Tag Archives: Green-on-Blue

How Will We Screen Out Terrorists Among Syrian Refugees?

Over the weekend, President Barack Obama announced the United States will welcome 10,000 Syrian refugees for resettlement over the next 12 months. Now, sane Americans must wonder how government officials will screen out terrorists among the refugees entering the country through refugee processing centers in almost every state.

This U.S. Department of State map shows where refugees, including those from Syria, will be sent.

This U.S. Department of State map shows where refugees, including those from Syria, will be sent.

The transcript of a State Department background briefing for reporters Sept. 9 offers some clues about how those ostensibly in charge of the nation’s foreign affairs programs — including Secretary of State John “F’n” Kerry and other left-wing political appointees — plan to ensure no members of the Islamic State and other Islamic terror groups enter the United States under the guise of being refugees. Michael Gordon of The New York Times asked the first question:

“Could you tell us, please, what the range of numbers is? You say you want to – the Secretary wants to increase the number of refugees that are admitted, so what is the range you’re looking at and what does that cost? And then it seems that part of the problem is vetting, in that the UN has submitted a list but it takes a long time to vet these people. Are you looking at committing more resources to speed up that vetting process? Thank you.”

As someone who spent four years investigating the federal government’s use of so-called credibility assessment technologies in places like Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay and Iraq, I’m more aware than most of the capabilities that exist within our defense and intelligence agencies for conducting background checks and vetting (a.k.a., “screening”) foreign nationals. That awareness makes me more than a bit interested in the response of an unidentified “senior State Department official” to Gordon’s question. It appears below with acronyms deciphered by yours truly:

“The Secretary talked about a range of different numbers, but I will not be sharing them with you today. And there was varying views within the group from the judiciary committees of the House and Senate about how receptive they were to increasing the numbers of refugees coming.

“And the process to bring refugees here is careful and deliberate, and that’s – as a result, it takes a while. It takes between 18 to 24 months between when a refugee is referred to us and when they – if approved, when they end up arriving in the United States. And a big reason for this is the care that’s put into the security vetting for them. It involves several aspects. Part of it is that every refugee has their sort of case file put together with help from organizations that we fund overseas, and then those files and the refugees’ families themselves are interviewed by someone from the Department of Homeland Security, from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. And then we also check their names against a whole series of U.S. Government databases to make sure that they’re not already in there – some sort of derogatory information about them.

“What we’re trying to do is weed out people who are liars, who are criminals, or would-be terrorists. And this is something that slows down the process and it’s taken very seriously by everyone involved in it.”

The response, especially the description of the security vetting process having “several aspects” and being “careful and deliberate,” reminds me of what I was told repeatedly over a period of several months in 2012 by U.S. military public affairs officers speaking on behalf of the now-defunct International Security Assistance Force, precursor to the Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan. An excerpt from a July 12, 2012, statement appears below:

“We (ISAF) have today, just as we discussed back in April, advise the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) in assisting them to develop improvements to the overall vetting and recruitment process for the ANSF. The 8-step vetting process, which we have discussed in the past, is the result of our advising on this issue. Just like everything else that we (ISAF) advise on in Afghanistan, it is an ongoing and continuous process. We continually advise our Afghan partners on ways to improve processes. Again, the Afghans have the lead and are responsible for vetting their recruits into their security forces.”

Two months after receiving the statement above via email, I learned Afghans had not been in charge of all of the vetting taking place in that country. Instead, U.S. Army personnel were doing much of the vetting and, by September 2012, had grown “increasingly frustrated” with the eight-step vetting process that turned out to be largely ineffective at stopping so-called “Green-on-Blue” or “Insider” attacks, the often-deadly surprise attacks waged against U.S. and coalition forces by allegedly-trustworthy Afghans wearing the uniforms of Afghan military, police or security agencies.

And therein lies the problem with vetting 10,000 Syrian refugees, a group Nicholas Rasmussen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, described as “clearly a population of concern” during a meeting of the House Committee on Homeland Security last week. [UPDATE at 7:55 p.m. Central: UK Prime Minister David Cameron has been warned that two out of every 100 Syrian refugees are Islamic State fighters.]

