead we hear platitudes about "supporting our troops" and how we are "freeing people from dictators and tyranny."  Meanwhile when people condemn the violence our soldiers commit in war this is the response.

Unsurprisingly, #tcot cloaks itself in #JeSuisCharlie right after sending @RaniaKhalek & @MaxBlumenthal death threats http://t.co/ju945kQ7xa
— Keane Bhatt (@KeaneBhatt) January 9, 2015

We go to work, we do our errands, pay our bills, entertain ourselves, and then Muslim terrorists kill in our streets and we wonder why, and then proceed to unify against our enemy.

While I condemn violence, terrorists attack us for a reason, as I wrote on Twitter

Odd how terrorists and governments both say same thing "stop bombing us and killing innocent civilians or we will attack you in response"

We only seem to respond to terrorism when it occurs where we live, ignoring it when it is us who carry out attacks, or when the killers are not Muslim, for instance school shootings.  Democracy Now! had two great interviews last week discussing Yemen with Jeremy Scahill and terrorism and cable news terrorism "experts" with Glenn Greenwald.

Glenn said about terrorism that

every time there’s an attack where the assailant or the perpetrator is unknown, the media will say it’s unknown whether or not terrorism is involved. And what they really mean by that is: It’s unknown whether or not the perpetrator is Muslim. And as soon as they discover that the perpetrator is a Christian or is American, a white American, they’ll say, "We now have confirmation that this is not a terrorist attack." It’s something else—someone who’s mentally unstable, some extremist, something like that. It really is a term that functionally now means nothing other than Muslims who engage in violence against the West.

continued

I remember there was an individual named Joseph Stack who flew an airplane into a government building in Texas, into the side of the IRS, actually. And for the first several hours of the reporting, it was said that the suspicion is that this is a terrorist attack, because it was on a government facility. And then when it was discovered that he was actually a right-wing, anti-tax, anti-government American, they said, actually, this isn’t a terrorist attack, this is just kind of this crazy person who did this for political ends.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/08/world/violence-grows-in-yemen-as-al-qaeda-tries-to-fight-its-way-back.html?smid=tw-share

same day as Hebdo was car bomb in Yemen

A large car bomb exploded outside a police academy inYemen’s capital, Sana, early Wednesday, killing or wounding dozens of applicants who were lined up at the building’s gate, according to security officials.

An Interior Ministry official said that at least 38 people had been killed and that more than 90 had been wounded.

Investigators said there was no immediate claim of responsibility for the bombing. The attack was the deadliest in the capital since October, when a suicide bomber killed nearly 50 people at a protest.

Yemeni activist is republishing the cartoons https://twitter.com/BaFana3/status/553042758639042560

shooter ties to Syria fighting probed http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/01/07/252316_suspects-in-paris-terror-attack.html?rh=1

2011 response to Charlie Hebdo publishing cartoons http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/its-charlie-hebdos-right-to-draw-muhammad-but-they-missed-the-opportunity-to-do-something-profound-8435693.html


France's own War on Terror in Africa

France has been fighting it's own War on Terror in Africa which has largely been absent from the headlines.

Operation Barkhane began in August 2014, replacing Operation Serval, the French military mission in Mali, and Operation Epervier, the mission in Chad according to the French Ministry of Defense.

As usual those who scream "Liberty, Equality, Brotherhood, Democracy" intervene when these values interfere with their own definition of the words, usually Western governments or their global allies fighting against people they define as "terrorists"

Mali, France and the war on terror in Africa

When France was weakened by World War II, the peoples of West Africa organized to regain their independence and it was in this region where there were the loudest calls for the establishment of a United States of Africa- then called Union of Independent African States. Soon after the independence of Ghana in 1957, the leaders of Ghana, Guinea and Mali proclaimed a unity based on Pan-African cooperation. Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana and Sekou Toure started this union that was later joined by Modibo Keïta of Mali. Mark DeLancey in his bibliographical essay on the The Ghana - Guinea - Mali Union: exposed the deep interest in that elementary Union and the deployment of western intellectuals to understand the internal dynamics of that Pan African experiment. [1] After the western intellectuals came the military interventions. First Ghana met the fate of the removal of Nkrumah in 1966 and then in 1968 General Moussa Traoré organized a coup d'état against Modibo Keïta, and sent him to prison in the northern Malian town of Kidal.

continued 

In the book, France Soldiers and Africa, Anthony Clayton laid out in graphic detail the military system of France and its impact on both France and Africa. One of the little known aspects of this militarization of Africa was how the French intellectual culture was negatively affected by the history of military engagement and interventions. Between 1960 and 2012 France had undertaken more than one hundred military interventions in Africa. The lowest point of this engagement and its intellectual variant was when France invaded Central Africa to assist those who were carrying out genocide in Rwanda in 1994.

The US and France have increasingly partnered in the war on terror in Africa, launching operations in almost every country as Vice reports (video report Part 1 here)

All of this comes as part of what analysts have dubbed the US military's "pivot to Africa." Although the US has engaged in counterterrorism activities in Africa since 2002, military operations have grown rapidly under the Obama administration. Camp Lemonnier in Djibouti remains the only official, permanent US base in Africa, but over the last decade, a constellation of sites, including "intermediate staging bases," and "cooperative security locations," have spread across the continent. A near-constant rotation of US military personnel, intelligence operatives, and private military contractors who engage in humanitarian missions, civil affairs activities, bilateral training exercises, and covert operations is now underway in almost every country in Africa. (emphasis mine)

"You could call it a fourth front in the war on terror, and it is not very much talked about," Reeve said.

Right.  but it should at least be talked about when once in a while, the war makes it's way back home.

As refugees currently come to Europe by boat from Libya, destroyed by the NATO/US bombing in 2011 that toppled Qadaffi and created a failed state with 2 rival governments, and the more recent refugee crisis from Syria makes headlines, these refugees are supposed to be a reminder that wars abroad have consequences at home.  

Unfortunately for most Europeans and certainly most US politicians, it is just another example of how evil the rest of the world is and how "they" are the ones trying to destroy "our civilization."

Yeah, sure.

Sabrina de Sousa and the Rendition of Abu Omar

Former CIA agent Bob Baer says 

If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan.

If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria.

If you want someone to disappear - never to see them again - you send them to Egypt.

Mother Jones reported that

Then-CIA director George Tenet testified before the 9/11 Commission that there were more than 80 renditions before September 11, 2001. We found information on 29 cases of extraordinary and ordinary rendition prior to 9/11. Of the 14 that qualify as extraordinary renditions, 12 were to Egypt.

