ODNI Report on Released Gitmo Detainees

In an attempt to prevent the closure, Congress is now voting on a bill preventing further transfers of inmates until a new defense policy bill is passed.

Currently, 61 detainees still remain at the detention camp, following the release of 15 in August, the largest single transfer under the Obama administration. Additionally, 16 others have been cleared for transfer.

Summary of the Reengagement of Detainees Formerly Held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Summary of the Reengagement of Detainees Formerly Held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

The Director of National Intelligence submits this summary consistent with direction in the Fiscal Year 2012 Intelligence Authorization Act, Section 307, which states:

(a) “The Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, shall make publicly available an unclassified summary of,

(1) intelligence relating to recidivism of detainees currently or formerly held at the Detention Facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the Department of Defense; and

(2) an assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will engage in terrorism or communicate with persons in terrorist organizations.

(b) Updates – Not less frequently than once every 6 months, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and the Secretary of Defense, shall update and make publicly available an unclassified summary consisting of the information required by subsection (a) and the number of individuals formerly detained at Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who are confirmed or suspected of returning to terrorist activities after release or transfer from such Naval Station.”

Section 307 (a) (1) Intelligence relating to recidivism of detainees currently or formerly held at the Detention Facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, by the Department of Defense.

**

Reengagement of Former Guantanamo Bay (GTMO) Detainees as of 15 July 2016
Total Pre-22 January 2009a Post-22 January 2009
Detainees Transferred 693* 532 161
Confirmed of Reengaging 122 of 693 (17.6%) 113 of 532 (21.2%) 9 of 161 (5.6%)**
Dead – 30 of 122 29 1
In custody – 25 of 122 25 0
Not in custody – 67 of 122 59 8
Suspected of Reengagingb 86 of 693 (12.4%) 75 of 532 (14.1%)** 11 of 161 (6.8%)**
Dead – 3 of 86c 2 1
In custody – 18 of 86 18 0
Not in custody – 65 of 86 55 10

a Executive Order 13492 was signed on January 22, 2009 to determine the disposition of the 240 detainees then remaining at the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

b The Defense Intelligence Agency assesses five additional detainees are suspected of reengagement.

c Due to a coding error this number was previously reported as 4.

*An additional nine detainees died while at GTMO, and one was transferred to New York for trial, was convicted, and is now imprisoned in Colorado.

**Each of these categories includes detainees who were transferred pursuant to a court order.

Section 307 (a) (2) An assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will engage in terrorism.

Based on trends identified during the past eleven years, we assess that some detainees currently at GTMO will seek to reengage in terrorist or insurgent activities after they are transferred. Transfers to countries with ongoing conflicts and internal instability as well as recruitment by insurgent and terrorist organizations could pose problems. While enforcement of transfer conditions may deter reengagement by many former detainees and delay reengagement by others, some detainees who are determined to reengage will do so regardless of any transfer conditions, albeit probably at a lower rate than if they were transferred without conditions.

Section 307 (a) (2) An assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will communicate with persons in terrorist organizations.

Former GTMO detainees routinely communicate with each other, families of other former detainees, and previous associates who are members of terrorist organizations. The reasons for communication span from the mundane (reminiscing about shared experiences) to the nefarious (planning terrorist operations). We assess that some GTMO detainees transferred in the future also will communicate with other former GTMO detainees and persons in terrorist organizations. We do not consider mere communication with individuals or organizations—including other former GTMO detainees—an indicator of reengagement. Rather, the motives, intentions, and purposes of each communication are taken into account when assessing whether the individual has reengaged.

Definition of “Terrorist” or “Insurgent” Activities. Activities such as the following indicate involvement in terrorist or insurgent activities: planning terrorist operations, conducting a terrorist or insurgent attack against Coalition or host-nation forces or civilians, conducting a suicide bombing, financing terrorist operations, recruiting others for terrorist operations, and arranging for movement of individuals involved in terrorist operations. It does not include mere communications with individuals or organizations—including other former GTMO detainees—on issues not related to terrorist operations, such as reminiscing about shared experiences at GTMO, communicating with past terrorist associates about non-nefarious activities, writing anti-US books or articles, or making anti-US propaganda statements.

Definition of “Confirmed” Activities. A preponderance of information which identifies a specific former GTMO detainee as directly involved in terrorist or insurgent activities. For the purposes of this definition, engagement in anti-US statements or propaganda does not qualify as terrorist or insurgent activity.