If federal government officials are not willing to subject Syrian refugees to the same highly-effective interrogation technology that was used to interrogate members of Saddam Hussein’s inner circle (a.k.a., “The Deck of Cards”) as well as hundreds of al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists and other detainees at Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere around the world, then we might as well plan to see a significant increase in the number of terror attacks waged on U.S. soil.

At a bare minimum, we will likely see more cities experience the types of refugee problems the folks in Minneapolis are facing.

Click on image above to order a copy of The Clapper Memo by Bob McCarty.

Click on image above to order a copy of The Clapper Memo by Bob McCarty.

To learn more about the no-touch, no-torture, no-pain non-polygraph interrogation technology that was used with great success before its use by Department of Defense personnel was banned in October 2007 by James R. Clapper Jr., then Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and now Director of National Intelligence (i.e., nation’s top intelligence official), visit TheClapperMemo.com. There, you’ll find an overview of my second nonfiction book, The Clapper Memo, as well as several stellar endorsements the book has received. FYI: You’ll also be able to order a copy of the book!

h/t Zero Hedge

For links to other articles of interest as well as photos and commentary, join me on Facebook and Twitter.  Please show your support by buying my books and encouraging your friends and loved ones to do the same.  To learn how to order signed copies, click here. Thanks in advance!

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.

Did Pentagon Do Enough to Prevent ‘Green-on-Blue’ Attacks? Questions Remain on Third Anniversary of Deadly Attack

Three years ago today, LCpl. Greg Buckley Jr., a 21-year-old Marine from Oceanside, N.Y., died along with two fellow Marines following a “Green-on-Blue” (a.k.a., “Insider”) attack waged by an Afghan “ally” wearing the uniform of his country.  Almost one year after his death, his aunt, Mary Liz Grossetto, commented on an item I had posted on the Facebook page dedicated to her nephew. It had to do with an article about family members of British service members winning the right to sue their government over their loved ones’ combat deaths which they believed were linked to bad equipment. Excerpts from her comments appear below with only minor edits:

LCpl. Greg Buckley Jr., USMC

LCpl. Greg Buckley Jr., USMC

Bob, if you had asked anyone in my family that question a year ago I’m pretty sure the answer would have been “NO.”

What a difference a year makes!

A year ago, I would have thought, “God forbid something happens, that’s the risk you were willing to take.”

Of course, a year ago I was under the mistaken impression that this country was doing all it could to protect & provide for our military. Sadly, today I know that is not the case. This administration is more concerned with how the Afghans will perceive things than making sure our own men are as safe as possible.

Grossetto came to understand a lot during that first year after her nephew died.  Later in her response, she asked and answered some pointed questions:

Did we take measures to ensure our military would be safe?  Did we order our men to carry loaded weapons at all times?  Did we provide “Guardian Angels” to watch over our soldiers when they were most vulnerable? NO! WHY? Because we were too busy handing out pamphlets & ordering our soldiers to attend “culture & sensitivity training” so our heroes would not “offend” Afghans.

Did we use the best, most advanced equipment when it came to vetting these Afghan soldiers / police? NO!

Have we thoroughly investigated what happened to Extortion 17? NO!

Have we investigated & spoken the truth about Benghazi? NO!

She concluded her response this way:

So, in answer to your question (about whether families of fallen service members should be able to sue the government), I guess we should start suing.  Maybe that will help this administration get it’s priorities in order! Until Then, God Help Us All!

After our online exchange, I shared several thoughts in a post published Aug. 25, 2013. Chief among them was my fear that most Americans are more like Grossetto was before she lost her nephew in Afghanistan.  They remain largely unaware of the hardships facing American men and women in uniform, and unaware of how many of those hardships stem from misguided decisions made by top government leaders. Misguided decisions like the ones I highlight inside my second nonfiction book, The Clapper Memo.

I remain grateful to Grossetto for the endorsement below which she offered after reading The Clapper Memo and recognizing how I had connected some critical dots regarding hundreds of American “Green-on-Blue” attack casualties:

“Read this book & you will see how our government has for many, many years deprived our military of the best possible tool for vetting & weeding out the enemy.”

