FBI's PETRAEUS INVESTIGATION SURPASSED THEIR BOSTON BOMBER PROBE

Order online

I believe the CIA should It's time to rethink which of the 17 agencies comprising the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) should be in charge of counterintelligence (CI) within the U.S. I believe the FBI should assume less, while the CIA more. The FBI represents law enforcement (LE) and they are spread paper thin trying to adequately fulfill the roles of both LE and CI. 

After all, Russian authorities contacted the FB I with concerns about Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev not once but “multiple’’ times. They even alerted the FBI after Tsarnaev was first investigated by FBI agents in Boston. The FBI interviewed Tsarnaev in early 2011 after it was initially contacted by the ­Russians, but by the summer of 2011, they completed their review and found no  evidence that Tsarnaev was a threat.

Read the first 3 episodes of the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean" for free and get to know Corey and how the CIA operates.  

Last week, the FBI reported that it requested but did not receive more specific or additional information from Russia. Is that reason to "conclude" a review on a suspected radicalized Muslim terrorist? Such reports should spawn ongoing reviews that never conclude. Sadly, Senator Richard Burr, A North Carolina Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he believed that Russia alerted the United States about Tsarnaev in “multiple contacts,” including at least once since October 2011. I believe the CIA should be in charge of a robust counterintelligence (CI) operation inside America. We can't afford worry whether or not the FBI will pay more attention to future radicalized Muslim bombers. The IC has to hit a home run every time it's up at the plate; terrorists only have to hit a homer once every few years to have a long-lasting effect on America's psyche.  

I also feel there is a connection between lack of communication before 9-11, the occurence of the Boston Marathon bombings despite Russia's warning to the FBI, and the quick and intense FBI investigation of CIA Director David Petraeus after receiving a complaint that his biographer Paula Broadwell was sending harassing e-mails to another woman close to him.

It is shameful that the FBI's investigation of Tsarnaev wasn't as rapid and robust as their investigation of CIA Director General Petraeus. A woman made the initial complaint to the FBI about Petraeus; Russian intelligence made multiple
complaints to the FBI about Tamerlan Tsarnaev. Ironic how both complaints to the FBI conclude with General Petraeus’ resignation (A blow to the spirit of the men and women working for the CIA's counterintelligence division)
and two blasts ripping through the finish line of the Boston Marathon, killing three people and injuring more than 180 others. 

Read the first 3 episodes of the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean" for free and get to know Corey and how the CIA operates.

Personally, I don't think General Petraeus should have resigned. His situation was unlike the other adultery-guilty leaders like Newt Gingrich, Larry Craig, David Vitter, John Ensign, Mark Sanford, Senator John McCain, Bob Livingston, Bill Clinton, President John F. Kennedy, Anthony Weiner…the list is endless. He didn‘t resort to lies, cover ups, deceptions and mendacity's, like the others…he simply fessed up to the truth and assumed all blame. 

Too bad the swift and passionate FBI investigation into General Petraeus wasn't replicated in their Tsarnaev probe. Neither Petraeus' girlfriend (Broadwell) or the other woman she was emailing was a "Honey Trap", a CIA term for female foreign agents who befriend Americans and obtain vital classified information from them. Even if either woman turned out to be, and Petraeus found out about it, he would have privately informed CIA counterintelligence (CI), assumed the role of a double agent and fed her false information to harm whatever foreign intelligence service she was working for. General Petraeus is well aware of the importance CI plays in aggressively penetrating and thwarting hostile intelligence organizations and radicalized Islamic groups and individuals bent on harming America.

I also wonder if the FBI’s underlying motive for the Petraeus investigation was to demonstrate their supremacy over the CIA on American turf. For years there has been a battle between law enforcement (LE), like the FBI and counterintelligence (CI), like the CIA over who should take over domestic counterintelligence. This battle between the LE and CI cultures has grown and the FBI may play a diminishing role in domestic surveillance activities. The CI professionals in the CIA say that the FBI’s LE culture cannot fight terrorism effectively by slapping the cuffs on and making speedy arrests as soon as enough evidence is collected to prosecute effectively in court.

The CIA's CI culture, which lacks the power to arrest, desires to postpone arrest and continue surveillance in order to gather ever more vital information about the suspects, their friends and visitors, strangers they meet, etc. I'll wager that if the CIA received the Russian intelligence warning about Tamerlan Tsarnaev back in 2011, he would have been put on intense and on-going surveillance and the Boston Marathon bombings would never have occurred.