Definition of “Suspected” Activities. Plausible but unverified or single-source reporting indicating a specific former GTMO detainee is directly involved in terrorist or insurgent activities. For the purposes of this definition, engagement in anti-US statements or propaganda does not qualify as terrorist or insurgent activity.

Corruption Undermined US Mission in Afghanistan

Report: Corruption Substantially Undermined US Mission in Afghanistan

Widespread corruption in Afghanistan has substantially undermined U.S. efforts to rebuild the county, according to a report released Wednesday

The U.S. government’s Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) John Sopko said corruption has fueled grievances against the Afghan government and channeled material support to the insurgency from the beginning of Operation Enduring Freedom.

Sopko’s report says corruption remains an enormous challenge to security, political stability, and development, and urges the U.S. mission to make anticorruption efforts a top priority.

The report offers a number of recommendations for implementing a U.S. interagency anticorruption strategy in Afghanistan.

Although the United States injected tens of billions of dollars into the Afghan economy, it contributed to the growth of corruption by being slow to recognize the magnitude of the problem, the role of corrupt patronage networks, and the ways in which corruption threatened core U.S. goals. It said certain U.S. policies and practices exacerbated the problem.

‘Endemic’ problem

The report titled, “Corruption in Conflict: Lessons from the U.S. Experience in Afghanistan,” quoted Ambassador Ryan Crocker, who re-opened the U.S. Embassy in Kabul soon after the September 11, 2001, attacks and served again as ambassador in 2011-2012 (and who is a member of Broadcasting Board of Governors which oversees U.S. international broadcasting, including the Voice of America) as saying that “the ultimate point of failure for our efforts … wasn’t an insurgency. It was the weight of endemic corruption.”

“The corruption lens has got to be in place at the outset, and even before the outset, in the formulation of reconstruction and development strategy, because once it gets to the level I saw, it’s somewhere between unbelievably hard and outright impossible to fix,” Crocker said.

****

The report is 164 pages, but here is some help with the conclusions:

Our study of the U.S. experience with corruption in Afghanistan finds:

1. Corruption undermined the U.S. mission in Afghanistan by fueling

grievances against the Afghan government and channeling material

support to the insurgency.

2. The United States contributed to the growth of corruption by injecting

tens of billions of dollars into the Afghan economy, using flawed oversight

and contracting practices, and partnering with malign powerbrokers.

3. The U.S. government was slow to recognize the magnitude of the problem,

the role of corrupt patronage networks, the ways in which corruption

threatened core U.S. goals, and that certain U.S. policies and practices

exacerbated the problem.

4. Even when the United States acknowledged corruption as a strategic

threat, security and political goals consistently trumped strong

anticorruption actions.

5. Where the United States sought to combat corruption, its efforts

saw only limited success in the absence of sustained Afghan and

U.S. political commitment.

Thumb through the report here.

Summary:

Billions in US taxpayer money filled the pockets of Afghan warlords, bolstered the drug trade and fed corruption during effort to rebuild the country after the war

  • Federal watchdog released damning report into post-war efforts by US
  • Was based on the ‘lessons’ needed to be learned from military operations
  • They injected billions into economy without knowing extent of corruption 
  • The money ended up in hands of criminals, some with ties to the Taliban 
  • Multi-million dollar villas were built for the corrupt individuals 
  • While programs meant to actually rebuild the country were undermined  
  • A top diplomat Ryan Crocker said: ‘The ultimate point of failure for our efforts wasn’t an insurgency. It was the weight of endemic corruption’
  • He added that the failures in the system are ‘almost impossible to fix’ 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3789240/Corruption-undermines-US-efforts-Afghanistan.html#ixzz4KGPWwkxm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

How to Stop Obama/Kerry from Giving More Money to Iran

Rubio letter on Iran transaction by Daniel on Scribd

Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.), among other lawmakers, has petitioned the Obama administration to disclose the names of the U.S. and Iranian officials who played a role in the cash handoff.

“What U.S. official(s) escorted the pallets of cash to Iranian officials and what entity of the Iranian government received the funds and controlled the flight(s) that transported the cash to Iran?” Rubio asked in a Sept. 10 letter to the administration.

“Please provide a list of the Iranian officials present at the exchange of cash and include the Iranian government entities that employed them, including any past or current connections to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence,” Rubio wrote.

Lawmakers working to unearth further details about the exchange told the Free Beacon that it appears increasingly likely that the IRGC played a role in the cash exchange.

