Beirut (AFP) - A US special forces raid in eastern Syria killed 32 members of the Islamic State jihadist group, including four leaders, a monitoring group said Sunday.

"The US operation killed 32 members of IS, among them four officials, including IS oil chief Abu Sayyaf, the deputy IS defence minister, and an IS communications official," said Rami Abdel Rahman, head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

US officials have said "about a dozen" people were killed in the operation on Friday night, which was conducted by Iraq-based US commandos in order to capture Abu Sayyaf.

Abdel Rahman said three of the four leading officials killed in the raid were from North Africa, but that the IS communications official was Syrian.

US President Barack Obama approved the special forces operation, a rare use of "boots on the ground" by the United States, which has fought the jihadists almost entirely from the air.

The operation targeted an IS compound at al-Omar, one of Syria's largest oil fields, which is located in the eastern Deir Ezzor province.

A US official speaking on condition of anonymity said the commandos engaged the jihadists "at very close quarters... there was hand-to-hand combat".

US Secretary of Defence Ash Carter called the operation a "significant blow" to IS, while Adam Schiff, a Democrat on the House intelligence committee, said US attacks "have put increasing pressure on the economics undergirding the terrorist organisation".

The Saudis have received a lot of bad press as of late due to it consistently breaking its ownrecords for beheadings, but sometimes a simple beheading isn’t sufficient. In a punishment known as “crucifixion,” the executed person’s beheaded body is placed on public display for three days. Currently facing this fate are three political activists, including two children. We learn from Reprieve.org that:

Saudi Arabia has been urged to spare the lives of two juveniles and an ageing political activist, after plans emerged to execute at least one of them this Thursday (14th).

Sheikh Nimr Baqir Al Nimr, a 53-year old critic of the Saudi regime, and two juveniles, Ali Mohammed al-Nimr and Dawoud Hussain al-Marhoon, were arrested during a 2012 crackdown on anti-government protests in the Shiite province of Qatif. After a trial marred by irregularities, Mr Al Nimr was sentenced to death by crucifixion on charges including ‘insulting the King’ and delivering religious sermons that ‘disrupt national unity’. This week, it emerged that the authorities plan to execute him on Thursday, despite protests from the UN and Saudi human rights organizations.

The planned execution of Mr Al Nimr has prompted fears for the safety of the two juveniles, who were both 17 when they were arrested and eventually sentenced to death on similar charges. Both teenagers were tortured and denied access to lawyers, and faced trials that failed to meet international standards. All three prisoners, including Mr Al Nimr, have not yet exhausted their legal appeals.

Saudi Arabia has carried out executions at an unprecedented rate since the coming to power of King Salman in 2015. On May 6th 2015, the Kingdom carried out its 79th execution of the year, and it is already close to surpassing its 2014 total of 87 executions. Human rights organization Reprieve has urged the European Union to intervene with Saudi Arabia to prevent the killings.

It isn’t clear whether or not this execution has happened. As Vox notes:

Saudi Arabia is set to behead a man and publicly display his headless body (a practice called “crucifixion” in Saudi law) — for nothing more than speaking his mind. Sheikh Nimr Baqir al-Nimr, an internationally respected Shia cleric, was sentenced to death for “disobeying the ruler,” “inciting sectarian strife,” and “encouraging, leading and participating in demonstrations.” His actual crime: participating in nonviolent protests and calling for the fall of the house of Saud.

It’s not clear when the Saudis plan on executing al-Nimr: the country has a habit of both postponing executions and carrying them out without very much warning. But the case illustrates a basic fact about one of America’s closest allies in the Middle East: its system of capital punishment is one of the cruelest on earth.

Meanwhile, publicly at least, the U.S. government remains as committed to the Saudis as ever. We learn the following from National Journal:

CAMP DAVID, Md.—Of the six Arab leaders invited to the summit, one was too busy, two called in sick, and a fourth skipped it to go to a horse show instead.

The Gulf Cooperation Council conference was nevertheless “the beginning of a new era of cooperation,” President Obama declared Thursday after a daylong series of meetings.