I believe 9-11, the Boston bombings and the signation of CIA Director General Petraeus all stem from the LE- CI rift and the dire need for the FBI to relinquish its CI duties to the CIA. It was the law enforcement mentality that spawned the releasing of General Petraeus' extramarital affair. If there was a remote possibility that either Broadwell or the other woman were a possible "Honey Trap", this whole affair should not have been exposed so quickly and both women should have been put under intense surveillance... everywhere they went and everyone they contacted should have been collated and observed as well....until they were proven not guilty...which would have lessened the impact on General Petraeus.Does the General Petraeus affair highlight the division between the LE and CI cultures? I attended an Association Of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) seminar 7 years ago in Tyson Corner, VA, and listened to members of the  
Intelligence Community (IC) explain why domestic spying and counterintelligence should be conducted by the CIA counterintelligence community (CI) and not by the FBI (LE). 
At one point, an FBI agent grew so angry that he stood up and began swearing (using 4-letter words) at the CI panel members.

I believe this on-going LE and CI culture clash may be behind the reason why the FBI speedily released the information about Petraeus' extramarital affair, simply because he was CIA Director. I wonder if the FBI brass and agents in their CI division toasted his resignation at the local pub. I hope not, for it was this rift between the FBI-LE mentality and CIA-CI mindset that did NOT prevent 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombings from happening. The United States needs a dedicated domestic CI division and it should be centered at the CIA headquarters in Langley, Va. I've written articles justifying that we permit the CIA to conduct counterintelligence inside America. Excuse me whilst I duck.


Related Posts:
Formidable Counterintelligence Is Needed in America
Senior Counterintelligence-Analyst Position Available
DHS Study- Create Separate Domestic Intelligence Agency
CIA Should Conduct Counterintelligence Inside America

Robert Morton, M.Ed., Ed.S. is a member of the Association Of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) and writes the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." His ideas are his own and do not represent those of any organization he's a member of. Contact him on the Secure Contact Form

BOSTON BOMBERS GRASSROOTS MILITANTS FROM CHECHNYA

Note: This article is a synopsis of the Stratfor article “Boston Bombing Suspects: Grassroots Militants from Chechnya”. It is written with permission from Stratfor.

The identities of the suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing -- Chechen brothers Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19, and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26 -- appear tentatively to confirm several of Stratfor's suspicions. From this profile, the simple nature of the attack, their efforts to rob a convenience store and their lack of an escape plan, we can at least say at this point in time that they were what we refer to as grassroots militants. Typically being amateurs, such militants clearly still pose a significant threat.
 

Read "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." Get to know Corey, learn how the CIA works and enjoy the Caribbean islands by reading the first 3 episodes online for free!

Here’s Stratfor’s analysis: Just after 10 p.m. on April 18, the Tsarnaev brothers were identified after having robbed a convenience store in Cambridge, Mass., just three miles from Boston, hours earlier. A Massachusetts Institute of Technology police officer, who responded to the robbery, was shot and killed and found in his car by fellow responding officers. The two suspects later hijacked an SUV at gunpoint, releasing the driver unharmed. Authorities later caught up to the suspects, and a car chase ensued.

Just after midnight, the car chase ended with a gunfight in Watertown, Mass. The suspects reportedly threw explosive devices at police, though it is not yet confirmed what types of explosives allegedly were used. During the firefight, Tamerlan Tsarnaev was wounded, taken into custody and later reported dead. Some press reports suggest he may have been wearing some sort of suicide belt or vest. Dzhokhar escaped by driving the stolen SUV through the police barricade and remains at large. According to media reports, a third accomplice was detained earlier this morning by authorities and is being questioned.

According to The New York Times, the two men are from Chechnya. Their family also reportedly lived briefly in Makhachkala, the capital of Dagestan, before moving to the United States in 2002. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev's profile on VKontakte, a Russian social media website, said he attended school at the School No. 1 of Makhachkala, spoke English, Russian and Chechen and listed his worldview as Islam. A school administrator from the School No. 1 said the two suspects and their family had previously lived in Kyrgyzstan before moving to Dagestan.

Because they are grassroots actors, there is likely only a small chance that the authorities will discover a formal link between the suspects and a state sponsor or a professional terrorist group such as al Qaeda or one of its franchise groups. Any link will likely be ideological rather than operational, although it is possible that the two have attended some type of basic militant training abroad. Given what we have learned about the suspects and the nature of the improvised explosive devices they constructed, it is very likely that the authorities will find that the brothers had read and studied al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula’s Inspire Magazines.

This case also highlights Stratfor’s analysis that the jihadist threat now predominantly stems from grassroots operatives who live in the West rather than teams of highly trained operatives sent to the United States from overseas, like the team that executed the 9/11 attacks. This demonstrates how the jihadist threat has diminished in severity but broadened in scope in recent years -- a trend that Strafor’s analysts expect to continue.