This is the story of Abu Omar, a prisoner sent to Egypt that we heard from again, and Sabrina de Sousa, one of the CIA agents charged in his rendition case of kidnapping.  Both continue to fight for justice more than 10 years later.  Abu Omar's case was heard on June 23, 2015 at the European Court of Human Rights.  Italy denied it's role in the rendition, claiming that Abu Omar

“was captured exclusively by CIA agents”, Paolo Accardo, lawyer for the Italian government, told the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

“The applicant was never – not even for one moment – in the hands of Italian authorities, nor has he been lawfully detained for some time by Italian authorities,” said Accardo.

The Rendition

On February 17, 2003 as more than 3 million protesters gathered in Rome against the imminent war in Iraq, with millions more protesting in cities around the world, Sabrina de Sousa was

chaperoning her son’s high school trip at Madonna Di Campiglio, a popular ski area in northern Italy.

Working for the CIA since the mid-1990's, she was transferred to the US Consulate in Milan in the spring of 2001.

She was one of more than 20 convicted in 2009 in absentia of orchestrating the rendition of Abu Omar from Italy to Egypt.

She was denied immunity from the State Department and has been fighting ever since to clear her name and hold those who are responsible accountable for the kidnapping and torture of an innocent man. The CIA has denied the existence of records

pertaining to the U.S. government's investigation of Abu Omar's rendition as well as determinations concerning the government's obligation to defend her.

Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, known as Abu Omar, a radical Egyptian cleric, had lived in Italy since 2001 (according to the Italian arrest warrant for Betnie Medero, Vincent Faldo and James Thomas Harbison) after receiving political asylum after the Egyptian government alleged that he was part of a terrorist group.  

In 2002 Egypt issued an arrest warrant for him after it was requested that they do so by Jeffrey Castelli.

While in Italy, Abu Omar spoke out publicly and vehemently against U.S. military action in Iraq prior to the March 2003 invasion. Italy responded by placing him under surveillance.

However at the time of his rendition Abu Omar was not under investigation.

The Kidnapping

Around noon on Monday, Feb. 17, 2003, Abu Omar left his apartment on Via Guerzoni in Milan for his daily walk to his mosque. Some at the CIA believed he had been plotting a 2002 attack against a bus full of students headed to an American school in Milan, Italian court records say.

A small car purred alongside him. Then a big white van. An Italian law enforcement official, who was collaborating with the CIA team, stepped out of the car and asked to see Omar’s identification. Moments later, two men burst out of the van. Omar, a hefty man, then about 40, was forced into the back. His mouth was taped shut. His feet and hands were bound. He was blindfolded, according to Italian court documents.

Hours later, the van sped onto Aviano Air Base in northeast Italy. From there, Omar was flown to a U.S. air base in Germany, then on to Egypt, where he was thrown into a Cairo prison. He was beaten, his wife told Italian investigators, according to the court documents. His genitals, she said, were subjected to electric shocks.

(Harvard National Security Journal footnote 2 page 2)

The abduction purportedly derailed Italy’s investigation of Omar. An Italian counterterrorism prosecutor claimed that “if Abu Omar had not been kidnapped, he would now be in [an Italian] prison, subject to a regular trial, and we would have probably identified his other accomplices.”

Italian counter-terrorism officials claimed that Omar fought in Bosnia and Afghanistan and recruited fighters for extremist Islamic causes. Omar’s attorney acknowledged that Omar illegally entered Italy in 1997 but that prior to that he had merely been traveling in Jordan, Yemen, Albania, and Germany. (MSNBC)

The court referred to Omar as a “[m]ilitant in Egypt of the Egyptian extremist organization Gama’a al Islamiya.” (footnote 1 pg 172)

The Trial

By analyzing cell phone records Italian prosecutors were able to "In July 2006, the prosecutor issued an arrest warrant for De Sousa, whom he identified as one of the four U.S. officials mainly responsible for the alleged kidnapping."

Abu Omar ultimately was not charged with a crime and was released in February 2007.

That same month, an Italian judge indicted 26 U.S. government officials, including the plaintiff, for their alleged roles in the kidnapping. Six Italian officials were also charged.  Abu Omar, for his part, filed a separate civil suit in Italy.

Sabrina de Sousa returned to the United States in early 2004 after finishing her tour of duty in Italy.  (Pg 3, Opinion, Sabrina de Sousa vs State Dept)

The State Department only invoked diplomatic immunity for one person, Robert Seldon Lady, allegedly the CIA station chief in Milan.

"Lady received a sentence of eight years. The Italian judge found that a third alleged CIA operative, Jeffrey Castelli, the alleged CIA station chief in Rome, could not be convicted because he possessed diplomatic immunity."

In 2009 de Sousa sued the State Department for failing to invoke diplomatic immunity, and in November 2014

She submitted FOIA requests to State, the CIA, and the Department of Defense for records pertaining to the U.S. government's investigation of Abu Omar's rendition as well as determinations concerning the government's obligation to defend her. The CIA issued a Glomar response neither confirming nor denying the existence of records. The other agencies did not substantively respond to her requests and De Sousa finally filed suit.

According to an exchange with a prosecutor, Mr Spataro, Abu Omar may have been kidnapped in order to recruit him as an agent.

"With regard to the question of whether Abu Omar had been kidnapped with the objective of recruiting him, Mr Spataro said that it was possible that there had been attempts to recruit him after the kidnapping, but he did not consider that Abu Omar’s possible recruitment was the aim of the kidnapping."

Map of CIA Rendition Flights from Mother Jones

Abu Omar Rendition 

In a 2007 Congressional hearing (video 2hrs 39) former CIA agent Michael Scheuer testified that

to the best of my knowledge, not a single target of rendition has ever been kidnapped by CIA officers. The claims to the contrary by the Swedish Government regarding Mr. Aghiza and his associate and those by the Italian Government regarding Abu Omar are either misstatements or lies by those governments.

An Italian arrest warrant issued on September 27, 2005 goes into more details about the torture Abu Omar endured, including threats made against his family as well.

Page 6

he added that he was made to sign a statement after the torture where he declared he had turned himself in to the Egyptian authorities of his own free will…

According to my husband, at first the Egyptians were astounded at having him there with them; this fueled my husband’s belief that he had not been kidnapped by Egyptians.. once freed, the Egyptian authorities told him he could go back to his work in Egypt, open up a store or even take up studying again, but he had to stay away from spreading any kind of Islamic propaganda. Some of the details I am recounting have also been learnt by my sister-in-law… I cannot provide precise information as to the traumas he endured.. I heard about the torture from his kin... at any rate, he said he had lost about 20 kilos as a result of the detention.. I do not believe my husband was able to provide any of the information they were after.. they merely ordered him to quit his propaganda activities..

