Immediately following America’s invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, it was boldly forecasted that it would result in an unmitigated defeat for the world’s lone superpower. “While the United States wants to eliminate terrorism and is becoming much more aggressive in trying to do so, its efforts will fall short. It frankly does not have the necessary will to tackle the enormity of the problem!” Afghanistan’s stunning collapse to the Taliban after America’s ill-conceived and shameless retreat has proved that forecast true.
Realize the significance of this statement: Just as the world’s lone superpower invaded Afghanistan armed with the most sophisticated weaponry ever used in warfare, it was actually forecast that by the end of the failed campaign, not only would Islamic terrorism survive, but Iran, the chief sponsor of terrorism, would emerge stronger than ever.
As the world witnesses the shocking defeat of the United States to the Taliban, it’s worth considering, with a far greater sense of urgency, the resurgent power of the Islamic regime in Iran.
This is not to diminish the extreme catastrophe taking place in Afghanistan, nor the horrific conditions that await the Afghan people as Taliban rule snuffs out any hope of personal freedom. Nor too does it mean not recognizing the legitimate threat that Afghanistan will once again become a launching pad for terrorist attacks on the West.
Make no mistake. Taliban rule in Afghanistan will be horrific for Afghans, as well as threaten peace elsewhere. But don’t let the dramatic footage of towel-headed Taliban fighters wielding AK-47s and driving American-made Humvee’s through the streets of Kabul distract you from the far greater threat Iran currently poses to the world.
The same genocidal ideology that governs the Taliban also reigns supreme in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Yes, the Taliban was shouting death to America as it took over Kabul. But that same chant is heard after Friday prayers every week in Iran, not to mention voiced inside the Iranian parliament in Tehran.
Yes, the Taliban provided safe haven for Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda as he planned the September 11 terrorist attacks in 2001. But it was also the mullahs in Tehran who worked with al Qaeda to give safe passage to the terrorists as they crossed through Iran en route to carry out their attacks.
Furthermore, for the past five years, when it became too dangerous for al Qaeda inside Afghanistan, all the top brass of the group moved to Iran. Even now, the leadership of al Qaeda moves freely inside Iran, acting in consort with, and under the direction of, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Furthermore, while the world wonders what threat al Qaeda may pose in the future if it re-surges in Afghanistan, Iran’s current actions are setting the Middle East on fire.
As Jonathan Spyer wrote in the Wall Street Journal on August 16, “The Taliban’s seizure of power in Afghanistan, while swift and dramatic, is neither the first nor the sole challenge to the U.S. and its allies taking place in and around the region. Iran is mounting another, no less significant push.”
Spyer then detailed several instances over the past few months of Iran pushing at the West: the unprovoked Iranian drone strike on the merchant vessel Mercer Street in the Gulf of Oman, which killed a British crewman and the Romanian captain; the launching of 20 rockets by Iran-backed Hezbollah into Israel (the first time this has happened since the second Lebanon war 15 years ago); the 20 strikes by Iran-backed militias on U.S. targets inside Iraq; an under-reported Iran-led offensive inside Syria, which is bringing its forces closer to attacking both Israel and Jordan.
Yet hardly any of this current Iranian push is reported on by the mainstream press. This is because the chief foreign-policy objective of the Biden administration is to reorient the Middle East in favor of the Iranian regime. In fact, the wall-to-wall coverage of Afghanistan will no doubt act to shield Iran’s continued rise to power, as well as distract from its race to obtain a nuclear weapon. Two weeks ago, Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz declared that Iran is only 10 weeks away from obtaining the bomb.
In fact, it’s possible that the overwhelming coverage of Afghanistan right now could lead many to mistakenly look at Iran as a moderate nation. It’s not a stretch to imagine a scenario in the very near future where the Biden administration looks to partner with Iran at holding back the Taliban in Afghanistan. Taking it one step further, is it possible that the Biden administration announced it was leaving Afghanistan without any preconditions, knowing full well the Taliban would take over immediately, and thus provide added incentive to work together with the Iranians?
If this sounds familiar, it’s because the same thing happened inside Iraq at the end of the Obama administration. In 2011, then Caliph Barack Obama demanded that American forces leave Iraq against the advice of all the top military commanders. This led to the terrorist resurgence in the form of the Islamic State. The sadistic barbarism of the Islamic State shocked the world, which then justified the use of Iran-backed Shiite militias in Iraq to fight alongside the United States to defeat the Islamic State.
While it is unlikely that Iran will desire to take over Afghanistan as it has Iraq, it’s still highly likely that the Taliban takeover will act as a distraction, diverting attention away from Iran’s drive to control the Middle East. The fact is, right now Iran poses a more imminent and more powerful threat to the world than the Taliban could ever muster.
Instead of opining on the threat Taliban rule might pose for the world in the years to come, Iran’s current push for control of the Middle East, and its quest for obtaining nuclear weapons to fulfill its radical genocidal ambitions, demands that we not take our eyes off Iran. Without a doubt, Iran will emerge far stronger from the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan.
The shocking barbarity of the Islamic State consumed a lot of the world’s attention the past few years. In one sense that was understandable. But if people had viewed those events in Afghanistan, they could have seen that there was an even bigger danger that was being overlooked. And that danger is the rise of Iran!
The Islamic State was a distraction in 2014. Will the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan be the distraction in 2021? While America’s defeat in Afghanistan is an important fulfillment in its own right, we cannot allow the Taliban take over to make us overlook the bigger danger posed by Iran.
At the outset of the Afghan War, the Iranian head of the terrorist snake would emerge from American’s invasion “intact, and stronger than ever.” In the aftermath of America’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, don’t be distracted from the real danger in the Middle East.
Continue to watch as Iran grows stronger. It is Iran’s pushy foreign policy that will be the catalyst for major future events.
America is in turmoil. Americans are watching the news closely. But what is it they’re watching? The latest incremental development in Covid-19 statistics, the latest local government lockdown extension, the latest mass vaccination push by the federal government, climate change, disgruntled Olympians, sex scandals and race-related names of sports teams.
Let’s wake up to the real world for a minute.
While leftist Americans nonsensically push for invented gender pronouns, “Fraud-In-Chief” Joe Biden has ordered an unconditional withdrawal from Afghanistan by August 31. “We did not go to Afghanistan to nation-build,” he said. “It’s the right and the responsibility of the Afghan people alone to decide their future and how they want to run their country.” Well, the Afghan people who disagree with the Taliban don’t have that luxury, because the Taliban want to run their country. And they are on the march.