There will always be plenty of soft targets in a free society, and it is incredibly easy to kill people, even for untrained operatives. In this case, the brothers conducted an attack that was within their capabilities rather than attempting something more grandiose that would require outside assistance -- and which could therefore have put them in jeopardy of running into a government informant as they sought help. It is thus important for citizens to practice good situational awareness and to serve as grassroots defenders against the grassroots threat.

 I agree with Stratfor’s call for citizens to “practice good situational awareness” and believe this can be achieved by linking the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) with neighborhood Block Watch programs. I wrote an article on this idea called “A Strategy To Prevent Future Boston Marathon Bombings”. Please read it and contact me on your thoughts and recommendations for starting such an enhanced nationwide Block Watch program. 

Robert Morton, M.Ed., Ed.S. is a member of the Association Of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) and writes the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." Have a different perspective, thought or comment? Contact him on the Secure Contact Mail Form.

RETIRED CIA SPY REVEALS ESPIONAGE TRADECRAFT

A Spy’s Journey by CIA veteran Floyd Paseman is a pleasurable read for active and retired case officers, 
journalists and for spy buffs. It's one of the best CIA memoirs published in a long while, akin to the written memoirs of David Atlee Phillips' 1977 classic "The Night Watch". It includes all the minute experiences of Paseman, including nibbling on moose lips and sipping vodka in Mongolia.

Read "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." An online spy series. Get to know Corey and how the CIA works. First 3 Episodes for free!

He reveals his fascinating career in Cold War covert operations in Asia and Europe from the 1960s to the present. Dedicated and determined, Paseman mastered espionage methods and difficult foreign languages in order to defend American policies and values from Soviet, Chinese Communist, and terrorist threats. His courage and tradecraft skills make the book a good read.

Order online

Floyd L. Paseman retired from the Central Intelligence Agency in January 2001 following a thirty-five year career in operations. Now deceased, following his retirement he lived in Williamsburg, Virginia, where he worked as an international security consultant.

It is a very useful and highly readable account of his 34 years in The Company, from trainee to senior executive. The book describes his progressing career as a top spy recruiter for the Directorate of Operations and other published works about particular eras and controversies over the years, from 1967 to the present.

It is both a primer on espionage craft and a syllabus for an orderly study of the CIA's history, with each Central Intelligence Director, from Richard Helms to George Tenet, profiled for their strengths and weaknesses. He also describes the relations between each president and the agency in historical sequence. Importantly, Paseman reveals exactly what's right and wrong with the CIA and tells who is to blame (the Clinton Administration, most recently) and who is to be praised, notably George Tenet for his efforts to revive the craft of intelligence gathering.

He describes the 9/11 attack an intelligence failure. When asked, he replies, "Of course," then points to our continuing vulnerabilities. I read Paseman's book in conjunction with Michael Scheuer's Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror, and got a sense for just how complex our response to the challenge of Islamist terrorism must be. And that war is a challenge that cannot be met merely with CIA/military/homeland security operations. Other allies and agencies have to help infiltrate and "roll up" terrorist cells and networks. We also must take economic and educational initiatives that lead towards better career opportunities to remove "fuel from the fire" and afford angry young Islam youth hope. It is my belief that fighting terrorism is like changing the tire on your car...while it's still moving!"

Paseman was recognized by the CIA to be one of the best recruiters of foreign spies during his years in Taiwan, Japan, Burma, Greece, Thailand, Singapore and Germany. He 
found that one good tool was his ability to form bluegrass bands during his overseas postings.

Ironic and sometimes humorous, he offers tips on how to know what's going on inside the CIA on the home front. His version of "the water cooler" is to keep one's ears open in The Company restrooms and to patrol aggressively for coffee around other staff groups. Paseman's genius goes far beyond the restroom and coffee pot...I believe his book will enrich your understanding of how the Intelligence Community(IC) works...whether you are a professional case officer or analyst, journalist or writer of spy genre, or an armchair spy buff.

Robert Morton, M.Ed., Ed.S. is a member of the Association Of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) and writes the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." Have a different perspective, thought or comment? Contact him on the Secure Contact Mail Form.

HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE IN AFGHANISTAN

I thought the book Ghost Wars by Steve Coll was quite revealing. It delves into how the war against the Soviets began and how the CIA became involved during the Cold War years. It brought remembrances of when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan and the fragile oil shipping routes to the West were threatened.