Here from pages 7-8

"He had to meet an important personality.. the Egyptian Home Secretary HABIB AL ADLY…. In fact the minister… basically told him that if he agreed to work as an infiltrator for the Egyptian secret service, he would be home in 48 hours… otherwise he would have to bear full responsibility for his refusal.. Abu Omar refused.. he was forthwith taken to other Cairo premises, also managed by the secret service, where he stayed continually until his release on April 20th 2004.. He was subjected to serious torture.. the first measure was to leave him in a room where incredibly loud and unbearable noise was made.. he has experienced damage to his hearing.. The second kind of torture was to place him in a sauna at tremendous temperature and straight after to put him in a cold storeroom.. occasioning terrible pain to his bones.. as if they were cracking.. The third was to hang him upside down.. and apply live wires to the sensitive parts of the body including his genitals.. and producing electric shocks.. he has suffered damage to his motory and urinary systems.. he became incontinent.. They tortured him accusing him of being an Al Quaeda terrorist and a militant against the Egyptian regime.. they wanted to wrest information from him that he was unable to give.. they told him to consider himself, along with myself, Abu Imad (i.e. the imam of V.le Jenner) and Abu Saleh as terrorists … and that sooner or later the same fate would befall the three of us.. they would catch us as soon as possible.. they said they had agreements with the Italian authorities… that could easily ensure our capture.. If we didn’t turn ourselves in voluntarily.. they would kidnap us…

He told me the torture had been particularly ferocious for the first seven months in detention.. it had then diminished.. except whenever questions were asked about his role and his alleged involvement.. in the final stage of detention.. he underwent medical treatment.. also after his release.. He told me that he had been summoned one day by one of the superintendents of the secret service, who said that if he wanted to get out alive from that jail, he would have to declare he had left Italy for Egypt voluntarily, in order to clear his position.. he would have to keep quiet on everything else.. from the abduction to the torture.. they told him they would find out about any violation of the rules since everything was “under surveillance” also with the backing of the Egyptian judiciary.. if he rejected this proposal.. he would not leave the prison alive.. Before making a decision Abu Omar consulted other inmates.. who told him nobody gets out alive from that jail.. so they told him to accept.. So he did.. he was taken to an office in Alexandria.. he brother was told to fetch him there.. upon release Abu Omar was deprived of his papers.. and he was ordered not to disclose anything to anyone neither in Italy, nor Egypt, and certainly not to the press.. Abu Omar “breached” the agreement.. and for fear of being arrested again, he asked me not to divulge the information I had given him.. I had no other direct communication with Abu Omar aside from that first time and on May 7th.. for all other matters, I just got news from his wife..”

Abu Omar was only one of more than 50 people who were renditioned that Mother Jones magzine was able to count as of 2008 

What is Rendition and why was it used?  Amnesty International said in a statement for the record that

Amnesty International uses the term ‘‘rendition’’ to describe the transfer of individuals from one country to another, by means that bypass all judicial and administrative due process. In the ‘‘war on terror’’ context, the practice is mainly—although not exclusively—initiated by the United States, and carried out with the collaboration, complicity or acquiescence of other governments. The most widely known manifestation of rendition is the secret transfer of terror suspects into the custody of other states—including Egypt, Jordan, and Syria—where physical and psychological brutality feature prominently in interrogations. The rendition network’s aim is to use whatever means necessary to gather intelligence, and to keep detainees away from any judicial oversight.

However, the rendition network has also served to transfer people into U.S. custody, where they may end up in detention centers in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Iraq, or Afghanistan, or in secret facilities known as ‘‘black sites’’ run by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). In a number of cases, individuals have been transferred in and out of U.S. custody several times.

continued

Rendition is sometimes presented simply as an efficient means of transporting terror suspects from one place to another without red tape. Such benign characterizations conceal the truth about a system that puts the victim beyond the protection of the law, and sets the perpetrator above it.

Renditions involve multiple layers of human rights violations. Most victims of rendition were arrested and detained illegally in the first place: some were abducted; others were denied access to any legal process, including the ability to challenge the decision to transfer them because of the risk of torture. There is also a close link between renditions and enforced disappearances. Many of those who have been illegally detained in one country and illegally transported to another have subsequently ‘‘disappeared,’’ including dozens who have ‘‘disappeared’’ in U.S. custody. Every one of the victims of rendition interviewed by Amnesty International has described incidents of torture and other ill-treatment. Because of the secrecy surrounding the practice of rendition, and because many of the victims have ‘‘disappeared,’’ it is difficult to estimate the scope of the program.

In many countries, families are reluctant to report their relatives as missing for fear that intelligence officials will turn their attention on them. The number of renditions cases currently appears to be in the hundreds: Egypt’s Prime Minister noted in 2005 that the United States had transferred some 60–70 detainees to Egypt alone, and a former CIA agent with experience in the region believes that hundreds of detainees have been sent by the United States to prisons in the Middle East. However, this is a minimum estimate. Rendition, like ‘‘disappearance,’’ is designed to evade public and judicial scrutiny, to hide the identity of the perpetrators and the fate of the victims."

On page 12 Michael Scheuer testified about the origin of the rendition program under President Clinton

The CIA’s Rendition Program began in late summer, 1995. I authored it and then ran and managed it against al-Qaeda leaders and other Sunni Islamists from August, 1995, until June, 1999. There were only two goals for the program: First, to take men off the street who were planning or had been involved in attacks on the United States or its allies; second, to seize hard copy or electronic documents in their possession when arrested. Americans were never expected to read those, and they could provide options for follow-on operations.

I would like to add interrogation was never a goal under President Clinton. Why? Because it would be a foreign intelligence or security service without CIA being present or in control who would conduct the interrogation, because the take from the interrogation would be filtered by that service holding the individual and we never knew if it was complete or distorted, and because torture might be used and the information might be simply what an individual thought we wanted to hear.

The Rendition Program was initiated because President Clinton and Messrs. Lake, Berger and Clarke requested that the CIA begin to attack and dismantle al-Qaeda. These men made it clear from the first that they did not want to bring those captured to the United States or to hold them in U.S. custody. President Clinton and his national security team directed the CIA to take each captured al-Qaeda leader to the country which had an outstanding legal process for him. This was a hard-and-fast rule which greatly restricted CIA’s ability to confront al-Qaeda because we could only focus on al-Qaeda leaders who were wanted somewhere for a legal process. As a result, many al-Qaeda fighters we knew of and who were dangerous to America could not be captured.

