An affordable price is probably the major benefit persuading people to buy drugs at www.americanbestpills.com. The cost of medications in Canadian drugstores is considerably lower than anywhere else simply because the medications here are oriented on international customers. In many cases, you will be able to cut your costs to a great extent and probably even save up a big fortune on your prescription drugs. What's more, pharmacies of Canada offer free-of-charge shipping, which is a convenient addition to all other benefits on offer. Cheap price is especially appealing to those users who are tight on a budget
Service Quality and Reputation
Although some believe that buying online is buying a pig in the poke, it is not. Canadian online pharmacies are excellent sources of information and are open for discussions. There one can read tons of users' feedback, where they share their experience of using a particular pharmacy, say what they like or do not like about the drugs and/or service. Reputable online pharmacy canadianrxon.com take this feedback into consideration and rely on it as a kind of expert advice, which helps them constantly improve they service and ensure that their clients buy safe and effective drugs. Last, but not least is their striving to attract professional doctors. As a result, users can directly contact a qualified doctor and ask whatever questions they have about a particular drug. Most likely, a doctor will ask several questions about the condition, for which the drug is going to be used. Based on this information, he or she will advise to use or not to use this medication.
With all the many months of negotiations between the P5+1 members with Iran, a verbal deal was reached on the Iranian nuclear program. John Kerry and State Department representatives were asked often why was a condition to Iran to release the Americans in prison part of the talks, the response was always, those talks are underway and separate from the JPOA talks. Now we find that was never the truth. Furthermore, a designation Swiss delegation was heading the prisoner swaps but did the Iran Foreign Minister, the Swiss or anyone else involved bother to ask questions about the conditions by which the Americans were held in prison? Additionally, with what you will read below, you must ask yourself how could the United States be the grand marshal for a country, placing Iran on the world stage as a legitimate power and encourage foreign investment?
There is no bigger shame, than that of Barack Obama, John Kerry and the rest who willfully chosen to ally with Iran.
ABCNews: When ex-Marine Amir Hekmati addressed reporters Tuesday for the first time after being released from an Iranian prison, he said that he stayed strong through “very inhumane and unjust” “pressures” in detention because he “didn’t want to let any of my fellow Marines down.”
The happy and now-healthy-looking 32-year-old Hekmati did not get into what exactly he meant by the “pressures” that had been put on him, but a post on a website managed by the Hekmati family in March 2015 paints a grim picture of the trials Hekmati allegedly suffered while in Iran’s infamous Evin Prison. Hekmati had been arrested in August 2011 and accused of espionage. He was convicted in a secret court and sentenced to death. Though that ruling was later overturned, he stayed in prison.
The list of alleged abuses during his time in detention, “gathered from accounts by [Hekmati’s] family in Michigan, his extended family in Iran and from Amir himself,” includes what the family described as “torture, abuse and mistreatment” at the hands of prison officials.
Solitary Confinement, Sleep Deprivation, Forced Drugging, Electric Shocks
On their website, the Hekmati family alleges that for the first four months of his detention, Hekmati was held in a cell that was just three feet by three feet. His hands and feet were “constantly shackled.”
For more than a year, they claim, Hekmati was kept in solitary confinement – so long that he developed “severely limited vision.” He was also placed in “stress positions for extended periods” and cold water was poured in his cell to keep him from sleeping, the family wrote.
“Amir was forcibly given drugs, such as lithium, by prison officials. Officials would intentionally and abruptly stop this medication to induce a painful withdrawal response,” they wrote.
Hekmati was also interrogated by Iranian officials and subjected to electric shocks to his kidneys, whips to his feet and the young man “endured mental torture through threats, insults and humiliations.” The family said he was told at least once, falsely, that his mother had been killed in a car wreck.
‘It Breaks Our Heart’
The conditions became so bad as the years dragged on that Hekmati twice went on hunger strike.
“It breaks our hears to know our brother has suffered through torture, abuse, and mistreatment for committing no crime,” the family wrote in a May 2015 post. “It hurts us even more knowing that he is risking solitary confinement for choosing to starve himself in hope that action will finally be taken and his case will finally move forward and he will be one day closer to coming home and being reunited with our family.”