After Afghanistan, the Middle East oil countries were next. At least, that's everyone thought...you know, the domino effect.
Didn't happen. Factions in Afghanistan revolted against the Soviet authority. The CIA supplied the rebels with money and weapons, like Stinger missiles. They also funded training camps to train the people who came to help fight the Soviets. One of these was the billionaire Sheikh Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden at the time had close relations with Saudi Arabian intelligence and various Arab charities and provided money for the rebels and for humanitarian aid for the population.

Read "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean" and learn how the CIA and Intelligence Community operate. First 3 episodes online for free!

 

Ghost Wars describes how the Taliban was formed as a small militia group which opposed all of the corruption, it quickly grew. Mullah Omar and his people eventually received the support of the Saudis and Pakistanis. When the Russians withdrew, they left Afghanistan in the midst of a civil war. Massoud and his Northern Alliance were eventually forced into the northern part of the country. The United States declared neutrality and refused to overtly support any faction.

Bin Laden also left Afghanistan, but the al-Qaeda had already been formed and he was viewed as a rising leader in the world of radical Islam. As a result of this anti-royal stance and criticism of the Saudi royal family during the Gulf War, he was expelled from Saudi Arabia and went to Khartoum, Sudan. After several years he was asked to leave and moved to Afghanistan where the Taliban was now in control.

The training bases that had been used to train fighters against the Soviets were now being used to train Arab jihadist terrorists. In addition there were hundreds of Stinger missiles in the country that the various factions had that could be used to shoot down passenger airplanes. The CIA was quietly trying to buy them, which gave them a reason for covert activities in Afghanistan.

As bin Laden, al-Zawahiri and al-Qaeda grew stronger, and more and more terrorist acts were traced to them, the United States tried to have them captured. This was a new generation of terrorists that they were trying to cope with. The new kind of terrorist was different from the groups of the past. They were recruited in the madrasses and trained in Afghanistan as was the Hamburg cell and those involved with the September 2001 attacks on New York and Washington. Even today, these madrasses continue to be terrorists training schools that teach hatred toward the U.S. and the West.  

Ghost Wars tells how the seemingly distant tribal revolts in Afghanistan culminated in the attacks on American soil. I highly recommend Coll's book to those who want to gain an in-depth understanding of the Afghanistan war and how America and the CIA fit into it. You'll learn of the inner workings of the CIA and how their hands were pretty much tied at the time.

But, here we are in the middle of an unpopular war that's supposedly winding down. Yeah, right. As a member of the Association For Intelligence Officers (AFIO), I attended a seminar where Michael Scheuer, ex-head of the CIA's bin Laden unit, said, "The war in Afghanistan is mathematically impossible to win." I agree with Scheuer's thinking, and  believe that the Taliban and al Qaeda will re-emerge in force in Afghanistan after we pull out. 

During an interview with Press TV, former CIA agent Ray McGovern said, "The Afghan Taliban does not pose a threat to American national security". Three additional CIA experts  claim that our troops in Afghanistan are side-tracking going after al Queda and actually increasing the likelihood that American civilians will be killed in a future terrorist attack. This short video (below), "Part 6 of Rethink Afghanistan," features three former high-ranking CIA agents who explain why:
 

A year ago, a CNN poll that revealed that more than six in ten Americans (63% to be exact) oppose the U.S. war in Afghanistan, with 56 percent of the public believing that things are going badly for the U.S. in Afghanistan. Only 35 percent said they support the U.S. mission in Afghanistan. 

President Obama's trilateral strategy in Afghanistan seems to be a well-thought out one. But, will it succeed? 

German Soldiers taking a patrol break. Talking to Afghan children.

 

Canadian soldiers on patrol.

 Roadside bombs kill Americans in convoy

American troops drinking tea with local Afghans
 

Robert Morton, M.Ed., Ed.S. is a member of the Association Of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) and writes about the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." His ideas are his own and do not represent those of any organization he's a member of. Contact him on the Secure Contact Mail Form.

DRONE STRIKES KILL 4 TERRORISTS IN PAKISTAN

According to the Arab News and other media reports out of the Middle East, U.S. drone strikes have killed 4 militants. In addition, a bomb killed a Pakistan political party official by a Taliban suicide bomeber. 

Read the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean". Get to know Corey and how the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) works by reading the first 3 episodes online for free!

The newspaper report came out of Miranshah, Pakistan on April 14th. At least four terrorists had been killed by a U.S. drone strike on Sunday in Pakistan’s northwestern tribal belt, security officials said. The attack took place in Datta Khel town, 35 kms (22 miles) west of Miranshah, the main town in the lawless North Waziristan region which borders Afghanistan. The area is a stronghold of Taliban and al-Qaeda-linked militants.