CIA warned the President and his National Security Council that the U.S. State Department had and would identify the countries to which the captured fighters were being delivered as human rights abusers.

In response, President Clinton and his team asked if CIA could get each receiving country to guarantee that it would treat a person according to its own laws. This was no problem, and we did so. I have read and been told that Mr. Clinton, Mr. Berger and Mr. Clarke have said, since 9/11, that they insisted that each receiving country treat the rendered person it received according to U.S. legal standards. To the best of my memory, that is a lie.

Amnesty International called for accountability for renditions (PDF pg 5)

It is Amnesty International’s position that it is the illegal behavior of U.S. agents overseas and policies that directly contravene international law that have interfered with U.S. relations with its allies. Rather than criticize European bodies for investigating alleged human rights abuses, the United States should fulfill its own responsibility to conduct investigations and cooperate with others in order to ensure transparency and accountability for policies that violate its laws and treaty obligations.

..... 

No diplomatic assurances

• Prohibit the return or transfer of people to places where they are at risk of torture or other ill-treatment.

• Do not require or accept ‘‘diplomatic assurances’’ or similar bilateral agreements to justify renditions or any other form of involuntary transfers of individuals to countries where there is a risk of torture or other ill-treatment.

..... 

Julianne Smith, director and senior fellow, Europe program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), told the hearing that (PDF pg 6)

When it was alleged, however, later in 2005—at the end of 2005 that the United States was detaining top terror suspects in so-called ‘‘black sites’’ in eight countries and that the CIA was flying terror suspects between secret prisons and countries in the Middle East that have been known to torture detainees, the United States image in Europe took another dive.

On the particular issues of rendition, as we have heard earlier, Europeans appear to have two primary concerns, one, Washington’s unwillingness to grant due process to terror suspects and, two, violation of suspects’ human rights during interrogation.

How rendition hurts US intelligence relationships with other countries

pg 9

the United States knowingly removed one of Italy’s better sources in an ongoing investigation. According to a piece in The Chicago Tribune by John Crewdson in January of this year, the Italian intelligence services had had Abu Omar under surveillance for months. Through wire tapping and videotaping, the Italians were investigating Omar’s suspected role in helping young European Muslims travel to Iraq to fight against the anticipated invasion. When the CIA abducted Omar in Milan in February 2003 (despite its knowledge of the Italian surveillance operation), the trail went cold, ending a major Italian investigation. While it is still too early to tell, one wonders whether or not DIGOS, Italy’s anti-terrorist unit (which was not informed of the decision to render Omar), will be as forthcoming with intelligence next time they coordinate with the United States on similar matters.

In an interview with Democracy Now in October 2006 journalist Stephen Grey, who first exposed the use of renditions brilliantly explained the contradictions between the Bush Administration calling for democracy in the Middle East while cooperating with these dictatorships by sending accused terrorists to countries that knowingly torture,

they've talked about their agenda of spreading freedom and democracy in the Middle East, and yet the same people who are preventing that democracy from happening, the secret police of these countries, are on the other hand referred to as liaison partners in the war on terror, people we work with, the same people who are locking up dissidents who want to bring the kind of democracy that everyone, I think, in the United States would like to see in these countries.

The American people have been asking since 9/11 "why do they hate us?"  Our hypocrisy towards torture and rendition is certainly a large part of it, because people in the Middle East know what their governments do with the help of the United States, and it is only Americans are the ones kept in the dark.

Recently the link between Egypt and Italy has been in the news again as ISIS claimed responsibility for bombing the Italian consulate in Cairo.

NYT

The Islamic State group claimed responsibility for a powerful explosion outside the Italian Consulate’s compound in downtown Cairo early Saturday that killed one person and was the first major bombing of a foreign diplomatic mission since the start of an insurgency here nearly two years ago.

The explosion, which occurred about 6:15 a.m., jolted residents awake across the city and brought down slabs of the consulate’s outer walls. Initial reports from state television said the explosion was caused by a car bomb that had detonated near one of Cairo’s busiest intersections and under a major bridge.

....

Over the past few weeks, militants have assassinated the country’s top prosecutor, carried out a large-scale assault on troops stationed in the Sinai Peninsula and tried to attack Egypt’s best-known tourist attractions.

....

The attack on Saturday raised new questions about whether the government’s strategy — including its sweeping crackdown on dissidents — could tame the insurgency. Rather, the militants appeared to be broadening the scope of their attacks after months of targeting the security services and killing hundreds of police officers and soldiers.

Unlike previous statements, the claim of responsibility for the bombing on Saturday did not carry the logo of the “Sinai Province,” an Egyptian group based in the Sinai Peninsula that has claimed responsibility for several deadly attacks and last year declared its affiliation with the Islamic State, also known as ISIS. It was not clear whether the logo on the latest statement — which said “Islamic State, Egypt” — was meant to announce the arrival of a new group.

The statement did not say why the Italian Consulate had been targeted. The compound was far less heavily fortified than other Western diplomatic missions.

An Italian diplomat told The Associated Press that the consulate was closed at the time and that no staff members were wounded.

At least nine people were wounded, including a police officer and three passers-by who were from the same family, a Health Ministry spokesman said.

The New York Times said that ISIS did not say why they attacked the Italian Consulate, and while some have talked about ISIS's desire to attack Rome as some apocalyptic goal, others have said it was simply a Western target, and the timing would indicate that casualties were not the aim.

Carol Grayson says that the group is the former affiliate

An IS affiliate previously known as Sinai Province posted their statement of responsibility on the bombing on social media. IS operatives haven’t yet reached Rome in their advance of the Caliphate however they are edging ever closer with today’s attack on an Italian institution.

While ISIS apparently did not cite a reason to targeting the Italian Consulate, other jihadis seem to be protesting the crackdown by the Egyptian coup government 

Egypt has been rocked by violence since then army chief Sisi overthrew Islamist president Mohamed Morsi in July 2013.

In an ensuing government crackdown, hundreds have been killed and thousands imprisoned, mostly supporters of Morsi.

Jihadists say their attacks are in retaliation for the crackdown.

Expect more attacks to continue as the response from Italy is more violence in response to violence

Following the blast, Italian Foreign Minister Paolo Gentiloni said in a message posted on Twitter, “Italy will not let itself be intimidated,” announcing his country’s intention “to respond firmly but also soberly... without alarmism.”