An official at the Interests Section of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Pakistani Embassy in Washington, D.C. declined to comment beyond saying, “as you said, these are all allegations made by his family member[s].” A representative from Iran’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Hekmati was freed over the weekend along with four other Americans held in Iranian prisons. In return, the U.S. released seven Iranians either in American prisons or awaiting trial for sanctions violations and withdrew its campaign to extradite and try 14 other Iranians abroad. Iran also promised in the deal to help locate and return former FBI agent Robert Levinson, who disappeared from Iran’s Kish Island in March 2007.
General Petraeus is still not out of the realm of more disciplinary action when it comes to his troubles. The ‘all-in’ for Obama, Defense Secretary Ash Carter is considering additional punishment for Petraeus and if this demotion happens, it could set a standard for how Hillary should/could be punished as her crimes were much worse.
TheDailyBeast: The Pentagon is considering retroactively demoting retired Gen. David Petraeus after he admitted to giving classified information to his biographer and mistress while he was still in uniform, three people with knowledge of the matter told The Daily Beast.
The decision now rests with Secretary of Defense Ash Carter who is said to be willing to consider overruling an earlier recommendation by the Army that Petraeus not have his rank reduced. Such a demotion could cost the storied general hundreds of thousands of dollars—and deal an additional blow to his once-pristine reputation.
“The secretary is considering going in a different direction” from the Army, a defense official told the Daily Beast, because he wants to be consistent in his treatment of senior officers who engage in misconduct and to send a message that even men of Petraeus’ fame and esteemed reputation are not immune to punishment.
Pentagon spokesperson Peter Cook told The Daily Beast that Carter had requested more information on the matter before reaching a final decision.
“The Department of the Army is still in the process of providing the Secretary with information
relevant to former Secretary McHugh’s recommendation,” Cook told The Daily Beast, referring to ex-Army Secretary John McHugh, who had recommended taking no action against Petraeus. “Once the Secretary has an opportunity to consider this information, he will make his decision about next steps, if any, in this matter.”
Carter could also recommend other actions that don’t result in Petraeus losing his fourth star. Or the Defense Secretary could simply allow the Army’s previous recommendations to stand.
Petraeus, arguably the most well-known and revered military officer of his generation, retired from the Army in 2011 with the rank of a four-star general, the highest rank an Army officer can achieve. If Carter decides to strip Petraeus of his fourth star, he could be demoted to the last rank at which he “satisfactorily” served, according to military regulations.
Reducing Petraeus’ rank, most likely to lieutenant general, could mean he’d have to pay back the difference in pension payments and other benefits that he received as a retired four-star general. That would amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars over his retirement. According to Pentagon figures, a four-star general with roughly the same years of experience as Petraeus was entitled to receive a yearly pension of nearly $220,000. A three-star officer would receive about $170,000.
Petraeus didn’t respond to a request for comment.
But the financial pain to Petraeus isn’t likely to be severe. He has confided to friends and acquaintances that he’s making a hefty sum from his job at a private equity firm and through speaking fees.
The demotion in rank would be a bigger, lasting blow, and take from Petraeus the rare achievement he’d set his eyes on many years ago.
At any given time, there are only 12 four-star generals in the Army, the largest of the services. By the time he was a colonel, in the mid-1990s, many thought Petraeus was destined to be one of them.
The U.S military has, on several occasions, demoted generals, increasingly for improper personal contact and not for poor battlefield decisions. But rarely does it demote four-star generals, in part because there are so few of them. It’s also more common to reduce the rank of more junior officers than of top generals.
If Petraeus were demoted, it would mark another spectacular fall. Petraeus stepped down as director of the Central Intelligence Agency in 2012 after his affair with Paula Broadwell, a writer and current Army reservist, was revealed. At the time, Petraeus had been frequently mentioned as a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2016.
Petraeus pleaded guilty last year to giving Broadwell eight notebooks that he compiled while serving as commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and that he knew contained classified information. The notebooks held some of the most sensitive kinds of military and intelligence secrets, including the identities of covert officers, intelligence capabilities, quotes from high-level meetings of the National Security Council, and notes about Petraeus’ discussions with President Obama.
After leaving Afghanistan, Petraeus brought the books back to his home in Virginia and gave them to Broadwell just three days before he retired from the Army. She later returned them. No classified information appeared in her biography, All In: The Education of General David Petraeus, officials have said.
