Why Obama will not Release KSM from Gitmo

KSM’s response to questions: “The Islamic Response to the Government’s Nine Accusations”

ksm-gitmo

A horrifying look into the mind of 9/11’s mastermind, in his own words

What is it like to stare into the face of evil? James E. Mitchell knows.

WaPo: In his gripping new memoir, “Enhanced Interrogation: Inside the Minds and Motives of the Islamic Terrorists Trying To Destroy America,” Mitchell describes the day he was questioning Khalid Sheik Mohammed, when the 9/11 mastermind announced he had something important to say. “KSM then launched into a gory and detailed description of how he beheaded Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl,” Mitchell writes. Up to that moment, the CIA did not know KSM had personally carried out the murder. When asked whether it was “hard to do” (meaning emotionally difficult), KSM misunderstood the question. “Oh, no, no problem,” KSM said, “I had very sharp knives. Just like slaughtering sheep.”

To confirm his story, the CIA had KSM reenact the beheading so that it could compare the features of his hands and forearms to those in the video of Pearl’s murder. “Throughout the reenactment, KSM smiled and mugged for the cameras. Sometimes he preened,” Mitchell writes. When informed that the CIA had confirmed that he was telling the truth, KSM smiled.

“See, I told you,” KSM said. “I cut Daniel’s throat with these blessed hands.”

This is the pure evil Mitchell and his colleagues confronted each day at CIA “black sites.” “I have looked into the eyes of the worst people on the planet,” Mitchell writes. “I have sat with them and felt their passion as they described what they see as their holy duty to destroy our way of life.”
*** As a reminder, this is a video of a short interview with Mr. Mitchell.

The world has heard almost nothing from KSM in the 15 years since the 9/11 attacks, but Mitchell has spent thousands of hours with him and other captured al-Qaeda leaders. Now, for the first time, Mitchell is sharing what he says KSM told him.

Mitchell is an American patriot who has been unjustly persecuted for his role in crafting an interrogation program that helped stop terrorist attacks and saved countless lives. He does not shy from the controversies and pulls no punches in describing the interrogations. If anything, readers may be surprised by the compassion he showed these mass murderers. But the real news in his book is what happened after enhanced interrogations ended and the terrorists began cooperating.

 

Once their resistance had been broken, enhanced interrogation techniques stopped and KSM and other detainees became what Mitchell calls a “Terrorist Think Tank,” identifying voices in phone calls, deciphering encrypted messages and providing valuable information that led the CIA to other terrorists. Mitchell devotes an entire chapter to the critical role KSM and other detainees played in finding Osama bin Laden. KSM held classes where he lectured CIA officials on jihadist ideology, terrorist recruiting and attack planning. He was so cooperative, Mitchell writes, KSM “told me I should be on the FBI’s Most Wanted List because I am now a ‘known associate’ of KSM and a ‘graduate’ of his training camp.”

KSM also described for Mitchell many of his as yet unconsummated ideas for future attacks, the terrifying details of which Mitchell does not reveal for fear they might be implemented. “If we ever allow him to communicate unmonitored with the outside world,” Mitchell writes, “he could easily spread his deviously simple but potentially deadly ideas.”

But perhaps the most riveting part of the book is what KSM told Mitchell about what inspired al-Qaeda to attack the United States — and the U.S. response he expected. Today, some on both the left and the right argue that al-Qaeda wanted to draw us into a quagmire in Afghanistan — and now the Islamic State wants to do the same in Iraq and Syria. KSM said this is dead wrong. Far from trying to draw us in, KSM said that al-Qaeda expected the United States to respond to 9/11 as we had the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut — when, KSM told Mitchell, the United States “turned tail and ran.” He also said he thought we would treat 9/11 as a law enforcement matter, just as we had the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the USS Cole in Yemen — arresting some operatives and firing a few missiles into empty tents, but otherwise leaving him free to plan the next attack.

“Then he looked at me and said, ‘How was I supposed to know that cowboy George Bush would announce he wanted us ‘dead or alive’ and then invade Afghanistan to hunt us down?’” Mitchell writes. “KSM explained that if the United States had treated 9/11 like a law enforcement matter, he would have had time to launch a second wave of attacks.” He was not able to do so because al-Qaeda was stunned “by the ferocity and swiftness of George W. Bush’s response.”