No Italian was killed or hurt in the blast, he said.

Prime Minister Matteo Renzi also said Rome and Cairo would stand together “in the fight against terrorism and fanaticism.”

EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, for her part, condemned the attack and said, “We stand by the Egyptian authorities in their efforts to fight terrorism and bring the perpetrators of this attack to justice.”

The Independent reports that  

The Italian Prime Minister, Matteo Renzi, spoke with President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi of Egypt after the attack. According to a statement released later from Mr Renzi’s office, he expressed his strong support: “We will not leave Egypt alone: Italy and Egypt are and will always be together in the fight against terrorism.”

More on the US raid against Abu Sayyaf

Updating my thoughts on the raid that killed ISIS oil finance minister Abu Sayyaf and captured his wife Umm Sayyaf.

Adam Johnson in an article for FAIR writes how the Mainstream media, blindly following the Obama Administration's claims of another "success" against ISIS failed to remind readers that the US had just put boots on the ground in Syria

Per usual, the media would retell the narrative based entirely on Pentagon and White House action movie prose. Just as with the bin Laden raid narrative—that later turned out to be mostly false—this tale involved some unbelievably compelling details: “rescuing a Yazidi slave,” “hand-to-hand combat,” “women and children as human shields,” “precise fire” (that, of course, avoided these women and children), and a body count, “40 extremists,” that would make Jack Bauer blush.

continued

given that the last such politically loaded raid, on the bin Laden “compound” in Pakistan, turned out to be full of White House lies—to say nothing of Seymour Hersh’s recent, high-profile allegations that theentire thing was staged—you’d think a bit of skepticism would be in order. But, in a world of mass information asymmetry, the government’s word on these matters is treated as the authoritative one until proven otherwise.

This routine problem, however, is not the real journalistic crime here. The real issue is that the White House just admitted it has American ground troops engaged in combat missions in Syria—and no one seemed to notice, much less care.

While it’s true the White House has acknowledged hostage rescue missions in Syria, this is the first time it’s admitted soldiers have been deployed inside Syria for expressly military purposes.

I wonder what percentage of reporters being spoonfed this raid in Syria know that "Abu" and "Umm" aren't their real names.

— Dan Murphy (@bungdan) May 16, 2015

.@bungdan Of interest here is that Syrian government also claims the raid but uses name "Abu al-Taym al-Saudi"

— Moon of Alabama (@MoonofA) May 16, 2015

.@chinahand @bungdan To add to confusion SOHR says it was an airstrike! So what was it really? Flip flop on the grounds? Oil-"barrel bombs"?

— Moon of Alabama (@MoonofA) May 16, 2015

@chinahand Cognizant that raid happened just after Mohammed bin Nayef was in country. @MoonofA @bungdan

— emptywheel (@emptywheel) May 16, 2015

@chinahand But I doubt this is pushback on Hersh, bc it already feels too similar. They're not that dumb. @bungdan @MoonofA

— emptywheel (@emptywheel) May 16, 2015

US spec ops literally had to 'shoot around' human shields to kill ISIS' #AbuSayyaf. http://t.co/W15RvaCxtl

— Noah Shachtman (@NoahShachtman) May 16, 2015

Abu Sayyaf wasn't the only one targeted. Also, @MPPregent made me laugh today. http://t.co/eVgSHWmlIp pic.twitter.com/hrmeZOPkbp

— Michael Weiss (@michaeldweiss) May 16, 2015

I noticed a few things from the Daily Beast article.  One is that here there is not mention that Umm Sayyaf was an initial target of the raid like the White House and Pentagon said in their statements.

His wife, an Iraqi national, and an 18-year-old Yazidi slave were taken out of the compound, as well as computers, cell phones and other forms of potential intelligence sources, which U.S. officials already believe will be valuable.

continued 

U.S. officials suspect that Abu Sayyaf's wife, Umm Sayyaf, is also a member the group and "played an important role in ISIL’s terrorist activities, and may have been complicit in the enslavement of the young woman rescued last night."

U.S. officials are questioning Umm Sayyaf, an Iraqi national, and still have not determined what will happen to her. Among the options being considered is releasing her or turning her over to Iraqi custody.

(Abu and Umm Sayaf are nom de guerres, meaning Father and Mother of Sayyaf, but defense officials said they did not have their actual names to release.)

continued

Another senior US official, who asked not to be identified for this article, told The Daily Beast that Abu Sayyaf was one of several ISIS figures targeted in the raid but that the others had left before the strike-force arrived, suggesting although the mission had been fully successful, US commanders were hoping to ensnare bigger ISIS leaders.

Political activists in the area say another ISIS oil emir, a Saudi national, was killed in the raid as well. They also say that Abu Sayyaf’s wife is a relative of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, although it is not clear whether by blood or marriage. 

I thought Obama promised no boots on the ground. http://t.co/KjYmRK5SZL

— Ali Gharib (@Ali_Gharib) May 16, 2015

Adam concludes by saying

What the media rarely do is stop to put things in context. It’s the slow drip of a war that’s sold to an American public in small, disconnected parts, so we don’t notice.

Put another way: If we were told in August 2014 that within a year, the US would have ground troops carrying out raids in Syria and Iraq, as well as bombing in both countries, would we have agreed?

The US raid in Syria

**Update
I do not know yet whether Umm Sayyaf was a target before the raid or that is just what they said after raid happened--Remember that Syria spoke first (h/t Moon of Alabama)

John Bellinger wrote about some of the legal aspects of the raid and the detention of Umm Sayyaf at Lawfare

Presumably, the domestic law authority both for the raid, and for the detention, is the 2001 AUMF, upon which the Obama Administration has been relying since last September for military operations against ISIS, despite the near unanimous agreement of observers that it is legal stretch to do so (given that the 2001 AUMF is directed at the “nations, organizations, or persons” responsible for the 9-11 attacks). It’s especially ironic that the Administration would continue to rely on the 2001 AUMF for detention for ISIS members, given that President Obama has repeatedly said that he wants to “repeal” the 2001 AUMF.

State Department said in its daily briefing on Monday that yes Umm Sayyaf is being detained under 2001 and 2002 AUMF authorities

MR RATHKE: -- for detention, the President has authority under the 2001 and 2002 AUMFs, and the international legal basis for this detention is the consent of the Government of Iraq in the context of the ongoing military operations in Iraq and Syria against ISIL.