“For the Obama administration to argue that the IRGC was somehow not involved in the U.S. transfer of $1.7 billion—or more—in cash to Iran is totally unconvincing,” Rep. Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told the Free Beacon. “Given the IRGC’s extensive control of the Iranian economy, and its vast influence with Iran’s regime, it was most likely influential in the set-up and execution of the payment. Like other malicious actors, the IRGC is eager to get its hands on cash to fund its terrorist activities.”

*****

Congressional questions to Treasury begins. Treasury admits to what? Nothing….

treasury-response-to-rep-duffy-september-9-2016

Rubio said his new bill “would stop the Obama administration from making any further payments to Iran from the [Treasury Department’s] Judgment Fund until Iran returns the ransom money it received and pays the American victims of Iranian terrorism what they are owed.”

“President Obama may have attempted to appease our enemy with pallets of cash secretly delivered on an unmarked cargo plane, but Iran continues to cheat on the nuclear deal, harass our military, hold Americans hostage, and fund terrorism around the world,” Rubio added. “Iran should be held accountable, and the Obama administration’s misguided policies must be stopped.”

Rubio’s bill, called the No Ransom Payments Act, is co-sponsored by Sens. John Cornyn (R., Texas), Mark Kirk (R., Ill.), Kelly Ayotte (R., N.H.), John Barrasso (R., Wyo.), and Shelley Moore Capito (R., W.Va.).

“Congress is taking a clear stand—demanding Iran return the more than $1 billion the Obama Administration wrongly gave them and putting a stop to any and all future money this administration, or any administration might want to give to state sponsors of terrorism like Iran,” Pompeo, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told the Free Beacon. “The American people know this is an unacceptable use of their taxpayer dollars and we wholeheartedly agree. It is unprecedented and dangerous for President Obama to be doling out millions to the Islamic Republic of Iran—in the dead of night, under wraps, and in cash. Kansans expect and demand better from their government.” More from FreeBeacon.

During Iran Talks, we Knew Iran was Harboring al Qaeda

It is stunning, that not only has John Kerry declared that upon the completed talks and agreement(s) with Iran, Iran would normalized and be a peaceful accepted actor on the global stage, but it is easy to conclude that during the hostilities with Islamic State in Iraq, the West has essentially given Iraq over to Iran. The Baghdad government is owned by Tehran. Mentioning the billions of dollars, much of it U.S. taxpayer dollars to Iran is almost anti-climatic at this point, when the notion of Iran operating globally with terror is a rightful prediction in the coming months and years. The United States has financially aided Iraq with billions of dollars and with more than 100,000 Iranian Shiite fighters in Iraq, how do we keep our money meant for Iraq out of the hands of Iran? We don’t.

Related reading: Al Qaeda in Iran

There is much talk that Saudi Arabia was behind the attacks of 9/11, while there are key Saudi operators that do deserve a guilty outcome, Iran has an much if not more history and responsibility when it comes to al Qaeda.

Could this another reasons be the basis for the decision not to publically release all the bin Ladin documents found at his compound in Abbottabad?

U.S. blacklists three al Qaeda members living in Iran

Reuters: The United States on Wednesday blacklisted three members of al Qaeda living in Iran, saying they had helped the Islamist militant group on the battlefield, with finance and logistics, and in mediating with Iranian authorities.

Iran has held several al Qaeda high-ranking members and lower-level militants since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, though U.S. officials say the precise conditions of their confinement are unclear.

Faisal Jassim Mohammed al-Amri al-Khalidi, a 31-year-old Saudi national, led an al Qaeda brigade and was serving as the group’s military commission chief in May 2015, Treasury said, describing him as “part of a new generation” of al Qaeda operatives. As of 2011, Khalidi liaised between al Qaeda associates, central council members, and leaders within the Pakistani Taliban.

Yisra Muhammad Ibrahim Bayumi, 48 and an Egyptian national, mediated with Iranian authorities as of early 2015, Treasury said, and helped al Qaeda members living in Iran.

Abu Bakr Muhammad Muhammad Ghumayn, 35, had control of the group’s financing and organization inside Iran as of 2015, Treasury said. Ghumayn, an Algerian, was previously based in Pakistan.

Al Qaeda and Iran’s government have a complex and sometimes tense relationship, according to documents seized from Osama bin Laden’s hideout in Pakistan and made public. At times Iranian authorities promised to release and may have actually released al Qaeda figures, but one of bin Laden’s sons who had been held in Iran, Saad, reportedly was killed in 2009.