Four other influential people read the book and offered similarly-powerful endorsements. Among them, a former U.S. Navy SEALs commander, a former U.S. Army general, the parents of a member of the U.S. Navy’s SEAL Team Six and the man who served as chief investigative counsel during the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. After you read The Clapper Memo, I think you’ll find yourself in agreement with them. Thanks in advance!

For links to other articles of interest as well as photos and commentary, join me on Facebook and Twitter.  Please show your support by buying my books and encouraging your friends and loved ones to do the same.  To learn how to order signed copies, click here. Thanks in advance!

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.

Family Members of Fallen Marine File Lawsuit Against DoD

Members of the family left behind by Marine LCpl. Greg Buckley Jr. have filed suit against several Department of Defense entities and individuals, alleging they were systematically misled about the death of their loved one at the hands of an Afghan “ally.”

LCpl. Greg Buckley Jr., USMC

LCpl. Greg Buckley Jr., USMC

The complaint, according to a Washington Post report Thursday, was filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in New York, and names the Department of Defense, the Navy Department and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service as defendants. In addition, it names Gen. James F. Amos, the soon-to-retire commandant of the Marine Corps as defendants who was in the news last week for other reasons.

News of the lawsuit brings back memories of MaryLiz Grossetto’s response to a question — Should families of U.S. Soldiers be able to sue Department of Defense? — I raised Aug. 23, 2013, and posted on the Facebook page dedicated to her 21-year-old nephew who was killed during a “Green-on-Blue” (a.k.a., “Insider”) attack in Afghanistan Aug. 10, 2012. Excerpts from her response appear below with only minor edits:

Bob, if you had asked anyone in my family that question a year ago I’m pretty sure the answer would have been “NO.”

What a difference a year makes!

A year ago, I would have thought, “God forbid something happens, that’s the risk you were willing to take.”

Of course, a year ago I was under the mistaken impression that this country was doing all it could to protect & provide for our military. Sadly, today I know that is not the case. This administration is more concerned with how the Afghans will perceive things than making sure our own men are as safe as possible.

Having learned a lot during the year since her nephew died, Grossetto asked and answered some pointed questions late in her response:

Did we take measures to ensure our military would be safe? Did we order our men to carry loaded weapons at all times? Did we provide “Guardian Angels” to watch over our soldiers when they were most vulnerable? NO! WHY? Because we were too busy handing out pamphlets & ordering our soldiers to attend “culture & sensitivity training” so our heroes would not “offend” Afghans.

Did we use the best, most advanced equipment when it came to vetting these Afghan soldiers / police? NO!

Have we thoroughly investigated what happened to Extortion 17? NO!

Have we investigated & spoken the truth about Benghazi? NO!

Grossetto concluded her response this way:

So, in answer to your question, I guess we should start suing. Maybe that will help this administration get it’s priorities in order! Until Then, God Help Us All!

After reading my second nonfiction book, The Clapper Memo, Grossetto recognized how I connected the dots between three memos — including one issued by James R. Clapper Jr., now the nation’s top intelligence official — and hundreds of American casualties resulting from Green-on-Blue attacks like the one that killed her nephew. In addition, she offered her endorsement of the book:

“Read this book & you will see how our government has for many, many years deprived our military of the best possible tool for vetting & weeding out the enemy.”MaryLiz Grossetto.

Grossetto’s endorsement joins those of four others, including a former U.S. Navy SEALs commander, a former U.S. Army general, the parents of a member of the U.S. Navy’s SEAL TEAM SIX and the man who served as chief investigative counsel during the impeachment of President Bill Clinton. Read their conclusions about the book here.

To learn more about The Clapper Memo, read other posts about the book.

To understand everything I’ve uncovered, order a copy of The Clapper Memo.

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.

Afghans in USA Missing After Vetting Process Fails Again

This morning, I came across a recent CBS News article about the disappearance of two Afghans who were in the United States to receive specialized training from the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. Based on what I learned during a four-year investigation into the federal government’s use of credibility assessment technologies, including the polygraph, I believe Americans have reason to be concerned about these men.

Left to right: Mohd Naweed Samimi and Mohammad Yasin Ataye.