Main Article

The weekend after Seymour Hersh's exposé about the lies told by the White House about the raid that killed Osama bin Laden and as a reminder that we are at war in Iraq and Syria, and we have more than 3,000 boots on the ground, US special operations forces conducted a raid against ISIS's oil and finance "minister" known as Abu Sayyaf in al-Amr Syria.  According to the White House National Security Council and The Pentagon statements about the raid, but left out of most newspaper accounts is that Abu Sayyaf's wife, known as Umm, was an intended target of the raid, and not a bonus after-thought as described in most accounts.

White House NSC (emphasis mine)

Last night, at the President’s direction, U.S. personnel based out of Iraq conducted an operation in al-Amr in eastern Syria to capture an ISIL senior leader known as Abu Sayyaf and his wife Umm Sayyaf. During the course of the operation, Abu Sayyaf was killed when he engaged U.S. forces.

Pentagon (emphasis mine)

WASHINGTON, May 16, 2015 – Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced in a statement today that U.S. special operations forces yesterday conducted an operation in Syria to capture a senior leader of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant terrorist organization.

“Last night, at the direction of the Commander in Chief, I ordered U.S. special operations forces to conduct an operation in al-Amr in eastern Syria to capture an ISIL senior leader known as Abu Sayyaf and his wife Umm Sayyaf,” Carter said.

Abu Sayyaf was involved in ISIL's military operations and also helped direct the terrorist organization's illicit oil, gas and financial operations, the defense secretary said.

“Abu Sayyaf was killed during the course of the operation when he engaged U.S. forces,” he said.

“U.S. forces captured Umm Sayyaf, who we suspect is a member of ISIL, played an important role in ISIL's terrorist activities, and may have been complicit in what appears to have been the enslavement of a young Yezidi woman rescued last night,” Carter said.

New York Times (emphasis mine)

American Special Operations forces mounted a rare raid into eastern Syria early Saturday, killing a leader of the Islamic State and about a dozen militant fighters, as well as capturing his wife

nowhere does it mention that she was an intended target of the raid (emphasis mine)

Bruce O. Riedel, a former C.I.A. analyst now at the Brookings Institution, said the operation looked like “a collection mission, the goal to capture someone or two someones who can explain how ISIS works.” With Abu Sayyaf now dead, he said, “perhaps the wife can do that.”

McClatchy (selected)

Captured alive in the operation was the man’s wife, who officials identified as Umm Sayyaf. She was taken back to Iraq for questioning.

It was unclear what would become of Umm Sayyaf. In its statements, the Obama administration said it believed she was a member of the Islamic State

whether Umm Sayyaf could be charged with a crime was uncertain.

The United States will follow “its usual practice” and provide the International Committee of the Red Cross” access to Umm Sayyaf, Meehan said.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/05/16/266909/us-says-it-killed-isis-finance.html#storylink=cpy

Emptywheel writes about Ron Wyden's "guess where John Brennan lied" and brings up Moon of Alabama's article asking about Syria's cooperation in the raid which is denied by everyone in every story.

Jeremy Scahill adds that this is part of the increase in ground troops in Syria

Regarding the reported SOF raid that killed Abu Sayyaf in Syria, remember that Brig. Gen. Michael Nagata was deployed to run a covert war

— jeremy scahill (@jeremyscahill) May 17, 2015

Nagata is black ops guy w long history of running covert SOF ops. This is just the beginning of increase of boots on the ground ops in Syria

— jeremy scahill (@jeremyscahill) May 17, 2015

Additionally while searching for articles about the raid I found another Abu Sayyaf (Jama'ah Abu Sayyaf terror group) from the Philippines and another raid conducted this weekend

Straits Times

TUBURAN, Philippines (AFP) - Government forces in the southern Philippines said Saturday they were hunting a suspected Malaysian bomb-maker who may be helping the Abu Sayyaf extremists.

The suspect, identified as Mohammad Najib, is believed to have fled after troops overran one of their bomb-making camps on the southern island of Basilan on Thursday, said Colonel Joselito Rolando Bautista, the island's military commander.

Three militants and one soldier were killed when soldiers overran the camp of the Abu Sayyaf group, an armed band founded in the 1990s with seed money from Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda network.

Phil Star

MOHAMMED AJUL, Basilan — Government forces retook two villages from the control of the Abu Sayyaf group and a Malaysian bomb maker who have pledged allegiance to the Islamic State (ISIS) after days of operations.

Barangay Tuburan Proper and Barangay Languyan, however, resemble ghost towns as more than 700 families have evacuated to other areas.

Houses were locked except for few civilians who dared to stay despite the presence of troops here Saturday.

The local police station, which was occupied by the group of Abu Sayyaf leader Ustadz Abbas Alam and Malaysian bombing suspect Mohammad Najib alias Anas, was also recovered earlier by the combined the Army's Scout Rangers and Special Forces at Barangay Tuburan.

The troops also cleared the adjacent village of Sitio Project Site where Alam and his Malaysian militant cohort converted his house into quarters for rebels and a makeshift bomb factory.

The clearing operation followed the offensive Thursday that left three militants killed and several others wounded.

The clearing was completed Saturday morning after it was rigged with several improved explosive devices, or IEDs, by militant groups who had slowed down the offensive since Thursday, Lt. Gen. Rustico Guerrero, commander of Western Mindanao Command (Westmincom) said.

The campaign left government forces with one soldier killed and eight others wounded.

Guerrero, who personally visited the troops and assessed the operation on ground, said soldiers recovered 50 pieces of pipe bomb casings fashioned with 4 x 12 inches of steel pipes, three liquefied gas tanks, an four-liter IED, radio transceivers, wires and other bomb equipment.

Also recovered were several "shahada" flags, known internationally as black flags similar to banners used by the ISIS.

Also I found that

Slate U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have stolen millions thru bribery, rigged contracts

Troops were selling the U.S. military’s fuel to Afghan locals on the side, and pocketing the proceeds.

Former Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction Stuart Bowen, who served as the principal watchdog for wrongdoing in Iraq from 2004 to 2013, said he suspected “the fraud … among U.S. military personnel and contractors was much higher” than what he and his colleagues were able to prosecute. John F. Sopko, his contemporary counterpart in Afghanistan, said his agency has probably uncovered less than half of the fraud committed by members of the military in Afghanistan.

 As of February, he said he had 327 active investigations still under way, involving 31 members of the military. “You don’t appreciate how much money is being stolen in Afghanistan until you go over there,” said Sopko, who says price-fixing and other forms of financial corruption are rampant in Afghanistan.