Iran’s Shi’ite Muslim rulers deny cooperating with al Qaeda, a Sunni group. Iranian officials call al Qaeda a terrorist group, and Iranian security forces periodically report the arrest of al Qaeda members.

An analysis by the U.S. Military Academy at West Point published in 2012 concluded that while it was obvious the al Qaeda-Iran relationship was antagonistic, the rationale behind Iran’s detention of al Qaeda militants for years “without due process” was unclear.

Treasury’s statement did not make clear what conditions the men were living under in Iran. Bayumi has been in Iran since 2014, Treasury said, but it did not say how long the other two men had lived there. Bayumi had been able to secure funds from Syria for al Qaeda members and facilitate al Qaeda funds transfers in 2015, Treasury said, suggesting he had some freedom to operate since moving to Iran.

Wednesday’s measure freezes any property of the three men in the United States, and bars U.S. citizens from dealing with them.

Iran Released Top Members of Al Qaeda in a Trade

NYT: The government of Iran released five senior members of Al Qaeda earlier this year, including the man who stepped in to serve as the terrorist group’s interim leader immediately after Osama bin Laden’s death, and who is the subject of a $5 million bounty, according to an American official who had been briefed on the matter.

Iran’s release of the five men was part of a prisoner swap in March with Al Qaeda’s branch in Yemen, the group holding an Iranian diplomat, Nour Ahmad Nikbakht. Mr. Nikbakht was kidnapped in the Yemeni capital of Sana in July 2013.

The Iranian government, in a statement on Thursday after the release was reported by Sky News earlier this week, denied that the five men had been freed. The American official, who was granted anonymity to discuss the matter, confirmed the release of Saif al-Adl, a senior member of Al Qaeda’s ruling body, known as the Shura Council, who oversaw the organization immediately after bin Laden was killed by Navy SEALs in Pakistan in 2011.

Analysts tracking Al Qaeda described the release as alarming, given the seniority of the five men. It comes at a time when much of the organization’s leadership has been lost in back-to-back airstrikes, including the death earlier this summer of Nasser al-Wuhayshi, considered to be the organization’s general manager. At the same time, the organization had been hemorrhaging members to the more brutal and media-savvy Islamic State.

Of special concern is the release of Mr. Adl, a former colonel in the Egyptian military believed to be in his 50s, who is listed on the F.B.I.’s Most Wanted Terrorist list, and who was indicted in the 1998 United States Embassy bombings in East Africa. Qaeda operatives have described him as the organization’s operational boss.

A passport photo of Saif al-Adl. Credit via Kronos Advisory LLC

Cynthia Storer, who was the Central Intelligence Agency’s first full-time analyst dedicated to tracking Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, called him a “founding father.” She added, “If the organization is having internal issues, he is someone that could bring it together.”

A Qaeda analyst, Michael S. Smith II of Kronos Advisory, who has tracked Mr. Adl’s rise, describes him as “the biggest fish of the big fish” and argued that Al Qaeda’s future would rest on the shoulders of Saif al-Adl.

It remains unclear when exactly the swap occurred, with some saying it happened almost six months ago. The release of Mr. Adl will act like “a shot of energy” in the leadership arm of Al Qaeda, said Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, who retired last year after heading the Defense Intelligence Agency.

“The collusion between Al Qaeda and Iran is something we have seen before and this trade, if known by the U.S., should have been included as part of the Iran deal negotiations,” General Flynn said.

According to the official briefed on the details of the transfer, the other four men released by Iran were Abdul Khayr al-Misri, an Egyptian who formerly headed Al Qaeda’s foreign relations council; Abul Qassam, a Jordanian who was a deputy to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the founder of the organization that later became the Islamic State; Sari Shibab, a Jordanian operative; and Abu Mohamed al-Misri, an Egyptian who helped orchestrate Al Qaeda’s major attacks before Sept. 11, 2001.

After those attacks, Mr. Smith, said, Al Qaeda decided to move several high-level leaders to Iran, believing that this would be one of the only places beyond America’s military reach.

Mr. Adl, for example, was dispatched alongside one of bin Laden’s wives and her children, and entrusted to organize their safe passage, he said.

It remains unclear when the men were detained by Iranian officials. They were held under house arrest, Mr. Smith said, and continued to communicate with Al Qaeda, according to intercepts and letters that were later recovered.