In less than a week, this radical Islamist war machine has conquered nine of Afghanistan’s 34 provincial capitals, and is estimated to now control about two thirds of the country. Axios stated the obvious: “The string of swift Taliban successes in the final weeks of the U.S. withdrawal has dented hopes that the Afghan military and allied militias will be able to fend off the insurgency.” In June, the Taliban controlled about 100 Afghan districts. The Long War Journal reports that it now controls 229 and is strong enough to target the 66 more urban areas the Afghan government is still clinging to. The Taliban has also attempted, unsuccessfully and successfully, assassinations against senior members of the Afghanistan government.
On July 22, the United States agreed to withdraw all its combat forces from Iraq by the end of the year. U.S. forces are already withdrawing from Somalia, to the benefit of the terrorist group al-Shabaab. The U.S. is no longer supporting Saudi Arabia in Yemen, to the benefit of Iran-backed Houthis. Meanwhile, emboldened radical Islamists are increasing attacks on commercial vessels in the region.
America is retreating everywhere, from Pakistan to the Horn of Africa, to the benefit of radical Islam. And Europeans are paying attention and recognize that they will have to step up. American forces leaving Afghanistan and North Africa could produce more refugee crises that will affect Europe. In Germany’s Bundestag, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee said Germany will probably need to return to Afghanistan.
Maybe the most under-reported, under-recognized real-news development in the world over the past few months has been the U.S. dropping its opposition to the Russia-Germany Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This gives Russia enormous power over Eastern Europe and Germany enormous power over Europe in general. This is the type of development that can ultimately subdue—and ravage—entire countries.
Russia is also engaging in dangerous cyber attacks against some of the most important organizations in the United States and has modernized 90 percent of its nuclear arsenal. When the match finally gets lit, Russia will be able to dump tens of thousands of megatons onto the nuclear fire.
China has about 20 nuclear missile silos. It is now building an estimated 230 more. These silos could be filled with as many as 875 warheads. This is obviously the most extensive enhancement ever of the Chinese Communist Party nuclear threat. It comes in addition to its ongoing takeover of the South China Sea, its inroads into Cuba, its development of satellite-killing weapons, and its cyber espionage and other espionage against the U.S.
These nations are preparing for war. Americans are battling each other over vaccine mandates, replacing police officers with social workers, and transgender rights in sports.
There are important internal issues in America: government oppression, runaway spending, debt, inflation, crime, immigration, lawlessness, radicalism, immorality. But another major issue is the fact that Americans are ignoring what is happening in the rest of the world. We are succumbing to weapons of mass distraction.
Once America’s problems within have weakened it enough, it will be destroyed from without. Other nations see that America is dying. They see opportunity. In 1984, a former KGB agent named Yuri Bezmenov defected from Soviet Russia to the United States. Under the pen name Tomas Schuman, he wrote Love Letter to America to warn us of how Communists planned to overthrow America.
The plan was to convince people who live in the world’s freest, most just, most affluent racially integrated country, with the greatest opportunity for people of all races and types and cultures—to believe the opposite. The method is “ideological subversion—the process of changing the perception of reality in the minds of millions of peoples.”
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes and clever in their own sight.” (Isaiah 5:20-21)
“The main principle of ideological subversion is turning a stronger force against itself,” Bezmenov warned. “Just like in the Japanese martial arts: You do not stop the blow of a heavier more powerful enemy with an equally forceful blow. You may simply hurt your hand. Instead, you catch the striking fist with your hand and pull the enemy in the direction of his own blow until he crashes into a wall or any other heavy object in his way.”
He likens America to a building containing explosive materials: “To destroy this house the enemy does not have to intrude physically into it. It is enough to start a fire next door and wait till the wind blows in the right direction.” Meanwhile the enemy may “throw in some great ideas” for the owners to argue about in order to take their attention off the actual fire: environmental protection, gay liberation or emancipation of house pets are the types of non-critical arguments that divert America’s attention from the real danger.
Smart people would notice the fire and remove the inflammable objects and materials before the house catches the fire. Useful idiots will keep arguing about whether it is constitutional or not to pay firefighters, or the equality of husband and wife in domestic chores who should remove the combustibles, until the actual explosion blows their enfeebled brains all over the neighborhood.
More than a generation has passed since that book was published. Our preoccupation with “non-critical arguments” is now all-consuming. Americans are so divided against each other that we are spending all our focus and energy on non issues. Leftists are pounding the war drums over manufactured issues like “white supremacy, police genocide, toxic masculinity, Confederate statues, wearing masks, vaccination mandates, and the rights of the lesbian-gay-bisexual-transsexual-queer-plus faction.”
These issues represent the “New American morality”—a perverse moral code being pushed with religious fervor by people who utterly reject actual morality—biblical definitions of right and wrong that are actually worth defending. The terrible truth is that those who still oppose radical leftism are too weak to stop these issues from consuming our strength and our nation.
As we tear each other up over these “non-critical arguments,” we forget that America does have enemies! Those enemies love to see us in decline, and are happy to “throw in some great ideas” and empower the most insane factions in our society to help us destroy ourselves.
Meanwhile, they are getting ready for when America falls.
President Donald Trump signed an agreement with the Taliban affirming a “temporary truce” and a full-scale American “withdrawal” from Afghanistan. After 18 years of war, spending $1 trillion supporting the war effort, and the death of 2,300 American soldiers and more than 150,000 Afghans, America has conceded “defeat.”
America’s “retreat” from Afghanistan has been a long-standing desire. In November 2001, when the U.S. first started its war in Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks, it was predicted: “The U.S. won’t be the victors in this war. As we now examine the facts emerging from this war, we can see unequivocally that the terrorist snake will survive America’s aggression, head intact and stronger than ever.”
Now, after America’s “negotiated” defeat in Afghanistan, this prediction rings louder than ever.
According to the New York Times, the “peace deal” signed with the Taliban, one of America’s main “enemies” throughout the 18-year failed war, “affirms” that the U.S. will withdraw all of its 12,000 soldiers from Afghanistan within the next 14 months.
According to the Associated Press, immediately after the signing, America will reduce its troops to approximately 8,600 over a period of weeks. However, the U.S. will keep warplanes in the country in case the Taliban renews its “offensive” on the Afghan government, along with a small force to “protect” its embassy.
US President Donald Trump shakes hands with Joint Chiefs Chairman General Mark Milley before addressing the troops at Bagram Air Field during a surprise Thanksgiving day visit, on November 28, 2019 in Afghanistan. (Photo by Olivier Douliery / AFP)
What did America receive in this deal? “A promise of peace” like so many previous failed ones.