Petraeus could have faced felony charges, including for lying to FBI investigators, but was allowed to plead guilty last year to a misdemeanor count of unauthorized handling classified information. He avoided and avoid a prison sentence and received two years probation and a $100,000 fine.
But that was not the end of the matter. Last year, the FBI gave Army investigators information that the bureau had come across as it was closing up its own investigation of Petraeus, the defense official and one former U.S. official told The Daily Beast.
The information, the FBI believed, might be of interest to the Army, the defense official said. The Army investigated and decided “there was nothing new here that should change his retirement” and “recommended that there be no change” to his four-star rank, the official said. Last month, it went to the Secretary of Defense for final approval.
Army personnel regulations say that an officer doesn’t automatically retire with the highest rank he or she achieved while in uniform. And even though Petraeus had already been officially retired, through a process known as grade determination the Army can retroactively reopen his case and consider whether to demote him “[i]f substantial new evidence discovered contemporaneously with or within a short time following separation could result in a lower grade determination.”
The regulations also state that if “an officer’s misconduct while still on active duty is documented,” including by “conviction after retirement,” a new grade determination may be completed. Petraeus hadn’t yet retired when he gave Broadwell the classified information.
The Army received the information from the FBI that prompted this new review more than four years after Petraeus had retired. The Defense Department was also running its own investigation into Petraeus’ relationship with Broadwell and what classified information he gave her at the same time the FBI and federal prosecutors were pursuing their case. That may explain why the Army decided it had seen nothing new in the information it received last year from the FBI and decided not to recommend a demotion.
But Carter is said to be concerned that because he has recommended other generals be reduced in rank for actions not becoming an officer, he’ll be seen as inconsistent if he doesn’t do the same for Petraeus. The decision is as much about timing and politics as it is Petraeus’ own transgressions.
“This is about Ash Carter, not David Petraeus,” the defense official said.
Last November, Carter removed his senior military aide, Lt. Gen. Ron Lewis, for personal misconduct, and referred the matter to the Pentagon’s inspector general for investigation. Lewis was demoted a rank, to a major general.
Lewis was a long-time and influential aide to the secretary, and his removal and punishment signaled Carter’s commitment to maintaining upstanding behavior among of the military’s generals. The exact nature of Lewis’ misconduct has not been announced, but military officials have suggested he was involved in an improper personal relationship.
While few are familiar with Petraeus’ potential demotion, those who are aware of it said they were surprised that he could be punished years years after the scaNdal was presumably put behind him and after Petraeus pleaded guilty to mishandling classified information. No general in recent history has been demoted years after scandal swirled around him or her.
Those who know and have worked with Petraeus describe him as a man of extraordinary capabilities and ambition. He received his fourth star in 2007 and then served in several prestigious and demanding assignments, including commander of U.S. Central Command, the commanding general of all ground forces in Iraq, and later as commander of ground forces in Afghanistan.
Petraeus’ unorthodox thinking and willingness to buck conventional strategy was seen as key to the U.S. victory over insurgents and jihadists in Iraq during the so-called troop surge of 2007 and 2008. His reputation was so esteemed that there was talk of giving him a fifth star–a largely symbolic gesture that was highly unlikely–or renaming the road to Petraeus’ alma mater, the U.S. Military Academy, after him.
Should Carter choose to knock Petraeus down to the rank of a three-star general, he will have a chance to appeal his case to the secretary, but Congress doesn’t have to be informed of the decision, the official said.
There is no deadline on Carter to make a decision.
The last commander to lose rank for professional misconduct was Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, who was demoted to colonel in 2005 for the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq. The last four-star general to be demoted was Gen. William Ward who retired as a three-star in 2012 amid allegations he misspent government money on himself and his family.
Inspectors will monitor Iran’s key nuclear facilities 24 hours a day, 365 days a year,” President Obama promised yesterday. Praising the Iran deal’s implementation, he asserted that Iran cannot build a nuclear weapon and that the Middle East has been made safer. Tellingly, the president also referenced Iran’s detention of U.S. sailors last week: “We worked directly with the Iranian government and secured the release of our sailors in less than 24 hours.” These two quotes illustrate President Obama’s kidnapping of realist international-relations theory, which, as he sees it, involves balancing U.S. interests with the realities of a complicated world. Or, as he puts it, “Don’t do stupid sh**.”
