Posts Tagged ‘CIA’


CIA: funding rebels doesn’t work

October 31, 2014

An internal review conducted by the CIA found that U.S. financing, training, and arming foreign fighters has seldom worked in the past 70 years. According to The New York Times (hat tip to Drugs and Thugs Blog), the Obama administration asked the CIA to report on the subject when the White House was considering whether to increase aid to Syrian rebels in 2012 and 2013. The CIA found that there was only one significant example of support to rebels that was effective in the short-term, which was aid to the Afghan mujahideen in the 1980s—an initiative now viewed as a long-term strategic blunder that contributed to the eventual rise of Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

Nevertheless, the Obama administration has shifted course and decided to arm and fund “vetted, moderate,” Syrian rebels anyway. Funding the rebels has likewise been championed by interventionists including John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Hillary Clinton.

Other studies have shown even worse consequences than the CIA’s report. Rather than just being ineffective, such efforts tend to make matters worse according to Dr. Marc Lynch:

In general, external support for rebels almost always make wars longer, bloodier and harder to resolve (for more on this, see the proceedings of this Project on Middle East Political Science symposium in the free PDF download). Worse, as the University of Maryland’s David Cunningham has shown, Syria had most of the characteristics of the type of civil war in which external support for rebels is least effective…

Why are we choosing the least effective option?


The colossal folly of arming the rebels

August 9, 2013

The Obama administration may have directed the CIA to ship weapons covertly from Libya to Syrian rebels, creating a tempting target for the terrorists who attacked the U.S. mission in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012, according to a growing chorus of reports:

World Net Daily has more about the story:

CNN is reporting lawmakers are speculating on the possibility U.S. agencies operating in the Benghazi compound attacked Sept. 11, 2012, were secretly helping to transfer weapons from Libya, via Turkey, to the rebels in Syria.

That possibility was first reported by WND two weeks after the Benghazi attack, when the news agency cited Egyptian security officials who said murdered U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens played a central role in arming and recruiting rebels to fight Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

In November 2012, Middle Eastern security sources further described both the U.S. mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi as an intelligence and planning center for U.S. aid to the rebels, which included weapons shipments being coordinated with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Many rebel fighters are openly members of terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida.

The information may help determine what motivated the deadly attacks in Benghazi.

The State Department told CNN it was helping the new Libyan government destroy weapons deemed “damaged, aged or too unsafe retain” but denied it was transferring weapons to other countries.

The State Department, however, clarified it “can’t speak for any other agencies.”

The CIA would not comment to CNN on the weapons-transfer reports.

Meanwhile, clarification on the weapons transfers may have inadvertently come through recent statements by a Libyan weapons dealer from a group hired to provide security to the U.S. mission in Benghazi. The dealer told Reuters he has helped ship weapons from Benghazi to the rebels fighting in Syria.

The detailed account may provide more circumstantial evidence the U.S. Benghazi mission was secretly involved in procuring and shipping weapons to the Syrian opposition before the deadly attack that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.

In an interview with Reuters published in June, Libyan warlord Abdul Basit Haroun declared he is behind some of the biggest shipments of weapons from Libya to Syria. Most of the weapons were sent to Turkey, where they were then smuggled into neighboring Syria, he said.

Haroun explained he sent a massive weapons shipment from the port in Benghazi in August 2012, days before the attack on the U.S. compound. The weapons were smuggled into Syria aboard a Libyan ship that landed in Turkey purportedly to deliver humanitarian aid…

Management of the failed gunrunning operation from Libya to Syria appears to have been since been transferred to Qatar.


Diplomatic dynamite: ISI-Headley connection

November 24, 2009

Yours truly, American Delight, has been ALL OVER Pakistani-American Muslim David C. Headley with posts here on Money Jihad and comments (here and here) at Jihad Watch.  This is the creep who was arrested in Illinois for plotting against the Danish newspaper that printed the Muhammad cartoons, who traveled to India prior to the 26/11 Mumbai attacks to size up targets for Lashkar-e-Taiba, and whose buddy’s halal goat slaughterhouse was raided by the feds.  This is the only photo I could find.

Jihadist David Headley

Quite the looker… Is it just me or does Headley look like a Pakistani Michael Meyers?

Lately, I’ve also been posting about the troublesome activities of Pakistan’s intelligence service ISI, especially ISI’s connection to the jihadist organizations LeT and the Taliban.

Now it all comes together, as the Hindustan Times reports that David C. Headley may have been coordinating with the ISI prior to the Mumbai attacks:

Read the rest of this entry ?


CIA pays billions to Pakistan’s spooks

November 19, 2009

If the Taliban is Frankenstein’s monster, who is Dr. Frankenstein, its creator?  That’s a close call between Saudi Arabia who provided the brain (through indoctrination of Afghans and Pakistanis at Saudi-funded Wahhabist mosques, madrassas, and orphanages), and Pakistan who provided the body (through personnel, funding, training, and political support).

Within fractious Pakistan, the ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence agency) has played a major role in the expansion of the Taliban in the 1990s, and in its survival today.  Despite this, the United States has continued to fund the ISI.  The full scope of American involvement has just been revealed this week:

Washington–THE CIA has funnelled hundreds of millions of dollars to Pakistan’s intelligence service since the September 11, 2001, attacks, accounting for one-third of the foreign spy agency’s annual budget, according to current and former US officials.

Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency had also collected tens of millions of dollars through a classified CIA program that paid for the capture or killing of wanted militants, a clandestine counterpart to the rewards publicly offered by the State Department, officials said.

US officials often tout US-Pakistani intelligence co-operation. But the extent of the financial underpinnings of that relationship has never been publicly disclosed. The CIA payments are a hidden stream in a much broader financial flow; the US has given Pakistan more than $US15 billion ($A16 billion) over the past eight years in military and civilian aid.

Read the rest of this entry ?


Pros & cons of “Taliban reintegration” money

November 2, 2009

Can the Taliban be bribed to switch sides?  Last Wednesday, Pres. Obama signed a defense appropriations bill which included a provision to peel “moderate” or financially motivated Afghans out of the Taliban.  Money Jihad takes a look at statements from both sides of the issue:

Those in favor:

Hillary Clinton:  “One of the reasons why I think this review, that the President has directed is so important is we’re trying to sort out—who is the real enemy?  Our goal is to disrupt, dismantle, defeat Al Qaeda and its extremist allies. But not every Taliban is an extremist ally.”

Sen. Carl Levin:  “We should make a concerted effort to separate the local Taliban from their leaders. In Iraq, large numbers of young Iraqis who had been attacking us switched over to our side and became the “Sons of Iraq.” They were drawn in part by the promise of jobs and amnesty for past attacks, and in part by the recognition that the status quo was creating horrific violence in their own communities. In their own interests and the interests of their nation, they switched sides and became a positive force.

“That same prospect exists in Afghanistan. Read the rest of this entry ?