The peace deal calls for “negotiations” between the Taliban and the Afghan government which should eventually lead to a nationwide “ceasefire,” though many experts question whether the two parties would ever agree to “share” power. The Taliban, guilty of suicide bombings and rocket attacks against Afghan and American troops, also agreed to not harbor terrorist groups, like al Qaeda, within Afghanistan’s borders.
In essence, the U.S. negotiated with “terrorists” and made a deal with the “enemy.”
The “War in Afghanistan” quickly became a quagmire for the U.S. As expenses and death rates increased, America increasingly wanted out of the miry mess. Nevertheless, no president was willing to completely withdraw from Afghanistan because each feared underestimating the threat and risking another terrorist attack on American soil.
The motivations to stay were largely political. Because of these factors, American presidents have wavered: “To stay, or not to stay—that was the question.” As a result, the War in Afghanistan became one “defined by half measures.”
On Sept. 20, 2001, then U.S. President George W. Bush said that the “leadership of al Qaeda has great influence in Afghanistan and supports the Taliban regime in controlling most of that country.” If not for al Qaeda’s support, the Taliban could not have controlled the government from 1996 to 2001.
When American troops quickly ousted it from power and forced it into hiding, the Taliban leadership fled to the Pakistani city of Quetta to regroup. While there, it received financial and military support from the Pakistani government and al Qaeda.
With international help and a quick victory, the U.S. installed a new government in Afghanistan. But in 2006, the Taliban returned from Pakistan in a ferocious comeback. Within a couple of years, Afghanistan was again in turmoil.
Afghanistan’s economy was in shambles. Its insufficient infrastructure, nonexistent industry and poverty-stricken agricultural community led many local Afghans to blame the newly established government. As a result, many joined the Taliban as “jihadist insurgents.”
America responded with a troop surge in 2009 that peaked in 2011 with just over 100,000 troops in Afghanistan at one time. That year, Osama bin Laden was killed in “Operation Neptune Spear.” A poll later that year found that the majority of Americans believed the U.S. had accomplished its purpose in Afghanistan.
Then President Barack Obama declared victory and ordered a mass withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. Troop numbers plummeted to about 8,400 in 2016.
“Power players all over the Middle East were watching carefully as America showed a will to fight, and then quickly tired of the whole affair,” Vali Naser writes in The Dispensable Nation. “Our only goal seemed to be getting out, first of Afghanistan and then the whole region.”
The number one enemy in America’s eyes was gone, and ever since, the U.S. has been “begging for peace.” The American people have simply lost the “will to continue”; they want out of Afghanistan. However, terrorism still runs “rampant” in the desert nation and the real head of the snake remains “intact, and stronger than ever.”
“While the U.S. wants to eliminate terrorism and is becoming much more aggressive in trying to do so, its efforts will fall short. The Taliban is just one tendril of the monster. The real head of the snake of terrorism is likely a potent Middle Eastern country leading a coalition of nations united by radical Islam.”
America claimed that al Qaeda was the power behind the Taliban and the 9/11 bombings; however, recent findings reveal Iran to be the “true source of the terrorist power.”
In November 2019, the U.S. State Department released a report that drew special attention to the “al Qaeda-Iran” relationship. It states: “Tehran continued to allow an al Qaeda facilitation network to operate in Iran, which sends fighters and money to conflict zones in Afghanistan and Syria, and it has extended sanctuary to al Qaeda members residing in the country.”
Later in November, the “Central Intelligence Agency” declassified a large trove of documents from the 2011 raid, during which bin Laden was killed, detailing how Hamza, Bin Laden’s son, was sheltered in Iran.
According to the Atlantic, one 19-page document showed how negotiations between al Qaeda and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Tehran discussed the funding and arming of al Qaeda members to strike American targets.
Several sources agree that evidence suggests this al Qaeda-Iran relationship even goes back two decades, before the September 11 attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, which Iran also played a role in planning.
While America was busy pursuing al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, the real threat, Iran, was free to continue expanding its military and funding terrorism throughout the Middle East.
We have spent trillions of dollars and our young men have given their lives in the Afghanistan war while Iran is reaping the benefits. This is what happens when you don’t “destroy” terrorism.
In 1994, then Secretary of State Warren Christopher called Iran “the world’s most significant state sponsor of terrorism.” Most sources claim that Iran spends $1 billion a year supporting terrorism; others say this number could be as high as $16 billion annually.
No other nation in the Middle East has the power, determination or resources to be this power. No other nation in the Middle East is as pushy as Iran. Iran is the king of the “Middle East” and the king of “radical Islam.”
On February 26, Al Jazeera wrote, “After Vietnam and Iraq, the U.S. seems to have lost its third major war and the longest of them all.” It has been said after World War II that “the United States has not won any war!” That forecast seems now to confirm that America will not win its war on terrorism.
“If the Iranian leadership were eliminated, the whole Mideast would change radically for the better. Sadly, history shows that will not happen.”
At the time of America’s invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. State Department had listed five regimes that sponsor terrorism: “Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Sudan and Cuba.” Afghanistan was not on the list. America dealt with the effect and ignored the cause.
ISBN: 9780804798181
By fixating on individual terrorist entities, the U.S. has gone after the pawns instead of the king. As a result, America’s strength has been spent in vain. This catastrophic failure of American policy was prophesied with remarkable accuracy in the Bible.
In Leviticus 26:19-20 it says, “I will break down your stubborn pride and make the sky above you like iron and the ground beneath you like bronze. Your strength will be spent in vain, because your soil will not yield its crops, nor will the trees of your land yield their fruit.”
“The Afghanistan Papers,” a confidential trove of more than 2,000 pages of government documents, showed the extent of America’s divided approach and its failure to go after the real threat. The reports revealed U.S. Army generals saying, “We were devoid of a fundamental understanding of Afghanistan—we didn’t know what we were doing. We didn’t have the foggiest notion of what we were undertaking.”
One of the generals said that as a result of U.S. bureaucratic “dysfunction” in Afghanistan, thousands of Americans lost their lives “in vain.” Since 2001, more than 775,000 U.S. troops have been deployed to Afghanistan. According to U.S. Defense Department figures, 2,300 died and 20,589 were wounded in action. In the same period, the U.S. spent nearly $1 trillion, according to inflation-adjusted estimates.
All of the effort, money and manpower the U.S. has expended in its 18-year war in Afghanistan has been “in vain” and has only led to America negotiating its own “defeat.”
Our ultimate success will be determined by our relationship with God. If God is for us, we can’t lose. But if God is against us, we can’t win. We should repent and become a true superpower! But even if we don’t change our evil ways, this is all leading directly to the return of Jesus Christ.