Six U.S. drones flew over the area when one of them fired two missiles at a compound in the Manzarkhel area of the town. “The drones kept hovering at the compound for a while and then one drone fired two missiles at the time of sunset,” a local security official said.

“At least four militants were killed in the strike,” said the official. Another security official in the northwestern city of Peshawar, which lies on the edge of the tribal region, confirmed the attack and the casualties. An eyewitness said that the compound caught fire after the strike leaving all the bodies burnt.

“The bodies of the militants were severely burnt and it was hard to identify them,” Haji Gul Badin, a local shopkeeper reported to the media. The covert strikes are publicly criticised by the Pakistani government as a violation of sovereignty but American officials believe they are a vital weapon in the war against Islamist militants.

A UN envoy last month said U.S. drone attacks violate Pakistan’s sovereignty. UN special rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights Ben Emmerson visited Islamabad as part of an investigation into civilian casualties caused by drone strikes. According to Britain’s Bureau of Investigative Journalism, CIA drone attacks in Pakistan have killed up to 3,577 people since 2004, up to 884 of them civilians.
Meanwhile, a roadside bomb planted by the Taliban in restive northwest Pakistan killed a political party official on Sunday, a month before the country votes in a historic general election. The blast in the Swat valley, which was ruled by the Pakistani Taliban during a 2007-9 insurgency, comes a day after militants blew up the office of an independent candidate in North Waziristan tribal district.

The attacks are the latest violence to mar the runup to national and regional elections on May 11, which will mark the country’s first democratic transition of power after a civilian government has served a full term in office.
Sunday’s blast killed a local leader of the Awami National Party (ANP), which ruled the northwestern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province from 2008 until assemblies were dissolved last month for elections.

“Mukarram Shah, a local leader of ANP, was travelling to Mingora when his vehicle was targeted by an IED (improvised explosive device), around 12 kilometres northeast of Mingora city,” Gul Afzal Afridi, the district police chief told AFP. Shah was alone in his car and no-one else was hit by the explosion. Talieban militants claimed responsibility of the attack saying all secular parties and their leaders were in their crosshairs.

“We have already announced we will attack ANP and other secular parties,” Ehsanullah Ehsan, a spokesman for Tehreek-i-Taleban Pakistan, told AFP on phone.
Elsewhere, in the Charsadda district of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, another convoy of ANP workers was struck an IED and four people including a candidate for provincial assembly were injured.

The Pakistani Taliban have targeted a number of top ANP figures in recent months, assassinating the number two in the provincial government in December. The militants also claimed responsibility for a bomb attack on ANP rally on March 31 that killed two people and have warned they will strike again.

Robert Morton, Ed., Ed.S. is a member of the Association Of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) and writes the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." Got a thought, article or comment you'd like to submit? Contact us on the Secure Contact Form

DRONE STRIKES KILLING TOP AL QAEDA TERRORISTS

I uncovered this summation of research about the drone campaign inside Pakistan, conducted by Tushar Ranjan Mohanty, who is Research Associate at the Institute for Conflict Management. It is an accurate and unbiased analysis. The controversial but indisputably successful covert drone operations in Pakistan’s tribal area continues. A week ago, the US, in one of its deadliest drone strikes, killed 24 suspected terrorists and injured another 10 at the Gorwaik village of the Datta khel area in the North Waziristan Agency (NWA) of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA).

Read the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." Get to know Corey and how the CIA operates by reading the first 3 episodes online for free!

Datta Khel is a stronghold of Hafiz Gul Bahadur, a Taliban ‘commander’ who sends fighters across the border to fight NATO troops in Afghanistan. Unlike the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Hafiz Gul Bahadur has a secret deal with Islamabad not to attack Pakistani Security Forces (SFs) and, in return, has freedom to operate from Pakistan.

Earlier, on July 1, 2012, eight terrorists were killed in a US drone attack on a compound in the Kund Ghar area of the Shawal tehsil, 50 kilometres southwest of Miranshah, the NWA headquarters. The attack also killed cadres loyal to Gul Bahadur, and included some foreign militants belonging to the Turkmenistan Islamic Movement(TIM).

With Pakistan continuing to provide support and safe haven to a range of Islamic terrorist organizations, including a number of factions operating against International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) troops in Afghanistan, the US opted for drone operations way back in 2004, with the first such attack launched on June 18, 2004, at Wana, the regional headquarters of the South Waziristan Agency (SWA).