April 23, 2015 New York Times U.S. Weighs Training Iraqis to Call in American Airstrikes in ISIS Fight

A senior Obama administration official said Thursday that the United States was looking for ways to speed up United States bombing attacks on Islamic State militants, including a plan to train Iraqi troops to spot targets for American airstrikes.

Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq complained during his visit to Washington last week that it had been taking too long for the United States to carry out airstrikes on behalf of Iraqi forces. But a major constraint to shortening the time to conduct such strikes is that the White House has not authorized troops to accompany Iraqi forces on the battlefield and call in American and allied bombing attacks.

Knowing what you know now, would you have invaded Iraq? Rand Paul and many others have another question for Hillary Clinton--knowing what you know now, would you have overthrown Gaddafi in Libya?

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/05/16/266909/us-says-it-killed-isis-finance.html#storylink=cpy

Afghan President Visits US as US extends trip there and we charge soldier with desertion for leaving

Turns out we aren't leaving after all.  Remember Biden's statement from the debate in 2012?



Or Obama in December "ending" the war in Afghanistan?
Statement by the President on the End of the Combat Mission in Afghanistan

Today's ceremony in Kabul marks a milestone for our country. For more than 13 years, ever since nearly 3,000 innocent lives were taken from us on 9/11, our nation has been at war in Afghanistan. Now, thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of our men and women in uniform, our combat mission in Afghanistan is ending, and the longest war in American history is coming to a responsible conclusion.

continued

Afghanistan remains a dangerous place, and the Afghan people and their security forces continue to make tremendous sacrifices in defense of their country. At the invitation of the Afghan government, and to preserve the gains we have made together, the United States--along with our allies and partners--will maintain a limited military presence in Afghanistan to train, advise and assist Afghan forces and to conduct counterterrorism operations against the remnants of al Qaeda. Our personnel will continue to face risks, but this reflects the enduring commitment of the United States to the Afghan people and to a united, secure and sovereign Afghanistan that is never again used as a source of attacks against our nation.

These past 13 years have tested our nation and our military. But compared to the nearly 180,000 American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan when I took office, we now have fewer than 15,000 in those countries. Some 90 percent of our troops are home.

In December Obama said 180,000 troops, and yesterday he said

At our peak four years ago, the United States had more than 100,000 troops in Afghanistan

Here is where he publicly announces changing the troop withdrawal timeline

As we announced yesterday, we’ll work with Congress on funding to sustain 352,000 Afghan police and troops through 2017. At the same time, we’ll continue to conduct targeted counterterrorism operations, and we agreed to maintain a dialogue on our counterterrorism partnership in the years ahead.

At our peak four years ago, the United States had more than 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. In support of today’s narrow missions, we have just under 10,000 troops there. Last year, I announced a timeline for drawing down our forces further, and I’ve made it clear that we’re determined to preserve the gains our troops have won. President Ghani has requested some flexibility on our drawdown timelines. I’ve consulted with General Campbell in Afghanistan and my national security team, and I’ve decided that we will maintain our current posture of 9,800 troops through the end of this year.

The specific trajectory of the 2016 drawdown will be established later this year to enable our final consolidation to a Kabul-based embassy presence by the end of 2016. This flexibility reflects our reinvigorated partnership with Afghanistan, which is aimed at making Afghanistan secure and preventing it from being used to launch terrorist attacks. Reconciliation and a political settlement remain the surest way to achieve the full drawdown of U.S. and foreign troops from Afghanistan in a way that safeguards international interests and peace in Afghanistan, as well as U.S. national security interests.

Defense contractors are happy about ISIS because they had been losing money from the withdrawal in Afghanistan

Sales slumped 8.5 percent to 16.64 billion pounds as a result of a 600 million-pound hit from exchange-rate changes and lower volumes in the Land & Armaments unit, where demand has dropped with the exit from Afghanistan

Meanwhile we've known that secretly Obama has slowed the withdrawal from Afghanistan since the end of November as he announced an increased role for remaining troops (just as the NATO mission was ending)

President Obama decided in recent weeks to authorize a more expansive mission for the military in Afghanistan in 2015 than originally planned, a move that ensures American troops will have a direct role in fighting in the war-ravaged country for at least another year.

Delaying the closure of two key bases in Kandahar and Jalalabad.

Nominating war hawk Ashton Carter to take over for Chuck Hagel.

In his nomination hearing Carter said as much that we need to keep troops there longer and that he would tell Obama that

Carter: I think that success is possible there but, as you indicate, requires the United States to continue its campaign and finish the job. I understand we have a plan. The President has a plan. I support that plan. At the same time, it is a plan. And if I am confirmed and I ascertain, as the years ago [sic] by, that we need to change that plan, I will recommend those changes to the President.

Chairman McCain: Well, all I can say is it is not a matter of years. It is a matter of weeks, actually, because one of the major withdrawals is going to start this coming June.

Senator McCain and other Republicans have long cited the rise of ISIS as a result of Obama's "decision" to withdraw troops from Iraq instead of the invasion in 2003 as the real cause.

We have also seen the increase of night raids as the official military mission ends.  The information driving the raids comes from computers seized during the killing of Osama bin Laden.

as part of its counterterror activities authorized under the Bilateral Security Agreement put into place once Ashraf Ghani assumed the presidency. Unlike the days of the Karzai presidency, the John Kerry-invented National Unity Government of Ghani and Abdullah not only doesn’t protest US night raids, it actively works with the US to hide all news of them:

The spike in raids is at odds with policy declarations in Washington, where the Obama administration has deemed the American role in the war essentially over. But the increase reflects the reality in Afghanistan, where fierce fighting in the past year killed record numbers of Afghan soldiers, police officers and civilians.

And the government has twice tried to classify information coming out of Afghanistan in another attempt to declare the war over as fighting continues

The military has joined in Obama’s gamesmanship, taking as much of the war effort behind curtains of secrecy as it possibly can. In October, it suddenly classified information on Afghan troop capabilities and then in January it tried to expand that classification to nearly all information coming out of the war.

Those who support the war continue to talk about how great things are in Afghanistan because we've been there for 14 years

Carter nomination hearing 

Senator Kaine: We have, at the expense of blood and treasure, achieved a lot in Afghanistan. I mean, the nation's life expectancy has gone from 44 to 61 in 10 years. And you know, my back of the envelope math, I always say 30 million people living on an average 17 years longer. That is 510 million years of human life. That seems like a pretty good ROI to me, for as painful as it has been, for as expensive as it has been. 