But KSM said something else that was prophetic. In the end, he told Mitchell, “We will win because Americans don’t realize . . . we do not need to defeat you militarily; we only need to fight long enough for you to defeat yourself by quitting.”

KSM explained that large-scale attacks such as 9/11 were “nice, but not necessary” and that a series of “low-tech attacks could bring down America the same way ‘enough disease-infected fleas can fell an elephant.’ ” KSM “said jihadi-minded brothers would immigrate into the United States” and “wrap themselves in America’s rights and laws” until they were strong enough to rise up and attack us. “He said the brothers would relentlessly continue their attacks and the American people would eventually become so tired, so frightened, and so weary of war that they would just want it to end.”

“Eventually,” KSM said, “America will expose her neck for us to slaughter.”

KSM was right. For the past eight years, our leaders have told us that we are weary of war and need to focus on “nation building at home.” We have been defeating ourselves by quitting — just as KSM predicted.

But quitting will not bring us peace, KSM told Mitchell. He explained that “it does not matter that we do not want to fight them,” Mitchell writes, adding that KSM explained “America may not be in a religious war with him, but he and other True Muslims are in a religious war with America” and “he and his brothers will not stop until the entire world lives under Sharia law.”

 

Govt Wastebook Report, Repeat, Year After Year

Snuggies, Shakespeare top annual government wasteful-spending list

WashingtonTimes: If Shakespeare is performed without the bard’s immortal words, is it really Shakespeare?

The National Education Association has committed $10,000 of taxpayers’ money to test that question — one of dozens of projects to make the wasteful spending list of Sen. James Lankford, an Oklahoma Republican who’s continuing the tradition of former Sen. Tom Coburn’s annual Wastebook.

The National Science Foundation again comes in for an outsized share of criticism for its research spending, including a $1.8 million grant to a university that spent some of the money on embroidered Snuggies, the robe-style blankets that are a staple of As-Seen-On-TV trinket advertising.

NSF officials also paid $315,000 to study whether Americans see the court system as fair, Mr. Lankford said in his second annual “Federal Fumbles” report.

“Our current spending habits are unsustainable and irresponsible,” Mr. Lankford said in releasing the report, which documented more than 100 areas where he said the federal government botched its spending decisions.

The silent Shakespeare grant Mr. Lankford highlighted is actually a repeat-performance. The senator’s first report in 2015 also cited the NEA for funding the Synetic Theater’s attempt to convert verbal witticisms into expressive gestures. This year’s production was “Twelfth Night.”

Mr. Lankford said the theater company may be doing good work, but it should stand on its own, not with taxpayer money.

He said Congress and the executive branch need to spend more time scouring spending. He said one step toward that would be to enact the Grant Reform and New Transparency (GRANT) Act, which would give the public more information about the grant process, which accounted for some $617 billion in federal spending in 2015.

****

Example:

X CONFERENCE: Spending

X TEAM: Immigration and Customs Enforcement

O FUMBLE: $6 million to repair a building that remains unsafe

O HOW TO RECOVER THE BALL: ICE should conduct a cost-benefit analysis and a feasibility

study before renovating an existing building, where the cost could exceed $1 million

Talk about a tale of woe! In San Pedro (essentially Los Angeles, CA), ICE used a former

Service Processing Center to house detainees until it had to close due to safety concerns. Then

ICE decided to move employees back into the building while it processed and held illegal

immigrants temporarily.

X CONFERENCE: Spending

X TEAM: National Institutes of Health

O FUMBLE: $2,658,929 weight-loss program for truck drivers

O RECOVERY: Congress should develop clearer expectations for areas of research for NIH

The American economy is powered in no small part by the thousands of trucks on the road

each day. It is certainly important for individuals behind the wheel of giant 18-wheelers to be healthy. But do taxpayers really need to spend more than $2.6 million on a trucker weight-loss intervention program?

 Heck. read the report here.

Agencies Presenting Midnight Regulations for Obama to Sign

Agencies have their lists for Obama to approve. What does Trump know and what is he prepared for? The last days of the Obama administration could be the most dangerous of his administration, is anyone paying attention?