ISIS Chemical Weapons Destroyed and Hostilities with Hezbollah

US says it destroyed Islamic State chemical threat in Iraq

WASHINGTON (AP)– American warplanes eliminated a “significant chemical threat” to Iraqi civilians by bombing a complex of buildings near the northern city of Mosul that Islamic State militants had converted from pharmaceutical manufacturing to chemical weapons production, the three-star general in charge of U.S. air operations in the Middle East said Tuesday.

 Photo: DailyMail

Air Force Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Harrigian told reporters at the Pentagon that the target was an Islamic State headquarters also used to produce lethal chemicals, possibly including chlorine and mustard gas. He provided no details on the chemical production.

Harrigian described the airstrike as a large, well-planned operation, which destroyed more than 50 targets at the site with a variety of U.S. warplanes, including Air Force B-52 bombers and Marine Corps F-18D attack planes. Other U.S. officials said later that a total of 12 U.S. planes were used.

Harrigian said the mission was part of a broader effort to cut off the Islamic State’s main sources of revenue, kill their leaders and create “organizational dysfunction” in ways that will eliminate the group as a military threat in Iraq and Syria.

Meanwhile:

Hezbollah “secretly” deploying in Quneitra: report

A pro-rebel outlet claims that Hezbollah fighters have taken up positions in the province along the Israeli border under the guise of being local militiamen.

BEIRUT – Hezbollah has allegedly started to “secretly” deploy its members to Quneitra to replace regime troops stationed in the province near the Golan demarcation line with Israel, according to a pro-opposition outlet.

Al-Etihad press reported Thursday that pro-regime troops in Madinat al-Baath and Khan Arnabeh—both government strongholds northeast of the rebel-held Quneitra border crossing—were being “withdrawn in batches” for redeployment near the western Ghouta suburbs of Damascus.

The outlet’s report mirrored that of local correspondent Omar al-Joulani, who reported on Tuesday that pro-regime forces as well as Hezbollah withdrew a number of their combatants and tanks from the two Quneitra province towns.

However, Al-Etihad press cited local sources as saying that Hezbollah members “came out with the regime forces in public,” but returned in secret to positions under the guise of being local militiamen.

“Hezbollah fighters… returned under the name of the Golan Regiment,” the sources claimed, in reference to the predominantly Druze force that fights under the banner of the regime’s auxiliary National Defense Force.

On Monday, Iran’s Fars News reported that Hezbollah and Syrian regime forces are readying a major offensive against rebels along the Golan demarcation line with Israel.

Syrian military sources said that Hezbollah deployed fighters “in the vicinity of the Quneitra border crossing.”

“[Hezbollah] aims to put an end to the presence of armed men in the area close to the border,” the sources told the Iranian outlet.

The Fars News report comes after the leader of Iran’s paramilitary Basij force, General Mohammad Reza Naqdi, toured Syria’s border with Israel near Quneitra in July, the first such visit of a top-ranking official from Tehran to be publicized in Iranian media.

Cross-border incidents

 

In past weeks, pro-regime forces have bombarded rebel positions in Al-Hamidiyah and other rebel-held villages along the Golan border near the Quneitra crossing, with a number of mortar rounds hitting Israel, prompting Tel Aviv to launch retaliatory strikes on at least five occasions.

On July 4, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) hit two Syrian army targets in the Golan after stray fire damaged the technical fence stretching across the demarcation line between the two countries in the mountainous region.

Two weeks later, an unmanned aerial vehicle crossed over the border into Israeli territory in the central Golan, prompting Israel to fire two Patriot missiles in an unsuccessful attempt to shoot down the drone.

An air-to-air missile fired by an Israeli jet also failed to bring down the drone, which Tel Aviv suspects is Russian-manufactured.

In the latest incident, Israel once again responded to a stray cross-border mortar strike on September 8, hitting a Syrian army target east of the Druze-populated town of Hader in Quneitra, as per Tel Aviv’s standard practice of retaliation to errant fire.

A local pro-Assad fighting force also claimed that Israel conducted a missile strike on one of its convoys in the Quneitra province, although Tel Aviv has made no official comment on the accusation while Syrian state media has also stayed mum.

The Golan Regiment announced on July 28 that two Israeli Nimrod missiles hit one of its positions, but did not name the specific location of the strike.

“The commander of the Golan Regiment’s Fist Battalion, Majid Himoud, escaped the Zionist [strike],” the group, which is part of the Syrian regime’s auxiliary National Defense Force, announced on its official Facebook page.

The militia, which is predominantly Druze, added that Israel fired the missiles from its side of the divided Golan Heights, but did not specify whether the Nimrods were launched from an aircraft or the ground.