Situation in Afghanistan Feb 11, 2015

Senator McCain: More than 2,200 Americans have given their lives in Afghanistan, and thousands more have been wounded. And the progress they have enabled is extraordinary. The number of Afghan children in school has increased tenfold since 2001, from less than 1 million to almost 10 million today. Forty percent of these students are girls, and 40 percent of Afghan teachers today are women. Life expectancy has increased by over 20 years in less than a generation, an achievement unheard of in modern history. Less than 10 percent of the Afghan population supports the Taliban, while over 70 percent express the confidence -- express confidence in the Afghan military.  These gains and others are significant. But, as General Mattis testified last month, the gains achieved at great cost against our enemy in Afghanistan are reversible.   Afghan National Security Forces are now leading the fight and responsible for safeguarding their country. They've made real progress as a fighting force. The Afghan army and police maintained their professionalism during the presidential runoff last summer, upholding security and allowing the democratic process to play out without armed intervention. And, while the casualty rates of our Afghan partners in their fight against the Taliban are high, there is no doubt -- none whatsoever -- about the Afghan willingness to fight and die for their country.  But, like the Iraqi Security Forces at the end of 2011, the Afghan National Security Forces are still developing some key enabling capabilities, the shortfalls sounding eerily familiar: intelligence, logistics, airlift, close-air support, special forces, and institutional development.  Our commanders on the ground in Afghanistan are developing plans to address these shortfalls, but they need the time, resources, and authorities to help our Afghan partners to develop these nascent capabilities.  As I've said before, wars do not end just because politicians say so. Indeed, in Afghanistan we've seen an initial emergence of ISIS as well as the residual capabilities of al-Qaeda wrapped in their support network of the Taliban insurgency.  The world walked away from Afghanistan once, and it descended into chaotic violence that became the platform for the worst terrorist attack in history against our homeland. The threats are real and the stakes are high. We can't let Afghanistan become a sanctuary for al-Qaeda or ISIS. Failure in this manner would destabilize the region, especially by undermining the security of a nuclear-armed Pakistan. Worst still, failure would condemn millions of Afghans, especially women and girls, to live again under the tyranny of violent radicals.  We can't turn the clock back in Iraq, but we can, and we must, apply the tragic lesson that we learned in Iraq to Afghanistan. To preserve the progress enabled by our troops and the Afghan people, President Obama must replace his plan for unconditional withdrawal from Afghanistan with a conditions-based drawdown and a clear commitment to maintain a limited residual force. If the President repeats his mistakes from Iraq, we can expect a similar disaster in Afghanistan: growing instability, terrorist safe havens, horrific human rights abuses, the rapid dissolution of the hard-won gains that our men and women in uniform purchased at such high cost, and, ultimately, direct threats to the United States.

While American policy makers and war hawks are counting children in school and longer life expectancy as wins in the war in Afghanistan, and they are to some extent, they are not the reasons we went into Afghanistan, and 2014 was the deadliest year yet, for Afghan civilians and the Afghan military forces.

Some 5,000 members of the Afghan security forces were killed in 2014. That’s more than the US lost in all 13 years of combat operations. In addition, more than 3,000 Afghan civilians were killed.

What's the ROI on that Senators Kaine and McCain? 

Meanwhile as newly elected President Ashraf Ghani visits to praise from the American elite and mainstream media, he was at Council on Foreign Relations, NPR and the New York Times, thanking troops for their sacrifice at the Pentagon. (I also noticed he was in Saudi Arabia in March for Hajj)

President @ashrafghani performed Umrah-Haj & prayed for a durable peace & stabality in #Afghanistan pic.twitter.com/zHAw2NhXwS
— ارګ (@ARG_AFG) March 15, 2015

Here is the official Taliban response to Obama's announcement reiterating their opposition to foreign occupation

The Afghans will never accept foreign occupation

And as America commits to keeping it's troops in Afghanistan for at least 2 more years, Bowe Bergdahl was charged under UCMJ Articles 85 (desertion) and 99 (misbehavior before the enemy) and for being fed up with the war and destruction as many other soldiers are and like many in the military not knowing about conscientious objector status or how to apply

Conscientious Objection information by Branch

• Conscientious Objection: Department of Defense

• Conscientious Objection: Air Force

• Conscientious Objection: Army

• Conscientious Objection: Coast Guard

• Conscientious Objection: Marines

• Conscientious Objection: Navy
  
  

As The Guardian has reported in a video filmed with Bergdahl's unit in 2009 right before Bowe left, Bergdahl was not the only soldier acknowledging that the war had many problems and that Afghans hated occupation

Yet in emails to his family published in 2012 by Rolling Stone, Bergdahl, too, expressed doubt and bitterness over the mission, much like his colleagues in the video, who question the wisdom of the arduous counterinsurgency and nation-building mission featured in the US’s longest-ever war.

“They all hate us here anyway,” one soldier says. Another remarks: “They just want to be left alone, man. The same thing in Iraq, when I was there. These people just want to be left alone.”

The 501st appears isolated from the Afghan population, unable even to speak with the Afghans in whose name they fight except through radio communication with an interpreter, as Bergdahl watches. At one point, soldiers seem to consider throwing rocks at nearby Afghan children. The soldiers’ hilltop outpost is constructed near a burial site. One warns: “It’s not gonna be pretty when they come up here and get pissed off at us for desecrating their graveyard.”

Now we are hearing from defense a clarification on claims that Bergdahl did not intend to desert, instead saying he intended to report on

problems with "order and discipline" at Combat Outpost Mest-Lalak in Paktika province and also had concerns about "leadership issues at his base."

continued

In 2012, Bergdahl's father, Bob Bergdahl, disclosed a series of emails from his son to Rolling Stone magazine.

Bowe Bergdahl wrote that three "good" sergeants in his unit had been forced to move to another company and that his battalion commander was a "conceited old fool."

Bob Bergdahl video interview on destruction of war and comparing POWs to Guantanamo





End the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and Close Guantanamo.  Repeal the PATRIOT Act and 9/11 AUMF and let's end the war on terror.

If you really want to win against ISIS here is how to do it.

• pursue a comprehensive diplomatic, political, economic, and regionally led strategy to degrade and dismantle the Islamic State

• work through the United Nations and with allies and regional partners, including the Arab League, to pursue a political and diplomatic solution

• address the legitimate political grievances of all ethnic and religious groups in Iraq and Syria and to protect vulnerable groups from violence

• implement to the fullest extent United Nations Security Council Resolution 2170 (2014), calling on Member States to act to suppress the flow of foreign fighters, financing, and other support