The president believes that, with a mix of hard compromise and unwavering leadership, he has prevented a nuclear-arms race and facilitated Iranian political moderation. But this isn’t realism; it is delusion.
First off, it’s willfully ignorant. Consider again President Obama’s remark on inspecting “Iran’s key nuclear facilities.” It’s relevant because it reminds us that the deal in fact prevents timely inspections of other Iranian military sites. And by describing only some nuclear facilities as “key,” President Obama is tacitly accepting Iran’s obstruction of non-key facility inspections. Iran will simply use military sites for nuclear-weaponization research and then claim those facilities are off limits or clean them up before inspections. This isn’t really debatable; after all, Iran’s ongoing ballistic-missile tests prove its public determination to build a nuclear-weapons delivery platform. Of course, announcing new sanctions yesterday on eleven individuals and organizations connected to Iranian ballistic-missile research, the president said he will “remain steadfast in opposing Iran’s destabilizing behavior elsewhere.” He neglected — as do most in the media — to mention that these new sanctions are so weak that they’re functionally irrelevant. Iran will simply use new cut-out entities and further evasion to continue its ballistic activities. The Obama administration knows this, the Sunni monarchies know this, the Iranians know this, and the Europeans — who cannot wait to get their hands on Iranian business contracts — are banking on it.
The second way in which this deal distorts realist theory is in its fatally narrow-minded strategic vision. As I noted recently at National Review Online, Iran’s unchallenged dissection of U.S. credibility on inspections, missile tests, support for regional terrorism, etc., is fueling reciprocal escalation by the Sunni-Arab monarchies. As a consequence, opportunities for political moderation in the Middle East are rapidly being displaced by sectarian extremism. Making matters worse, as attested by President Obama’s failure to meet with Jordan’s King Abdullah in Washington last week, the president seems to have decided to simply ignore America’s Sunni allies. This preference for a short-term perceived win (the Iran deal) over long-term U.S. influence with the Sunni kingdoms (promoting political reform and restraining their sectarian impulses) further exemplifies the president’s defective realism. Yet the president’s realist delusion is enabled by many in the international-relations community. Just contemplate how his Twitter supporters mobilized this weekend. Professor Daniel Drezner of Tufts University gleefully tweeted: “All US negotiations with Iran this week have been a win-win. Which, if you believe relations with Iran’s regime are zero-sum, is infuriating.” Drezner also claimed that the Iranians released in exchange for Jason Rezaian and Amir Hekmati and two other Americans were largely insignificant actors. Vox’s Max Fisher tweeted: “Amazing fact: Iran surrenders the bulk of its nuclear program, and it is considered a partisan issue in America whether that is good or bad.” From the Council on Foreign Relations, Micah Zenko tweeted that every Joint Staff and Central Command defense planner is “elated.” All these claims deserve great scrutiny. First, while defense planners hope the Iran deal will hold, they also know it fuels second- and third-order risks of sectarian escalation. Moreover, although I support the deal to release Rezaian and company, we shouldn’t pretend that the released Iranians are insignificant. They were variously involved in supporting Iran’s satellite communications capability, in stealing U.S. technology for the Iranian military, and in hacking into the U.S. power-grid and airline-service databases. According to an American cyber-investigations firm, the airport hacking involved Iranian attempts to access ground-crew credentials. It doesn’t take a genius to understand why Iran wants access to civilian aircraft and power infrastructure: the capability to launch spectacular attacks on U.S. and allied interests. Again, realism demands our assessment of the facts in the context of Iran’s previous actions. For one, we should remember Iran’s 2011 attempt to blow up a packed Washington, D.C., restaurant. Oh, and as Josh Rogin reports, two other Iranian suspects the Obama administration has agreed to stop pursuing are involved in the drowning and starving of Syrian civilians. Related: Assad Is Deliberately Starving Sunni Muslims in Syria Finally, any true realist must also accept what this deal means for hard-liners aligned with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (IRGC). Holding dominion over key sectors of Iran’s economy and controlling foreign commercial access to the economy, the IRGC is getting a big payday. Realism also requires our objective assessment as to where the IRGC will spend its money: exported death. Consider that in the past five years, the IRGC has plotted an attack on the U.S. capital, supported the Taliban, assassinated U.S. allies in cities such as Beirut, and kidnapped U.S. citizens. And upon presenting these tests of U.S. resolve, the IRGC has witnessed two distinct Obama-administration