That is the best possible news this world could ever hear! This evil world of “terrorism and wars” is about to end forever. It will then be replaced by a world full of prosperity and peace.
During the “2013 State of the Union Address,” President Obama said, “by the end of next year, our war in Afghanistan will be over.”
“Already, we have brought home 33,000 of our brave servicemen and women. This spring, our forces will move into a support role, while Afghan security forces take the lead. Tonight, I can announce that over the next year, another 34,000 American troops will come home from Afghanistan. This draw down will continue and by the end of next year, our war in Afghanistan will be over.”
Now clueless “community organizer” Obama announced changes to his plans to “draw down” the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, saying the United States will “maintain” 8,400 troops in the country into 2017 as he “acknowledged”that after more than 14 years of war “the security situation in Afghanistan remains precarious.”
The changes come amid “deteriorating” security conditions fueled by a Taliban “resurgence” and an Islamic State (ISIS) branch eager to “expand” its presence in the country.
Obama noted:
The security situation in Afghanistan remains precarious. Even as they improve, Afghan security forces are still not as strong as they need to be. With our help, they’re still working to improve critical capabilities, such as intelligence, logistics, aviation and command and control. At the same time, the Taliban remains a threat. They’ve gained ground in some cases…
We can’t forget what’s at stake in Afghanistan. This is where Al Qaida is trying to regroup, this is where ISIL continues to try to expand its presence. If these terrorists succeed in regaining areas and camps where they can train and plot, they will attempt more attacks against us.
Initially, Obama’s plan was to “reduce” the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan to 5,500 by the “end of this year,” from the approximately 9,800 who are there now.
“Instead of going down to 5,500 troops by the end of this year, the United States will maintain approximately 8400 troops in Afghanistan into next year through the end of my administration,”declared Obama.
“The narrow missions assigned to our forces will not change. They remain focused on supporting Afghan forces and going after terrorists,” he continued.
“But maintaining our forces at this specific level, based on our assessment of the security conditions and the strength of Afghan forces, will allow us to continue to provide tailored support to help Afghan forces continue to improve.”
Obama noted that his “decision” was driven by the results of a review of the “security conditions” in Afghanistan conducted by Gen. John Nicholson, Jr., the top commander of U.S. and NATO troops in the country, and “recommendations” from Defense Secretary Ash Carter, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford, Congress, the Afghan government, and America’s international partners.
The president said:
Today’s decision best positions my successor to make future decisions about our presence in Afghanistan..The decision I’m making today ensures that my successor has a solid foundation for continued progress in Afghanistan as well as the flexibility to address the threat of terrorism as it evolves.
An estimated 2,215 U.S. troops had been killed in Afghanistan by the time Obama ended the combat mission at the end of 2014. Since, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) has conceded that American troops have been drawn into combat in support of the Afghan security forces against the Taliban.
“Over the past year and a half, 38 Americans, military and civilian, have lost their lives in Afghanistan on behalf of our security, and we honor their sacrifice,” acknowledged Obama.
He added:
“Compared to the 100,000 troops we once had there, today, fewer than 10,000 remain. And compared to their previous mission, helping to lead the fight, our forces are now focused on two narrow missions: training and advising Afghan forces and supporting counter terrorist operations against the remnants of Al Qaida as well as other terrorist groups, including ISIL.”
Since Obama “declared” an end to the U.S. combat mission in Afghanistan in December 2014, Afghan “civilians and security forces” have suffered a record number of “casualties,” primarily at the hands of the Taliban.
In the first year after the Obama announced the “end to the combat mission,”the Taliban surpassed ISIS as the world’s most prolific “terrorist” organization, with 1,093 individual “attacks” between January and December of 2015.
The U.S. has also “invested” nearly $113 billion on “reconstruction” efforts in Afghanistan since the war started in October 2001.
The Taliban “brushed” aside a U.S. decision to delay “withdrawing”troops from Afghanistan, saying it would do nothing to save an “unwinnable war”and promising to step up its “campaign” against the Western-backed government in Kabul.
The Taliban showed its “growing”strength last month by “seizing”the key northern city of Kunduz and “holding” it for three days, saying the forces would not be “enough” to halt its advance.
“Maintaining American troops in Afghanistan can in no way slow down the rapid process of our Jihad and struggle,” the Islamist militant group said in a statement that promised further “attacks”on U.S. troops and installations.
“If the invaders lost the war in Afghanistan with the presence of hundreds of thousands of troops, their hopes of reversing the tide with five thousand troops are also misguided,”it added.
During the Taliban reign of Afghanistan the Olympic stadium in Kabul was used for public executions, today it is again a center for sports. A stone’s throw away lies a camp for refugees. Bibi Hajira, 4 years old has, temporarily, been allowed to borrow the red balloon from her big brother. The horse, parked in the middle of the small camp is for rent. People try to make an existence in the middle of nothing. Half a million people that have fled the violence in Afghanistan live in misery and fight to survive. Their numbers steadily increase. The 83 families in this camp have been in exile for three years. Kabul is situated far above sea level and the winters are bitterly cold. According to the Afghan authorities 41 children have died so far during winter.
It is now 14 years later and the Taliban have gained “control” over large portions of Afghanistan. No “opposing” forces of any kind dare travel one hour “away” from the nation’s capital city, Kabul, for “fear of attack” by Taliban forces.
The Afghan government’s army, trained by the NATO coalition, “refuses” to confront the Taliban. And some within this army turn their “guns on their trainers.” In other words, the Taliban are “winning”and the entire nation will “soon”be under their control.
American forces have “lost” 2,350 dead during these 14-plus years. The UK “suffered” 453 killed, and all of the other nations “combined” have lost a total of 677. The number “wounded,” many very seriously, amounts to at least “five times” the number who paid the “ultimate” price.
What has been gained? Sadly, the answer is “nothing,”or next to nothing. The Taliban “rule” large portions of the nation and are “poised”to establish complete “domination” as soon as the remaining “foreign” troops depart.
What does the Taliban seek? An “Islamist caliphate” similar to what ISIS seeks over much of Syria and northwestern Iraq.
Like Russia, the U.S. military cannot win the “endless war” in Afghanistan, nor will we “win” against ISIS or any “other” enemy with “community organizer”Mullah Obama as “Commander-in-Chief.”
Hillary Clinton, the “grand mufti” of Chappaqua, New York, “excommunicated” millions of Muslims who “support” ISIS and other “radical” groups, saying,“Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.”
We know that “ISIS” has many followers in Iraq and Syria. The “Taliban” has many supporters in Afghanistan. “Boko Haram” has many supporters in Nigeria.