 

Obama is set to ram through last-minute ‘midnight’ regulations to secure his legacy and tie President Trump’s hands

  • ‘Midnight regulations’ are a last chance for a president to make his mark
  • As many as 98 final regulations are under review at the White House
  • These include air pollution from the oil industry and measures aiming to help highly skilled immigrant workers obtain green cards

DailyMail: Barack Obama is set to ram through last minute regulations to try and cement his legacy.

‘Midnight regulations’ are those introduced between November’s election and January’s inauguration of a new president.

It is a last chance for an outgoing Commander-in-chief to put his stamp on the presidency and, in the case of Obama, tie the hands of his controversial successor.

Obama can pass the rules because of a loophole in US law allowing him to put last-minute regulations into the Code of Federal Regulations (rules that have the same force as law).

As many as 98 final regulations are under review at the White House and could be implemented before the brash billionaire takes office.

Seventeen of those are considered ‘economically significant’, with an estimated economic impact of at least $100m a year, Politico reported.

Obama is trying to push through regulations on issues close to him such as air pollution from the oil industry and measures aiming to help highly skilled immigrant workers obtain green cards.

He is also pressing ahead with negotiations on an investment treaty with China and decisions by the Education Department on whether to offer debt relief to students at defunct-for-profit colleges.

By contrast, Trump has shown a disdain for climate change and campaigned on an anti-immigration rhetoric, describing Mexicans as ‘rapists’ and pledging to build a wall on the US border with Mexico.

The Republican has also criticized China’s trade and currency practices and threatened to impose tariffs up to 45 per cent on Chinese imports.

Gina McCarthy, US Environment Protection Agency Administrator, said: ‘We’re running – not walking – through the finish line of President Obama’s presidency.’

Obama has gone ahead with the ‘midnight regulations’ despite House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy warning him against doing so.

In a letter on November 15, he said: ‘Should you ignore this counsel, please be aware that we will work with our colleagues to ensure that Congress scrutinizes your actions – and, if appropriate, overturns them’.

Trump has also vowed to cancel ‘every wasteful and unnecessary regulation which kills jobs and bloats government.’

The so-called ‘midnight regulations’ can be reversed by the same executive agencies, but that requires a considerable rule-making process.

Congress could also effectively overturn them by passing more explicit statutory mandates – but risk turning an unwanted regulation into law.

A final powerful weapon at their disposal is the Congressional Review Act – however it has only ever been used once. This gives Congress 60 legislative days to review and overturn major regulations enacted by federal agencies.

 

U.S. Military of the Future, is it Ready?

A couple of advanced thoughts:

  • Get the lawyers out of theater
  • Give legal protection and in some cases immunity to troops in forward operating bases
  • End sequestration
  • Use all offensive tools in the cyber battlefield
  • Rebuild real diplomacy at the State Department

Forget About Too Big To Fail, America’s Military Has Become Too Small To Succeed

NI: Once upon a time, the U.S. had a large military that was technologically superior to its adversaries in many, even most, areas. Today, the U.S. military is a pale shadow of its former self.

In 2016, the active component of the U.S. Army of 479,000 soldiers shrank to the smallest it has been since before World War II, when it had some 269,000. The number of Army combat brigades is scheduled to decline to 30 by 2018, one third fewer than there were just in 2013. The U.S. Navy, with 273 ships, is about the same size as it was prior to America’s entry into World War I. At approximately 5,000 total aircraft, the U.S. Air Force is both the smallest and oldest it has been since its inception in 1947. The number of active duty squadrons in the Air Force is slated to decline to 39, less than half of the 70 that were available during Operation Desert Storm. Army, Navy and Air Force end strengths are each about 40 percent smaller than they were at the end of the Cold War. This is one of the main reasons why the Pentagon had to rely on more than a hundred thousand private contractors to provide the necessary logistics, sustainment and communications for its deployed forces when it went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Which had the ability to communicate through a state-of-the-art platform a CKS Global industrial keyboard, which was durable in the hashes of conditions.