responses: silence and, as in the case of last week’s sailor kidnap, gratitude. Yesterday, we learned of another Iranian test: Within the past few days, several Americans were kidnapped by a militia in Baghdad. I would confidently venture that an IRGC-proxy such as Kataib Hezbollah is responsible. As I warned back in December, “if the IRGC leadership senses American weakness, it will take hostile action (directly, via KH, or via covert subgroups) against U.S. interests.” Don’t get me wrong; realism demands that we actively pursue diplomacy with Iran. Iran’s youthful population is an existential threat to the theocrats and a source of major internal political pressure. We must not alienate these future leaders with a leap to military action. Yet by our failure to deter Iran’s hard-liners, we only encourage them further. And in their empowerment, political moderation perishes. Foreign-policy realism demands that we sometimes deal with unpleasant people. But it also requires our commitment to honest policy.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/429907/obamas-realism-iran?utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_content=569ce98d04d3012242625e14&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter
In light of the New Year attacks in Cologne, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble has demanded the option of deploying Bundeswehr troops at home. He also reiterated his support for Chancellor Angela Merkel.
In an interview with Saturday’s edition of the “Süddeutsche Zeitung,” Schäuble said Berlin must ask itself why “under clear legal rules in support of the police, practically every other country in Europe can turn to its armed forces,” except for Germany.
“A legal basis for domestic military missions must be created,” Schäuble told the paper, adding that Germans expect the state to ensure security.
“For this you need more police and enhanced legal foundations for the police and intelligence services,” he said.
“The situation may arise, however, where both federal and state police forces are exhausted,” he added. “Every other country in the world would deploy soldiers in an emergency.”
Any deployment of the Bundeswehr within Germany is subject to extremely strict constitutional limitations, with its role described in the German Basic Law as absolutely defensive.
Witnesses at the city’s main train station and iconic cathedral described women being groped, as well as subjected to lewd insults and robbery. In one instance, a rape was reported. Most of the culprits were said to have been of a North African or Middle Eastern appearance.
Support for Merkel
The reports have also renewed criticism of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s open-door policy on refugees and migrants, with some 1.1 million new asylum seekers registered in the last year alone. Following criticism from within Merkel’s own Christian Democrats (CDU), Schäuble renewed his support for the chancellor.
“I support with conviction what the chancellor has said: We must solve the problem at the external borders,” Schäuble told the “Süddeutsche.”
The finance minister also warned his fellow CDU party members against criticizing Merkel’s refugee policy.
“Of course, no one is satisfied with the situation,” Schäuble said, admitting that there had been “very intensive discussions” within the CDU and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union. The people want us “to solve the problems the best we can,” he said.
Schäuble’s comments published Saturday were far from comparable to those heard at the end of last year when he called for a strict limit on the number of family reunifications among refugees and compared Germany’s unprecedented influx of asylum seekers to an “avalanche.”
Three Americans reported missing from a Baghdad neighborhood were kidnapped by militiamen from an apartment in the capital on Saturday, a senior police official and resident of the building said.
A statement from Baghdad Operations Command on Monday confirmed that “three people with American citizenship” were kidnapped in the capital.
A Baghdad police colonel, speaking on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to the media, said that the Americans are employed as contractors at the Baghdad International Airport. He did not say which company employed the individuals.
Another police official in Baghdad, a major general also speaking on condition of anonymity, gave the names of the abducted individuals as Amro Mohamed, Wael al-Mahdawi, and Rusul Farad, a woman. The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad did not respond to a request to verify the names. Two senior security officials said that the missing Americans are of Iraqi origin.
The three Americans appear to have been seized by Shiite militiamen in the Dora neighborhood in southern Baghdad, the police colonel said. The area from which they were taken is controlled by Shiite militias, including the Iran-backed Asai’b Ahl al-Haq, or League of the Righteous, he said.
The colonel said that the group had been invited to the home of their Iraqi interpreter.
FNC: A group of Americans who disappeared in Baghdad over the weekend were kidnapped from their interpreter’s apartment, according to multiple Iraqi sources.