The South Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP) database has, thus far, recorded 244 such attacks, in which at least 2,303 persons have been killed (all data till July 15, 2012). Here's a summary of the US drone attacks in Pakistan from 2004-2012:

 

Years-Incidents-Killed

  2004-1-5

   2005-1-1

   2006-0-0

2007-1-20

2008-19- 156

2009- 46- 536

2010- 90- 831

2011- 59- 548

2012- 28- 312

Total 245- 2409

This data was accumulated up to July 15, 2012. In the 2,409 killed via US drone attack, a number of them were top terrorists, including:

• June 4, 2012: Abu Yahya al-Libi, the ‘second-in-command’ of the al Qaeda, killed in Hisokhel, in the east of Miranshah. Interestingly, the White House spokesman Jay Carney on June 6, 2012, stated that “our Government has been able to confirm al-Libi’s death,” while two al Qaeda-linked websites, Ansar and Alfidaa, on June 10, 2012, claimed that Libi was alive. Another 14 terrorists were killed in the attack.
• February 9, 2012: Badr Mansoor, a Pakistani citizen who served as al Qaeda's Pakistan chapter ‘commander’ and a key link to the Taliban and Pakistani jihadi groups, was killed near Miranshah.
• October 13, 2011: Jan Baz Zadran, top aide to the Haqqani Network leader Sirajuddin Haqqani, was killed in a US drone attack on a militant outpost on a hill in Zeba Mountain, close to the Afghan border in SWA.
• September 11, 2011: Abu Hafs al Shahri, a senior al Qaeda leader who served as the ‘operations chief for Pakistan’, was killed in the Hisokhel village of NWA.
• August 22, 2011: Atiyah Abd al Rahman, a senior al Qaeda leader who served as Osama bin Laden's chief of staff and a top ‘operational commander’, was killed in Mirkhunkhel area near Mir Ali in NWA.
• June 11, 2011: Ilyas Kashmiri, the leader of al Qaeda's Lashkar al Zil and the ‘operational commander’ of Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HuJI) was killed in a US drone strike in Wana Bazaar area of SWA. He was a member of al Qaeda's external operations council.
• February 14, 2010: Abdul Haq al Turkistani, the "overall leader" of the East Turkistan Islamic Party (ETIP), was killed in the Mir Ali town of NWA.
• September 14, 2009: Najmiddin Jalolov, the leader of the Jama'at al-Jihad al-Islami, a breakaway faction of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) and affiliated with al Qaeda operations in Central Asia and Russia, was killed in the Mir Ali area of NWA.
• August 27, 2009: Tahir Yuldashev, the founder of the IMU, was killed in the Kaniguram area in Laddha, SWA.
• August 5, 2009: Baitullah Mehsud, the chief of the TTP, was killed in a drone attack on his father-in-law’s house in Zangara village of the Laddha sub-division, SWA.
• January 1, 2009: Osama al Kini aka Fahid Mohammed Ally Msalam, al Qaeda's operations chief for Pakistan, who was also wanted for the 1998 bombings of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, was killed in the Karikot area of Wana, SWA.
• November 19, 2008: Abdullah Azzam al Saudi, a teacher and mentor of Osama bin Laden, who also liaised between al Qaeda and TTP, was killed in SWA.
• October 31, 2008: Abu Jihad al Masri, the leader of the Egyptian Islamic Group and the chief of al Qaeda's intelligence shura, was killed in Wana, SWA. Al Masri also directed al Qaeda's external operations in Egypt.
• September 8, 2008: Abu Haris, the al Qaeda chief in Pakistan, died of injuries in a drone attack in Miranshah, NWA.
• July 28, 2008: Abu Khabab al Masri, the chief of al Qaeda's weapons of mass destruction program and a ‘master bomb maker’, was killed in a compound in SWA near the Afghan border.

The drone program is still ongoing and is a success in killing top-level terrorists. Tushar Ranjan Mohanty brought up the point that Pakistani SFs failed to eliminate any significant top leader of terrorist groups operating from their soil and even denies the presence of these terrorist groups. I believe that Pakistan is no US ally in the war on terrorism. The recent killing of al-Libi confirms the fact that Pakistan's tribal areas
continue to serve as sanctuary for the top leadership of al Qaeda and Afghan Taliban. Indeed, John Brennan, the US Deputy National Security Advisor, referred to al Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri’s presence in FATA. Brennan stated, on April 30, 2012, "We believe he (Zawahiri) is in that region of the world, as well as other al-Qaeda leaders that continue to borough into areas of... the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan. We're not going to relent until they're brought to justice one way or the other."

Get to know Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean by reading the first 3 episodes online for free!