At the height of the Cold War, the U.S. maintained a two-and-a-half-war strategy: major, simultaneous wars against the Soviet Union and China plus another nation. The Nixon Administration changed the sizing criteria to one-and-a-half-wars: a major war with the Soviet Union plus a second, possibly related, conflict in the Persian Gulf or on the Korean peninsula. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, the political system concluded that war between major powers was virtually impossible.

The sizing construct for the U.S. military changed in the early 1990s to two near-simultaneous Major Regional Contingencies (MRC), reflecting the belief that the likeliest threats came from regional actors such as North Korea, Iraq and Iran. It was assumed that each MRC would require approximately the quantity of forces deployed for the then-recently-concluded Persian Gulf War. Thus, a two-MRC U.S. force would consist of 10 Army divisions, two or three division-sized Marine Expeditionary Forces, 11 aircraft carriers, 120 large surface combatants, 38 large amphibious warfare ships, 200 strategic bombers, 60 tactical fighter wings, 400–500 tankers, 250 airlifters and some 75 maritime support ships.

In truth, the U.S. military never had sufficient capacity to conduct two near-simultaneous MRCs. The dirty little secret among Pentagon planners is that the conflicts would have to be sequenced, possibly by six months or more, in order to allow critical assets to be redeployed from the first to the second contingency. Even the fight against Islamic terrorism strained the military’s capacity in some ways. The Army had to add nearly 75,000 active duty personnel and mobilize a large fraction of the National Guard just to handle the ongoing demands of Iraq, Afghanistan and its other worldwide commitments. A special acquisition program, directed by then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, had to be undertaken to acquire sufficient drones and Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles.

Since the end of the Cold War, reductions in the size of the military and its combat capacity was justified, first, on the basis of the diminution of the threat and, second, by reference to our technological edge over prospective adversaries and the resulting improved combat capability of the new systems that were being deployed. Neither of these arguments any longer holds true. The demand for U.S. military forces continues to grow even as their overall capacity declines. The civilian and military leadership of the Department of Defense (DoD) have publicly declared that the U.S. now faces five strategic threats: Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and global Islamic terrorism. Conflict with either of the first two would constitute a major war, not a regional contingency. U.S. Air Force Chief of Staff General David Goldfein testified before Congress that his service only had enough combat ready forces for one MRC and even that would require denuding all other theaters.

Moreover, the U.S. military has just about run out the string on its vaunted technological superiority. We have been repeatedly warned by senior Pentagon and Intelligence Community officials that the U.S. military is losing its technological edge. Both Russia and China have invested heavily in so-called anti-access and area denial capabilities (A2/AD) that are designed to counter erstwhile U.S. advantages, particularly in air and naval power. Russia is deploying its A2/AD capabilities in ways that could preclude U.S. and NATO military operations in the Baltic, Black and eastern Mediterranean Seas. These two countries are also developing advanced power projection forces and forward bases that could deny the U.S. the ability to operate in the eastern Pacific and the Arctic. Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter found the loss of U.S. technological superiority so threatening that he had to formulate a new investment strategy, the so-called Third Offset, specifically designed to re-establish our advantage in military capabilities.

Even regional adversaries and terrorist organizations are deploying advanced military capabilities. North Korea, a nuclear weapons state, has already deployed over a thousand ballistic missiles — three hundred of which have the range to strike Japan and U.S. bases in the Western Pacific. Iran has ballistic missiles that can reach most of the Middle East. Tehran just received its first Russian S-300 air defense system. Hezbollah, the Shiite terrorist group, is reported to have an arsenal with tens of thousands of rockets and ballistic missiles. ISIS has employed Russian-made anti-tank guided missiles capable of destroying U.S.-made M-1 tanks operated by the Iraqi Army.

This is why many in the military shiver in their boots when they consider going up against a serious A2/AD threat. It has become such a problem that the Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral John M. Richardson, has banned the use of the term A2/AD because, in his words, it implies “that any military force that enters the red area faces certain defeat – it’s a ‘no-go’ zone!” Yes, the U.S. military can penetrate current A2/AD defenses, but at what price? Let’s remember that the Air Force only has 186 F-22s, the plane that was designed to penetrate advanced air defenses, and there are no more where those came from.