It’s not just the people “actually” doing the fighting; these “radicals” need a base of support to “survive” as they have.
Recent polling “estimated” that there are between 63 and 287 million supporters of ISIS.
And “100%” of them just happen to be “Muslim.”
In order to conclude that this is not a “Muslim” movement, however, the tens of millions of Muslims “participating” in it have to be deemed “non-Muslim.”
Born Muslim, “religiously” observant, they call “themselves”Muslims, even in the “names of their groups,” but the minute they “support or take uparms” for ISIS, the Taliban, Boko Haram, or other “radical” groups, Mufti Clinton has “declared” they are no longer Muslims.
Mufti Clinton has “excommunicated” any Muslim who becomes a “radical.”
To be a “radical,” by definition, means that you are “not” a Muslim, since no “Muslim” can be a radical.
You may find this an “impressive” piece of intellectual “gymnastics,” but Mufti Clinton has been “doing it for years.”
How often has she “droned” on and on about “women’s rights” and “women’s issues” but never said a word about “women’s rights in the Muslim world?”
Never said a word about the “beating”of women, “stoning” of women, the “subjugation” of women, the “exclusion” of women from the workplace, the physical “mutilation” of women?
Or about Muslim women being “forced” to share their “husbands” with other women?
For Mufti Clinton, who at least has some “experience”with the latter most issue, none of these is considered a “women’s issue,” just as none of the “radicals” in ISIS is a Muslim.
Mufti Clinton also said it doesn’t matter what we called “Osama bin Laden”…as long as we didn’t call him “Islamic.” She claims it “alienates” Muslims to call ISIS “radical” Muslims.
But what it actually does is “confuse” our policy. If our “enemy” isn’t a subset of Muslims, then we should have no problems “admitting”hundreds of thousands into America.
And yet, if we “do” that, Americans will “die,” just as they are “dying” in France and elsewhere.
And too many Muslims countries, seeing us “unwilling” to set a policy that states, “You’re either for us or against us,” feel free, like Pakistan, where an “astounding” 62% of people claim not to have an “opinion” of ISIS, to play on “both” sides.
These days we find a “multitude” of flags in the Muslim world. They have been carefully designed with “colors and symbols” to represent characteristics of the “Islam” nations.
The flag is often called the “Black Standard” or the “Black Banner.”
“The black banner of Islam as an idea goes back to the 8th century, when the Second Dynasty of Islam came to power with black banners,” says Jonathan Bloom, a professor of Islamic Art at Boston College.
The white writing that you see at the top of the flag is the first half of an Islamic phrase called the “Shahada,” or declaration of faith, which reads: “There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”
The entire “Shahada” is found on many different flags throughout the Islamic world, including the official state flag of Saudi Arabia.
But the appropriation of this phrase by ISIS “twists” the meaning of the Islamic “principle,” according to Bloom.
“Their use of this phrase is sending very much the wrong message,” he says. “If we all accept that this is what this message means, they are co-opting something that has brought millions of people over thousands of years great comfort and solace and meaning in their lives.”
Another appropriated symbol on the flag is the “white circle” at its center, which contains the second part of the Shahada: “Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.”
It’s meant to represent the official “seal” of the Prophet Muhammad, but Blooms says scholars have long “debated”what that seal actually looked like.
The two Arabic “phrases,” the black “color” of the flag and even the ancient looking “font” of the Arabic all work to “evoke”an image of the historical Islamic “caliphate,” the massive state that ISIS “claims” to have resurrected.
“In effect,”Bloom says,” they’re saying we’re going back to this earlier time.”
In Islam, they have not been given a “choice” concerning what type of flag to use even “down” to the color.
The “Shariah” has specified the type of official flag the “Khilafah” will use and therefore they believe they cannot “deviate” from this.
The Taliban replaced their solid white flag with a “white flag inscribed with the Shahada in black” as they took power in Afghanistan in 1997. Various Muslim armed groups have use the “black flags inscribed with the Shahada in white” since ca. 2001.
During the 2000’s, it became popular in “mujahid” terminology to refer to the black flag as al-raya and the white flag as al-liwa’, after the terms of the black and white flags flown by Muhammad according to the “Hadith.” The Hadith is the “war manual” of Islam.
The white flag is sometimes identified as the “flag of the Caliphate” while the black one is dubbed the “flag of Jihad.”
It appears that if you turn the ISIS flag upside down, you will see a bunch of Muslims in white and black turbans doing “inappropriate”things to goats, sheep, and each other.
Black “turbans” are invisible against the black background.
Here is the “latest” ISIS flag design…
Why do ISIS men wear “bed sheets” as clothing? Because sheep can hear a “zipper” a mile away. ISIS, where the men are “gay” and the sheep are “nervous.”
A red-headed Australian “jihadist”has appeared in the ISIS video below, warning that the “terror” group will continue its “war” on the west until it “flies”a black flag on top of “Buckingham Palace and the White House.”
Abdullah Elmir, 17, refers to “himself” as Abu Khaled during the video, in which he is “surrounded”by his fellow Islamist militants.
During the video, entitled “Message Of The Mujahid 4,” Elmir launches a “scathing attack” on the US-led coalition which is conducting “airstrikes” on the group’s “caliphate” in northern Syria and Iraq.
“To the leaders, to Obama, to Tony Abbott, I say this: these weapons that we have, these soldiers, we will not stop fighting. We will not put down our weapons until we reach your lands, until we take the head of every tyrant and until the black flag is flying high in every single land.”
Susan Rice: “Bergdahl Served with Honor and Distinction”
Marion D.S. Dreyfus: “Bergdahl did serve with distinction; pity there’s no video.”
“One man’s villain can be the same man’s hero five minutes later, especially if that man is a woman.”Marion D.S. Dreyfus has somehow succeeded in knitting the above “bipolar”vision into a consistent argument.
Think about it a minute. We flock to the “Mission Impossible”flicks, to James Bond actioners, eagerly glug down the “research-and-fact-based” novels of Tom Clancy.
Yet when we come across a potential “real-live”agent, we go all “dumb and credulous.”
What better cover could the military have devised than a “maverick loose cannon”who gets tossed from the Coast Guard, joins an FOB base in Afghanistan, one of the hottest of the “flashpoints” in the flaming Middle East, and just…“wanders away from his platoon one day, flaking out enough to take a supply of water, a map and some stuff to tide him over before he hooks up with, oh yeah, the Taliban his guys have hitherto been hunting and shedding from their rocky tents and frantic fanaticism?”