No, Pakistan, definitely, is not a US Ally In The War On Terror. Even though there is tremendous success with the drone strikes, their usage has come under severe criticism from both within and outside Pakistan. Pakistan has, of course, vehemently opposed the attacks, arguing that they are unlawful, against international law and a violation of sovereignty. On April 1, 2012, Gilani argued that US drone attacks violated Pakistani sovereignty and created a “negative impact”, giving rise to deep misgivings between the Pakistani people and the US.

Elements within the ‘international community’ have also criticized the drone campaigns on the grounds that they have claimed many innocent lives. According to a report compiled by the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism (BIJ), published on February 6, 2012, 260 strikes by Predator and Reaper drones have been recorded since President Barack Obama took office in 2009, in which between 282 and 535 civilians, respectively, including over 60 children, had been ‘credibly reported’ killed. American officials claimed that the number cited by BIJ was “too high”, though they acknowledged that “at least several dozen civilians” had lost their lives “inadvertently” in strikes aimed at militant suspects. They questioned the accuracy of the higher claims, alleging that accounts might be concocted by militants or falsely confirmed by residents who feared extremist retaliation.

Nevertheless, on July 2, 2012, BIJ observed that fewer civilians had died in US drone strikes in Pakistan, so far, in 2012, than in any other comparable period in the last four years. It noted that between three and 24 civilians were reported killed by drones in Pakistan from January to June 2012. Reported civilian casualty rates have not been this low since the first half of 2008, when between 12 and 21 civilians reportedly died in attacks ordered by then US President George W. Bush. Civilian fatalities this year are far down compared to the 62 to 103 civilians reported killed by drone strikes in Pakistan in the first six months of 2011. According to the report, between 2,496 and 3,202 persons had been reported killed by drones in Pakistan since 2004. Among them were 482 to 832 civilians, 175 of them children.

President Obama, on January 30, 2012, had stated that US drone attacks in Pakistan had “not caused a huge number of civilian casualties.”

The impact of the drone attacks within Pakistan has, however, have been politically devastating. The Washington-based PEW Global Survey claims that about 74 per cent of Pakistanis now consider the US an enemy, up from 69 percent last year [2011] and 64 percent three years ago. Not surprising, the PEW survey also reported that Pakistanis have low regard for Barack Obama and civilian casualties in drone attacks are one of the major reasons for this.

The US, nevertheless, has justified the use of drones on grounds of necessity. Terming the drone attacks on Pakistani soil as ‘self defence’, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta on June 6, 2012, thus noted, "We have made it very clear to Pakistani leaders that we will continue to defend ourselves... This is about our sovereignty as well. The leadership of those that were involved in planning (the 9/11) attacks located (themselves) in Pakistan".

Not long ago, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defended Washington's use of drone strikes by stating, "We will always maintain our right to use force against groups such as al Qaeda that have attacked us and still threaten us with imminent attack. In doing so, we will comply with the applicable law, including the laws of war, and go to extraordinary lengths to ensure precision and avoid the loss of innocent life."

It is a bit significant that the July 6, 2012, drone strikes took place just two days after the first NATO truck entered Afghanistan through Pakistan after a break of more than seven months, reaffirming the US intent to continue with drone attacks, ignoring Pakistani objections and resentment over the issue. Discontinuation of the drone strikes was a major precondition that Pakistan required to reopen the NATO supply routes. On July 3, 2012, Pakistan agreed to reopen its border to NATO supply convoys into Afghanistan after US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton apologized for the loss of life in NATO’s aerial attack on the Salala border check-post in FATA on November 26, 2011, which killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

John Brennan, President Barack Obama’s Counterterrorism Adviser, stressed that targeted drone strikes in other countries were legal, and stated on April 30, 2012, “as a matter of international law, the United States is in an armed conflict with al Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces, in response to the 9/11 attacks, and we may also use force consistent with our inherent right of national self-defence.” President Barack Obama, moreover, had ordered a ‘sharp increase’ in drone strikes in Pakistan’s tribal areas in recent months.

Interestingly, Bloomberg quoted two US officials as disclosing on June 9, 2012 that Obama’s decision to increase drone attacks reflected the “mounting US frustration with Pakistan over a growing list of disputes”.

America remains adamant on its policy to continue covert drone operations in terrorist safe havens on Pakistani soil, regardless of the heavy criticism. To address the civilian casualties concern, the US is focusing on HUMINT and electronic intelligence to improve targeting and precision of drone attacks. Still, is this the real issue? Pakistan’s perverse support of terrorist groups operating inside its borders is the greatest justification for America to continue, even step up, its drone attacks inside Pakistan. As Pakistan ignites and constantly whips up domestic opinion against US drone operations, we will continue to ignore them.