The U.S. Army faces similar difficulties. As the commander of all U.S. Army forces in Europe, Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, recently declared his job is to make 30,000 soldiers look like 300,000. Currently, the Army and its NATO allies lack enough forces in Europe to oppose a determined Russian offensive. In addition, neither the U.S. nor its allies have real answers to the kind of capabilities in electronic warfare, cyber offense, high volume, long range fires and tactical air defense that Russia has demonstrated in its operations in Ukraine.

The reality is that the U.S. military today is too small, with too few technological advantages and facing too many threats. There is now a very real possibility that in a future conflict, even one with a regional adversary, U.S. forces could suffer such high casualties that, regardless of the outcome, this country will lack the capabilities needed to deal with any other major contingency. During the 1972 Linebacker II bombing raids against North Vietnam, the Air Force lost some 20 B-52s. Back then, this was a small fraction of the overall fleet. Today that would be more than 10 percent; the bomber force would literally be decimated. A force that is too small to fail is one that the U.S. increasingly could be reluctant to send in harm’s way save when national survival is at risk.

Dr. Dan Goure is a Vice President of the Lexington Institute. He served in the Pentagon during the George H.W. Administration and has taught at Johns Hopkins and Georgetown Universities and the National War College.

Obama’s Pen Commuted Another 79 Felons

The petition form is here where requests are made to the Department of Justice for review. They are scored for priority and recommendations are sent to the White House for Barack Obama’s signature. The DoJ has a Pardons Attorney division where full instructions are noted and they also include illegal immigrants. The president can only allegedly issue pardons for federal crimes. It is said he approves those that are non-violent but that hardly explains why if non-violent why many sentences would be for life.

Keep a close eye on Chelsea Manning, the man that altered his gender at taxpayer expense while in prison that stole government secrets and classified material. She has formally applied for a pardon as noted here.

chelsea-manning-commutation-application

White House Chief Counsel is Neil Eggleston, he is the point person for Barack Obama coordinating the pardon/commutations requests.

Eggleston represented Cheryl Mills, who was a board member of the William J. Clinton Presidential Library foundation, during a congressional investigation into President Clinton’s last-minute pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich, whose wife had been a foundation donor. Eggleston represented then-Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel during the prosecution of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Around that same time, he also represented then-Sen. Kent Conrad during a congressional ethics inquiry into a mortgage he had received from Countrywide Financial.

*****

TheHill: President Obama on Tuesday commuted the prison sentences of 79 inmates as part of a clemency effort that appears to be moving at rapid speed.

Obama has shortened the prison stays of 351 federal inmates since the beginning of October. The pace indicates that Obama is intent on using his remaining time in office to aggressively pursue the clemency initiative he started in 2014.

In total, Obama has commuted the sentences of 1,023 inmates, more than any of the last 11 presidents combined. Most of the inmates were convicted of non-violent, low-level drug offenses.

Of the inmates who have been granted clemency under Obama, White House Counsel Neil Eggleston said 342 were serving life sentences.

“We have two months left before the inauguration,” he said. “I anticipate we will keep going until the end.”

Eggleston did not say how many more commutations will be granted, but Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates said the Department of Justice had about 6,300 petitions from non-violent drug offenders alone as of Aug. 31.

She said the agency is on track to act make a recommendation on each of those petitions before Obama leaves office.

In a Facebook post, Obama said it doesn’t serve taxpayers or public safety to put nonviolent drug offenders behind bars for decades.

“At the heart of America is the idea that we’re all imperfect. We all make mistakes,” he said. “We have to take responsibility and learn from those mistakes. And we as a society have to make sure that people who do take responsibility for their mistakes are able to earn a second chance to contribute to our communities and our country.”

Last week, family members of incarcerated individuals delivered a petition with more than 2 million signatures to the Department of Justice urging Obama to speed up his rate of clemencies to ensure no one is left behind come Jan. 20.

Advocates fear the clemency initiative will end with Obama’s administration, as there is no guarantee that President-elect Donald Trump will continue it.

White the clemency initiative has been a priority of the current administration, Eggleston said he could not say what will happen under Trump.

“I can’t speak to whether the next administration will have a similar enthusiasm,” he said.