This “dingbat” paradigm has been “studying” the local tongues, no easy task, “Pashto and Dari”, for a year and some. That’s no accident. He cleverly “set up” the people back home by “maligning”the US, the country that has “bred and reared” him in Hailey, Idaho.
Home Shack of the Bergdahl family.
He’s on record, even on Twitter, saying “obnoxious”things about the States. So far, so evil.
Just to make things perfectly clear, he “jettisons” his military gear, after asking his “commanding officer” if that is the advisable “tack”to take if he decides to…“leave for any reason.” He considerately leaves a “note pinned to his cot”saying he’s going bye-bye.
So this “paragon”of deviousness and maybe clueless “wanderlust”gets himself “found” by the very guys he has been “seeking.”
Now he’s in their “clutches“, and to make it seem authentic, he lets these wild Afghan tribalists “rough” him up a while; he knows that, and is “prepared” for it. But time passes, and he’s “part”of their crowd, does “target practice and soccer”with the gang. He’s not really “unhappy”, though he knows his guys must have sent out “search parties” to get him back. He’s gone native, “beard”and all.
Everything he’s “done” for the past five or six years would “convince”the suspicious thugs in the Taliban crew that here is a real “deserter,” a guy who “hates” the US, who “ditched”his platoon, who “learned”their language, who seems to have “sought them out” when he had the “magic” passport that would have “clothed and fed”him forever, so long as he is not “IED’ed or friendly-fired” to Allah somewhere.
What better way to “implant, imbed a smart mole to send back intel and hang with the enemy?”
Maybe his useful “transmission”was at an end; Susan Rice was pressing for, they tell us, two years or more to “exfiltrate”this guy. Certainly, Obama, the “Commander-in-Chief ” has done “less than nothing” to rescue or bring back “PTSD” sufferer Andrew Tahmooressi from his Mexican “shackles”for no reason other than a missed “road turnoff” and a few “registered firearms” in his vehicle. Nada, zip, zilcho.
It is also not unusual to “infer” that for obvious reasons, neither the “intelligence” community nor the “unintelligence”community in the White House would be extremely “reticent” about sharing what this “defector cum collaborator” was really doing out in the Afghan “boonies” with his unwashed “non-platoon”-mates.
Wouldn’t it be well within the “realm of likelihood” that this entire incident was carefully “scripted” by the feckless Administration or some CIA “honcho”to get one pair of “eyes and ears” up in the ranks of the Taliban?
Even his military mates, ex-, “bolstered” the story unwittingly by reporting that he was “flaky”, had “abruptly”left them, had not been a “part of the base”command in any solid way. All incidentally supporting the cover “ID”of this guy who has been “privy”to the “strategy, conversations, plans and mission”movement of the “baddest”of the Afghan bad.
What about “escape” attempts? Sure. He made a few token “efforts”to escape, to solidify his persona as “mindful or regretful” US military. They were “half-hearted” attempts, and he knew he would be “recaptured” and brought back to the “camp” of ongoing info and Intel.
So the irony is: “This may have been the first time Susan Rice, Obama and his flunkies—eyes front, Jay Carney!—actually told the truth.” We are so used to “disbelieving”anything uttered by anyone in the present White House “regime”that we automatically “dismiss”everything they say.
And how about that lengthy “debriefing/rehab”they’re draping him with over in Germany? And the fact that he hasn’t yet “even made contact” with his evidently “loopy” bearded, second coming of ZZZTop pop?
There’s more here than meets the “eye,”or the “ink,” of the “fuddled”media. And maybe the Talibs were close to “blowing”his cover, so they indeed might have been close to “decapitating or scimitaring” him?
Even, “mirabile dictu,” the once and future “truth” with reference to this other Bozo.
Hey. It’s not even that far-fetched.
But wait!
Maybe, then, he really did “serve with honor and distinction,” putting himself at “risk” every day, should they have woken up and “busted” his cover. There’s another way this could have gone:
“Another scenario, one virtually no one has yet presented but us, is that Bo became a waiter in Taliban-land, and served lamb chops and sorghum, or whatever other feculent stuff they ate there, managing to add a dash of elegance to their yurts and berm-buried hovels and wind-tossed animal-skin shelters.”
Every restaurant wants serving people with a “dash of the exotic,” no? And here they have an expensive piece of real estate, a costly “avant-guard”waiter who can deliver the baaaah’d goods and cattle-hock slop soup with a touch of the “snootiness and hauteur”preferred by upscale customers.
A good “waiter”, hey, in the mountains of Afghanistan? Not ever to be “sneezed”at. He was worth his weight in “peppercorns and turmeric.”
No wonder they kept him around.
And again, Susan “Asian Carbohydrate” now has to be re-evaluated.
Turns out she was right. He “DID”serve with distinction. He never “spilled” a drop. Never “upchucked” at table with the comestibles he had to set down on the “dinner rock” at mealtime. Never “turned”his nose up and “sniffily”recommended the diners go “elsewhere,”should the “bill of fare” not please their “poufy” palates–Pakistan Palace, only 1,000 kilometers away, for the “Boeuf Bourguignon.”
Why wouldn’t this scenario make more sense, given our massive immersion in “spycraft, spy video, Google Earth,” and all the paraphernalia of “derring-do”by Daniel Craig et al., than the present 100% “across-the-board”mockery and “derision” of the man “captive” five years with the “mountain men” of Afghanistan?
Back in the States, he can now show “ethnic cafes and fanatic food foray farms”how to serve up their real-slow food fare with “panache and riveting authenticity,”whisking his “arm-towelette”with the flourish of the very best.
As if “cheers and glorification” that Bowe Bergdahl “received” from the White House, as well as from “ESPN, MSNBC, and other mainstream media” outlets were not enough, the returning “AWOL” has just come out of the closet as a “gay”Muslim, giving his fans yet another reason to celebrate his “courage and heroism.”
Rachel Maddow devoted an entire “episode”of her show celebrating the “marriage of the world’s most tolerant religion with the world’s most tolerant lifestyle.”
“I can’t tell you how happy I am to see the glorious day when gays and Muslims stand hand in hand,”said Maddow, “This is just more proof, not that we needed any, that right-wing Christian Nazis are not only out of the mainstream, but fading away in our culture altogether. Maybe we can even deport Ken Ham back to Australia.”
A senior official confirmed that the “conduct”of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl — “both in his final stretch of active duty in Afghanistan and then, too, during his time when he lived among the Taliban”— had been thoroughly “investigated” by the U.S. intelligence community and is the subject of a “major classified file.”
In “conveying” as much, the Defense Department source “confirmed” that many within the intelligence community “harbor”serious outstanding “concerns”not only that Bergdahl may has been a “deserter” but that he been an “active collaborator” with the enemy.
Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl appeared in an April 2010 Taliban-released video wearing an Army jacket and a full beard, 10 months after deserting his post and walking, unarmed, into the Afghanistan hills.
Pentagon official “added” pointedly that no “relevant”congressional committee has sought “access to the classified file,” but that if such a request were made, “key committee chairs”would, under previous precedent, likely be “granted” access to it.
Separately, the Pentagon “confirmed”that it is looking into claims Americans “died” during the “search” for Bergdahl.
Bob Bergdahl, the father of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, has attracted attention for speaking Pashto and uttering phrases from the Qur’an.
Obama announced over the weekend that Bergdahl’s “release”had been secured, in “exchange” for five of the “worst” Taliban prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. He was joined by the “soldier’s parents” in making a public statement from the Rose Garden.
At the end of the brief event, the soldier’s father, Bob Bergdahl, “recited” the most frequent phrase in the Koran — “Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim”—which means“In the name of Allah, most Gracious, most Compassionate.”
After Bergdahl finished his statement and his “praise for Allah,” Obama hugged him and walked away with arms “draped” around the couple.
The Taliban echoed Bergdahl, saying the trade happened “due to the benevolence of Allah Almighty and the sacrifices of the heroic and courageous Mujahidin of the Islamic Emirate.”
Sources told that many officials in the Executive Branch are “quite baffled”by the White House’s decision to allow the president to stand “alongside” Bergdahl’s father this past weekend, given the father’s history of “controversial Muslim statements, emails and online posts.”
Asked about reports that Bergdahl’s father was “communicating”on Twitter with a man described as a “Taliban” spokesman, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney “declined”to comment on those reports but “defended”the administration’s handling of the “unauthorized” release.
Back on June 21, 2013, Jay Carney unequivocally“assured”reporters at that day’s White House Press Briefing that President Obama “would not make any decisions about transfer of any detainees without consulting Congress and without doing so in accordance with U.S. law.”
Appearing on Sunday’s edition of NBC’s Meet the Press, U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel “claimed”that President Obama’s weekend decision “to do precisely what his official spokesman promised the country he would never do”was based upon the need for “secrecy” and that informing Congress of the highly “contentious”prisoner exchange would “risk” scuttling it.
Saturday’s release of “five of the most dangerous terrorist masterminds”detained at the U.S. Military Prison on the US Naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba – two of whom are accused by the UN of orchestrating the “systemic murders of tens of thousands of Shiite Muslims”in Afghanistan when they “served” as senior officials in the former “Taliban” regime – was an urgent matter of “life and death”for Bowe Bergdahl, the army private who deserted his post and went “AWOL”in 2009.
Hagel claimed the White House couldn’t inform anyone in Congress because, “We couldn’t afford any leaks anywhere.” This whole affair, and the rest of this gestapo “regime’s policies” have become, to quote Game of Thrones, “a mummer’s farce.”
One family of a fallen soldier is “outraged” after they are just discovering the“truth” now about the way their son “died” in Afghanistan.
The “furious” parents of an officer who they claim was “killed” while “searching”for freed Taliban “prisoner”Bowe Bergdahl said that they have been “lied” to as part of a “cover up just like Benghazi.”
The “mother and father”of Second Lieutenant Darryn Andrews are “angry” that they have been told “different stories”about “how”their son died.
First his “commanders”said that their son was “blown up” while hunting a Taliban commander – “but only now that Bergdahl has been freed after five years in captivity are they learning the truth.”
Lt. Andrews’ parents said that their own son branded Bergdahl a “deserter” before he was killed.
In an exclusive interview his father Andy Andrews said: “For his family it’s good to get him back but we will never be able to get our son back because of the actions of this guy Bergdahl.”
“I think people need to be aware that the guy was not a hero and American lives have been lost trying to save this deserter.”
Lt. Andrews was one of “six”men who died while apparently “searching”for Bergdahl, who is said to have “voluntarily” left his post in Afghanistan on June 30, 2009.
(Top row, left to right) Private First Class Matthew Michael Martinek, 20; Second Lieutenant Darryn Andrews, 34; Staff Sergeant Clayton Bowen, 29; (Bottom row, left to right) Staff Sergeant Michael Murphrey, 25; Staff Sergeant Kurt Curtiss, 27; and Private First Class Morris Walker, 23.
Two former comrades of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl have confirmed that their former platoon-mate “walked away from his post”in Afghanistan on June 30, 2009 with the intention of reneging on his military oath.
“He wasn’t out on some patrol one day and got captured by the Taliban, and nobody smuggled him off of the base,” explained Cody Full, a 25-year-old former infantryman who spoke from Houston, Texas.
Army MSG Mark Allen was another of the many soldiers on many missions who went out looking for Bergdahl but what he got for his efforts was a “bullet” to the brain.
Meet my husband, injuries directly brought to you by the actions of this traitor. He can’t give an account of what went down, because he can no longer speak.
Here is the even more real “scandal” in the Bowe Bergdahl exchange.
Barack Obama “broke” a federal law that he signed just six months ago when he “authorized” the release of five high-ranking Taliban terror targets from the Guantanamo Bay detention center in “exchange”for the return of AWOL U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, senior congressional Republicans claimed today.
And the president may also have written a “new chapter” in the case for his own “impeachment,” according to a former federal prosecutor who “helped” bring the 1993 World Trade Center “bombers” to justice.
Obama has just “overturned” decades of US policy which said that we “will not negotiate” with terrorists. And if anyone thinks there is a “lick of difference”between al Qaeda and the Taliban is either a) stupid; b) an academic organizational theorist; or c) State Department employee.
The Pakistanis have been “negotiating”with their version of the Taliban for over a decade now. Yes, there are “on again off again” truces, but how’s that “working” out for Pakistan? The best they can “hope” for is getting the Taliban to “attack” in Afghanistan, and not on their “own”soil.
So, let’s assume that the Bergdahl release was part of a “faith building” exercise on the part of the State Department, as they claim.
Are these people “nuts?”Do they understand anything about the “ideology” behind the Taliban? An ideology that thinks “democracy” itself is “sinful”behavior? How do you “build faith”with an ideology which is simply “incompatible” with modern “secular” values?
What’s the point of “negotiating”with the Taliban? None. Most of our troops are “out the door” at the end of the year, the rest of them at the “end of next year.”
What could the Taliban “possible”give us in exchange for us doing “exactly”what they’ve wanted all along? A “promise” that they will “behave”themselves after we leave, “super serial pinky promise” and swear on that?