The apartment is well-known in southern Baghdad as a brothel and is subject to frequent raids by Shiite militias, including the Iran-backed Asa’ib ah al-Haqq, a police official and a building resident told The Washington Post.
“We are in very direct contact with the Iraqi authorities… there is a very full effort going to find them as soon as possible,” Secretary of State John Kerry told Fox News Monday.
An Iraqi intelligence official told the Associated Press that the Americans were invited into the apartment in the neighborhood of Dora. After they were abducted, they were taken to Sadr City, at which point the official said, “all communications and contact stopped.”
A spokesman for Baghdad’s Joint Operations Command told The Washington Post that the three citizens were Iraqis who had acquired U.S. citizenship. A Baghdad police official said they worked as contractors at Baghdad International Airport, but did not say which country employed them.
The U.S. Embassy in Baghdad confirmed Sunday that “several” Americans had vanished, while the State Department said it was working with the Iraqi government to locate them.
The Arab news channel Al-Arabiya first reported that three Americans had been kidnapped by militas. However, U.S. officials have not confirmed either the number of missing Americans or that they were kidnapped.
“The safety and security of American citizens overseas is our highest priority” State Department spokesman John Kirby told Fox News Sunday. We are working with the full cooperation of the Iraqi authorities to locate and recover the individuals. Due to privacy considerations, I have nothing further.”
There were no immediate claims of responsibility. Kidnappings in Iraq have been carried out by ISIS, Shiite militias and criminal gangs often demanding ransom payments or seeking to resolve workplace disputes.
Following the ISIS takeover of Iraq’s second largest city Mosul and large swaths of territory in the country’s north and west, Iraq has witnessed a deterioration in security as government forces were sent to front lines and Shiite militias were empowered to aid in the fight following the collapse of the Iraqi military.
Last month a Qatari hunting party was kidnapped in Iraq’s south by unidentified gunmen and their whereabouts are still unknown. In September 18 Turkish workers were kidnapped from their construction site in Baghdad’s Sadr city by masked men in military uniforms. Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi blamed organized crime for the kidnapping. The workers were released later that month.
The most recent incident comes after a week that has seen a deterioration of security in and around the Iraqi capital after months of relative calm.
ISIS claimed a number of attacks in Baghdad and Diyala province last week that killed more than 50 people, including a high profile attack on a mall in the Iraqi capital.
***
Details on this Shiite militia:
Asaib Ahl al-Haq Asaib Ahl al-Haq (AAH) emerged between 2006 and 2008 as part of an effort by the IRGC Qods Force to create a popular organization similar to Lebanese Hizb Allah that would be easier to shape than Moqtada al-Sadr’s uncontrollable Jaysh al-Mahdi (JAM) movement. AAH was built around one of al-Sadr’s key rivals, a protégé of al-Sadr’s father called Qais al-Khazali who had consistently opposed al-Sadr’s cease-fire agreements with the U.S. and Iraqi militaries. After AAH undertook the kidnap and murder of five U.S. soldiers on January 20, 2007, al-Khazali was captured by coalition forces alongside his brother Laith Khazali and Lebanese Hizb Allah operative Ali Musa Daqduq in Basra on March 20, 2007. In time, al-Khazali was transferred to Iraqi custody and then released in exchange for kidnapped Briton Peter Moore on January 5, 2010. Although far less senior in the IRGC Qods Force hierarchy than al-Muhandis and 20 years his junior, Qais al-Khazali could become a significant political force in mainstream politics and is being courted by both al-Maliki and al-Sadr precisely because he has the capability to draw away a portion of Moqtada’s supporters if he so chooses.
During al-Khazali’s absence in prison, AAH played a delicate game, balancing the need to negotiate for the release of detainees against the desire of many AAH members to continue attacking U.S. forces. Like its predecessor, Jaysh al-Mahdi, AAH is becoming a catch-all for a wide range of militants who seek to engage in violence for a host of ideological, sectarian or purely commercial motives.[16] Notorious Special Group commanders such as Sadrist breakaway Abu Mustapha al-Sheibani (whose real name is Hamid Thajeel al-Sheibani) and infamous Shi`a warlord Abu Deraa (whose real name is Ismail al-Lami) are reported to be returning from Iran to join AAH.