Robert Morton, Ed., Ed.S. is a member of the Association Of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) and writes the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." Got a thought, article or comment you'd like to submit? Contact us on the Secure Contact Form

THE TRUTH BEHIND NORTH KOREA'S THREATS

I received this email message from Stratfor, titled "Ferocious, Weak and Crazy: The North Korean Strategy". I have permission from Stratfor to reprint it here, for readers. It was written by George Friedman, Founder and Chairman of Stratfor. Friedman originally wrote this Geopolitical Weekly on North Korea's nuclear strategy on Jan. 29. More than two months later, the geopolitical contours of the still-evolving crisis have become more clear, so we believe it important to once again share with readers the fundamentals outlined in this earlier forecast.

Read the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean". Read the first 3 episodes online for free and get to know Corey and how the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) operates.

North Korea's state-run media reported Sunday that North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has ordered the country's top security officials to take "substantial and high-profile important state measures," which has been widely interpreted to mean that North Korea is planning its third nuclear test. Kim said the orders were retaliation for the U.S.-led push to tighten U.N. sanctions on Pyongyang following North Korea's missile test in October. A few days before Kim's statement emerged, the North Koreans said future tests would target the United States, which North Korea regards as its key adversary along with Washington's tool, South Korea.

North Korea has been using the threat of tests and the tests themselves as weapons against its neighbors and the United States for years. On the surface, threatening to test weapons does not appear particularly sensible. If the test fails, you look weak. If it succeeds, you look dangerous without actually having a deliverable weapon. And the closer you come to having a weapon, the more likely someone is to attack you so you don't succeed in actually getting one. Developing a weapon in absolute secret would seem to make more sense. When the weapon is ready, you display it, and you have something solid to threaten enemies with.

North Korea, of course, has been doing this for years and doing it successfully, so what appears absurd on the surface quite obviously isn't. On the contrary, it has proved to be a very effective maneuver. North Korea is estimated to have a gross domestic product of about $28 billion, about the same as Latvia or Turkmenistan. Yet it has maneuvered itself into a situation where the United States, Japan, China, Russia and South Korea have sat down with it at the negotiating table in a bid to persuade it not to build weapons. Sometimes, the great powers give North Korea money and food to persuade it not to develop weapons. It sometimes agrees to a halt, but then resumes its nuclear activities. It never completes a weapon, but it frequently threatens to test one. And when it carries out such tests, it claims its tests are directed at the United States and South Korea, as if the test itself were a threat.

There is brilliance in North Korea's strategy. When the Soviet Union collapsed, North Korea was left in dire economic straits. There were reasonable expectations that its government would soon collapse, leading to the unification of the Korean Peninsula. Naturally, the goal of the North Korean government was regime survival, so it was terrified that outside powers would invade or support an uprising against it. It needed a strategy that would dissuade anyone from trying that. Being weak in every sense, this wasn't going to be easy, but the North Koreans developed a strategy that we described more than 10 years ago as ferocious, weak and crazy. North Korea has pursued this course since the 1990s, and the latest manifestation of this strategy was on display last week. The strategy has worked marvelously and is still working.

Robert Morton, M.Ed., Ed.S. is a member of the Association Of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) and writes about the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." The views expressed on this site do not represent those of any  organization he is a member of. Contact him on the Secure Contact Form

CARIBBEAN NATIONS OSINT RESOURCES

I often view the following online resources to gain information about the Caribbean Basin region:

One Caribbean Television
The PR Newswire
CaribPR Wire
News Americas Now
Caribbean Lifestyle Communications of Trinidad
WINN FM of St. Kitts
South Florida Caribbean
Caribseek
Antigua Tribune
Bahamas Spectator
Barbados Gazette
British Caribbean News
Caribbean ET Roundup
Caribbean Financials
Cuba Chronicle

Get to know Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean. First 3 online episodes are free!

Dominica Gazette
Dominican Republic Post
Dominican Today
Dutch Caribbean News
French Caribbean News
Grenada Chronicle
Guyana Inquirer
Haiti Gazette
Jamaica Inquirer
Puerto Rico Tribune
St. Kitts Gazette
St. Lucia Chronicle
Trinidad Tribune
The Bajan Reporter
The Bahamas Weekly.  

Robert Morton, M.Ed., Ed.S. is a member of the Association Of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO) and writes about the online spy series "Corey Pearson- CIA Spymaster in the Caribbean." The views expressed on this site do not represent those of any  organization he is a member of. Contact him on the Secure Contact Form