Obama laid out five points of agreement among all the countries, top among them a commitment by the United States to respond to an “external threat” to any of the nations’ territorial integrity, which could include the use of military force, as well as the development of a ballistic-missile defense for the Gulf nations. “And let me underscore, the United States keeps our commitments,” Obama said.

The Saudi highlight reel is a long one.

Here are a few examples:

The New York Post Reports – FBI is Covering Up Saudi Links to 9/11 Attack

New Saudi King Unveils Internal Power Shake-up in Desperate Pivot Toward Increased Authoritarianism

Already 45 Beheadings in 2015 – Saudi Arabia on Pace to Easily Beat 2014’s Decapitation Level

Saudi Arabia Sentences 3 Lawyers to Jail for Tweets

Record Beheadings and the Mass Arrest of Christians – Is it ISIS? No it’s Saudi Arabia

How the NSA is Actively Helping Saudi Arabia to Crackdown on Dissent

Saudi Arabia Passes New Law that Declares Atheists “Terrorists”

zerohedge.com)

We learned recently from Paris that the Western world is deeply and passionately committed to free expression and ready to march and fight against attempts to suppress it. That’s a really good thing, since there are all sorts of severe suppression efforts underway in the West — perpetrated not by The Terrorists but by the Western politicians claiming to fight them.

One of the most alarming examples comes, not at all surprisingly, from the U.K. government, which is currently agitating for new counterterrorism powers, “including plans for extremism disruption orders designed to restrict those trying to radicalize young people.” Here are the powers which the British Freedom Fighters and Democracy Protectors are seeking:

They would include a ban on broadcasting and a requirement to submit to the police in advance any proposed publication on the web and social media or in print. The bill will also contain plans for banning orders for extremist organisations which seek to undermine democracy or use hate speech in public places, but it will fall short of banning on the grounds of provoking hatred.

It will also contain new powers to close premises including mosques where extremists seek to influence others. The powers of the Charity Commission to root out charities that misappropriate funds towards extremism and terrorism will also be strengthened.

In essence, advocating any ideas or working for any political outcomes regarded by British politicians as “extremist” will not only be a crime, but can be physically banned in advance. Basking in his election victory, Prime Minister David Cameron unleashed this Orwellian decree to explain why new Thought Police powers are needed: “For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens ‘as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone.'” It’s not enough for British subjects merely to “obey the law”; they must refrain from believing in or expressing ideas which Her Majesty’s Government dislikes.

If all that sounds menacing, tyrannical and even fascist to you — and really, how could it not? “extremism disruption orders” — you should really watch this video of Tory Home Secretary Theresa May trying to justify the bill in an interview on BBC this morning. When pressed on what “extremism” means — specifically, when something crosses the line from legitimate disagreement into criminal “extremism” — she evades the question completely, repeatedly invoking creepy slogans about the need to stop those who seek to “undermine Our British Values” and, instead, ensure “we are together as one society, One Nation” (I personally believe this was all more lyrical in its original German). Click here to watch the video and see the face of Western authoritarianism, advocating powers in the name of Freedom that are its very antithesis.

Threats to free speech can come from lots of places. But right now, the greatest threat by far in the West to ideals of free expression is coming not from radical Muslims, but from the very Western governments claiming to fight them. The increasingly unhinged, Cheney-sounding governments of the U.K., Australia, France, New Zealand and Canada — joining the U.S. — have a seemingly insatiable desire to curb freedoms in the name of protecting them: prosecuting people for Facebook postings critical of Western militarism or selling “radical” cable channels, imprisoning peoplefor “radical” tweets, banning websites containing ideas they dislike,seeking (and obtaining) new powers of surveillance and detention for those people (usually though not exclusively Muslim citizens) who hold and espouse views deemed by these governments to be “radical.”

Anticipating Prime Minister Cameron’s new “anti-extremist” bill (to be unveiled in the “Queen’s Speech”), University of Bath Professor Bill Durodié said that “the window for free speech has now been firmly shut just a few months after so many political leaders walked in supposed solidarity for murdered cartoonists in France.” Actually, there has long been a broad, sustained assault in the West on core political liberties — specifically due process, free speech and free assembly — perpetrated not by “radical Muslims,” but by those who endlessly claim to fight them. Sadly, and tellingly, none of that has triggered parades or marches or widespread condemnation by Western journalists and pundits. But for those who truly believe in principles of free expression — as opposed to pretending to when it allows one to bash the Other Tribe — these are the assaults that need marches and protests.