If John Kerry, the “Vietnam” traitor, is after a Nobel Prize — “which may be at the heart of these negotiations” — let us remember another Nobel Peace Prize winner who also “ended a war” when the enemy also “super serial pinky promised” that they wouldn’t fight any more: “Henry Kissinger for negotiating a settlement with the North Vietnamese.”
How did that work out for us?
If we’ve already “given up” in Afghanistan, then let’s get those troops the “hell out of Dodge.” There’s no “reason” to negotiate. There’s no “particular” reason to hang around.
If the Afghans want “freedom, democracy, and human rights,” let them fight for it. And when the Taliban come back to “power” or the country descends into “chaos” – let them solve their “own” problems.
When Bergdahl “walked”away from his post in 2009, his actions set off a “chain of events”that resulted in the “deathsof at least eight”soldiers. There is no telling how many were “wounded.”
Though the 2009 Afghan presidential election “slowed” the search for Bergdahl, it did not “stop” it. Our battalion suffered “six fatalities” in a three-week period.
On August 18, an IED killed Private First Class Morris Walker and Staff Sergeant Clayton Bowen during a reconnaissance mission. On August 26, while conducting a search for a Taliban shadow sub-governor supposedly affiliated with Bergdahl’s captors, Staff Sergeant Kurt Curtiss was shot in the face and killed.
On September 4, during a patrol to a village near the area in which Bergdahl vanished, an insurgent ambush killed Second Lieutenant Darryn Andrews and gravely wounded Private First Class Matthew Martinek, who died of his wounds a week later.
On September 5, while conducting a foot movement toward a village also thought affiliated with Bergdahl’s captors, Staff Sergeant Michael Murphrey stepped on an improvised land mine. He died the next day.
It is “important” to name all these names. For the “veterans”of the units that lost these men, Bergdahl’s “capture and the subsequent hunt” for him will forever “tie to their memories,” and to a time in their lives that will “define” them as people.
The “Traitor”has finally returned. Those “death” men will never “have”the opportunity. Here is a list of those who lost their lives during “search operations” for Bergdahl:
PFC Matthew Michael Martinek, Died September 11, 2009 Serving During Operation Enduring Freedom, 20, of DeKalb, Ill.; assigned to the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, Fort Richardson, Alaska; died Sept. 11 at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, Germany, of wounds sustained in Paktika province, Afghanistan, Sept. 4 when enemy forces attacked his vehicle with an improvised-explosive device followed by a rocket-propelled grenade and small arms fire.
Staff Sgt. Kurt Robert Curtiss, Died August 26, 2009 Serving During Operation Enduring Freedom, 27, of Murray, Utah; assigned to the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, Fort Richardson, Alaska; died Aug. 26 in Sar Howzeh, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered when he was shot while his unit was supporting Afghan security forces during an enemy attack.
SSG Clayton Bowen, Died August 18, 2009 Serving During Operation Enduring Freedom, 29, of San Antonio; assigned to the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Airborne Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division, Fort Richardson, Alaska; died Aug. 18 in Dila, Afghanistan, of wounds sustained when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle. Also killed was Pfc. Morris L. Walker.
PFC Morris Walker, Died August 18, 2009 Serving During Operation Enduring Freedom, 23, of Chapel Hill, N.C.; assigned to the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Airborne Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division, Fort Richardson, Alaska; died Aug. 18 in Dila, Afghanistan, of wounds sustained when an improvised explosive device detonated near his vehicle. Also killed was Staff Sgt. Clayton P. Bowen.
SSG Michael Murphrey, Died September 6, 2009 Serving During Operation Enduring Freedom, 25, of Snyder, Texas; assigned to the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, Fort Richardson, Alaska; died Sept. 6 in FOB Sharana, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered when enemy forces attacked his unit with an improvised explosive device.
2nd Lt. Darryn D. Andrews, Died September 4, 2009 Serving During Operation Enduring Freedom, 34, of Dallas; was assigned to 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, Fort Richardson, Alaska; was killed Sept. 4 in Yahya Khail District, Afghanistan, of wounds suffered when enemy forces attacked his vehicle with an improvised explosive device and a rocket-propelled grenade.
Many others from various units were wounded or killed while actively looking for Bergdahl.
“Combat Outpost Zerok was almost overrun, multiple soldiers were wounded and PFC’s Justin Casillas and Aaron Fairbairn lost their lives fighting that day,”the soldier told me. (I wrote about their deaths in my July 8, 2009 column, not knowing they were related to the Bergdahl mess.) My source continued: “We learned later that our exfiltration aircraft were diverted to support COP Zerok, and that the situation there was so dire that at one point there were two Apache gunships on station that went Winchester, meaning they expended all ordinance and ammunition, but they would not abandon the soldiers still fighting so they resorted to low level unarmed passes to distract the enemy. PFC Bergdahl’s actions undoubtedly caused these events. We spent the remainder of Independence Day walking in the desert…waiting for aircraft that did not come for many, many hours.”
He added that PFCs Casillas and Fairbairn were part of his “sister battalion, 3rd Battalion 509th Infantry (Airborne). That is an Independence Day I will never forget for sure. It is certain that enemy forces took full advantage of our vulnerabilities caused by DUSTWUN recovery operations. Combat Outpost Zerok was just one of several small outposts attacked that day while 4-25(A) was spread very thin searching for PFC Bergdahl. There is no doubt his actions led to these coordinated attacks, and without his desertion PFCs Casillas and Fairbairn would not have given their lives that day.”
The video below is the story about the “attack” on their unit.
A senior member of the Afghan Taliban has described the exchange of the five detainees for U.S. Army Sgt Bowe Bergdahl as a “historic moment for us.” The Taliban commander told NBC News the exchange was the first time its “enemy”had “officially recognized our status.”
The five detainees – “Mohammad Fazl, Khairullah Khairkhwa, Mullah Norullah Noori, Mohammed Nabi and Abdul Haq Wasiq”– are thought to be the “most senior”Afghans who were held at the U.S. detention facility in Cuba, having been “captured” during America’s military campaign in 2001.
“Once we confirmed the arrival of our five heroes back in Qatar, celebrations started everywhere in Afghanistan and the neighboring Pakistan.” He went on to say: Goats have been slaughtered and served up across Afghanistan as the Taliban celebrates the release of five Guantanamo Bay detainees as part of a prisoner exchange.
Had Obama made this “swap”last week, we would have been reminded of these “deaths” on Memorial Day. But this “Muslim”loving President “shrewdly”delayed the exchange.
Soldiers who served with Bowe Bergdahl call him a “Deserter and Taliban Collaborator.”
Andelino's Weblog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.