Photo: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images


(The Intercept)

Associated Press Videos
Kerry Meets Chinese President

BEIJING (AP) — China and the United States are budging not a bit over Beijing's assertive development in disputed parts of the South China Sea, with Chinese officials politely but pointedly dismissing Washington's push for U.S.-proposed ways to ease tensions.

As U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry wrapped up a visit to China on Sunday, both sides stressed the importance of dialogue to resolve competing claims in the waterway. But neither showed any sign of giving ground over Chinese land reclamation projects that have alarmed the United States and China's smaller neighbors.

Kerry met Sunday with Chinese President Xi Jinping, who will be making an official visit to the United States this fall and sought to highlight U.S.-China cooperation.

"In my view, U.S.-China relations have remained stable overall," Xi told Kerry at Beijing's Great Hall of the People, adding that he "look(ed) forward to continue to grow this relationship" on his upcoming visit.

Despite those words, which came shortly before Kerry left Beijing and arrived in Seoul, South Korea, friction over China's construction in the South China Sea was evident and clouded the start of Kerry's brief trip to Asia.

The U.S. and most members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations want a halt to the projects, which they suspect are aimed at building islands and other land features over which China can claim sovereignty.

View gallery

Chinese President Xi Jinping, right, and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry hold a meeting at the Gr …

"We are concerned about the pace and scope of China's land reclamation in the South China Sea," Kerry said on Saturday. He urged China to speed up talks with ASEAN on guidelines for handling maritime activity in disputed areas.

The goal is to help "reduce tensions and increase the prospect of diplomatic solutions," Kerry said.

"I think we agree that the region needs smart diplomacy in order to conclude the ASEAN-China code of conduct and not outposts and military strips," Kerry told reporters at a news conference with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.

Wang indicated that while China was prepared to talk, it would not back down on the construction that, he said, "is something that falls fully within the scope of China's sovereignty."

"The determination of the Chinese side to safeguard our own sovereignty and territorial integrity is as firm as a rock, and it is unshakable," he said.

View gallery

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, left, shakes hands with China's State Councilor Yang Jiechi …

"It has always been our view that we need to find appropriate solutions to the issues we have through communications and negotiations that we have among the parties directly concerned with peaceful and diplomatic means on the basis of respecting historical facts and international norms. This position will remain unchanged in the future."

Wang added that the differences between China and the U.S. could be managed "as long as we can avoid misunderstanding and, even more importantly, avoid miscalculation."

The Chinese claims and land reclamation projects have rattled the region where South China Sea islands and reefs are contested by China and five other Asian governments. These activities have led to maritime clashes, accompanied by nationalistic protests and serious diplomatic rows.

The U.S. says it takes no position on the sovereignty claims but insists they must be negotiated. Washington also says ensuring maritime safety and access to some of the world's busiest commercial shipping routes is a U.S. national security priority.

China has bristled at what it sees as U.S. interference in the region and wants to negotiate with the ASEAN countries individually, something those much smaller nations fear will not be fair.

In one disputed area, the Spratly Islands, U.S. officials say China has reclaimed about 2,000 acres of dry land since 2014 that could be used as airstrips or for military purposes. The U.S. argues that man-made constructions cannot be used to claim sovereignty.

Obama administration officials have declined to comment on reports that it may deploy military assets, or that it is considering a demonstration of freedom of navigation within 12 nautical miles of the islands' notional territorial zone. But they have said many of the features claimed by China in the disputed Spratlys are submerged and do not carry territorial rights, and maintained that China cannot "manufacture sovereignty" with its reclamation projects.

Despite the clear disagreements over the South China Sea, Kerry and Wang said they were on track to make progress in other areas, notably on climate change, the fight against violent extremism, and preparations for the next round of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue in June and Xi's visit to Washington in September.

They expressed pleasure with their cooperation in the Iran nuclear talks, their solidarity in trying to denuclearize North Korea and combat diseases such as the deadly Ebola virus.