Left to right: Mohd Naweed Samimi and Mohammad Yasin Ataye.

Alarm bells began ringing in my mind after I read that, according to a DEA spokesperson cited in the article, Mohammad Yasin Ataye, 22, and Mohd Naweed Samimi, 24, were part of a group of 31 Afghan police officers participating in an intensive five-week training program to combat drug trafficking in Quantico, Va. Why? Because I learned long ago about the vetting process used to screen Afghans seeking positions with Afghan military, police and security agencies. It has worked so well that, during the seven years since Defense Department officials began keeping records of such attacks, 144 coalition members — mostly Americans — have been killed and 183 have been wounded [source] by supposedly-vetted individuals committing so-called “Green-on-Blue” attacks.

Click on image above to order book.

Click on image above to order book.

Alarm bells continued to sound off after I read the first sentence of the article’s fourth paragraph:  According to the DEA, each candidate is extensively vetted and polygraphed. A long line of Americans whose initial and continuing employment with federal government agencies (CIA, FBI, NSA et al) were subject to passing periodic polygraph examinations went on to be convicted of espionage against the United States. Most recently, Edward Snowden made the news for allegedly leaking a plethora of highly-classified intelligence data after passing polygraph exams.

To learn more about why I’m troubled by the disappearance of these Afghans, read The Clapper Memo. My second nonfiction book, it features never-before-published details obtained from top government officials, including individuals who interrogated members of Saddam Hussein‘s inner circle (i.e., “Deck of Cards”) and detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Plus, it has received rave reviews from some high-profile individuals.

To read other posts about The Clapper Memo, click here.

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.

DoD Still Keeping Best Vetting Technology From Warfighters

I’ve asked a lot of questions in recent years about the measures being employed to stop so-called “Green-on-Blue” attacks by members of the Afghan National Security Force against the U.S. and coalition personnel.  Two years ago today, I concluded that some — if not all — of the answers I had received from official U.S. and coalition spokespersons in Afghanistan were simply not true. Today, Defense Department leaders are keeping the best vetting technology on the market out of the hands of our nation’s warfighters.

TCM_Bailey_Endorsement

Click image above to learn more about the book and see who has endorsed it.

My conclusion stemmed from what I read in the first paragraph of TIME/World reporter John Wendle’s article published Sept. 4, 2012:

Alam Gul, a potential Afghan Local Police (ALP) recruit sat cross-legged on a mat outside the unit’s crumbling, mud-brick headquarters in the village of Tabin, in Kandahar’s restive Arghandab district, alternately looking at his hands and at the sky as he answered a series of questions.  Two ALP members sat watching nearby, while others washed motorbikes or lounged in the sun.  The U.S. Army specialist and staff sergeant in charge of the interview were getting increasingly frustrated with the young man.

The words in the final sentence of that paragraph revealed what the reporter interpreted was happening before his eyes.  At the same time, they ran counter to everything I had been told since April 4, 2012.

After I asked Army Lt. Colonel Jimmie E. Cummings about the process via which ANSF members are being vetted prior to working alongside U.S. and coalition forces, the International Security Assistance Force public affairs officer told me via email that “ISAF or U.S. are not responsible for vetting Afghans for either the Afghan National Army or Police. The Afghans use a 8-step process in vetting their candidates.”

Responding to similar questions July 4, Colonel Cummings reassured me nothing had changed and that Afghans were still in charge:

“We (ISAF) have today, just as we discussed back in April, advise the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) in assisting them to develop improvements to the overall vetting and recruitment process for the ANSF. The 8-step vetting process, which we have discussed in the past, is the result of our advising on this issue. Just like everything else that we (ISAF) advise on in Afghanistan, it is an ongoing and continuous process. We continually advise our Afghan partners on ways to improve processes. Again, the Afghans have the lead and are responsible for vetting their recruits into their security forces.”

On Aug. 23, Colonel Cummings’ replacement in Afghanistan, Air Force Maj. Lori Hodge, confirmed again via email that Afghans were in charge of vetting Afghans:

“In response to your question on the vetting procedures adopted by the Afghans, the Afghan National Security Force is working hard to make their vetting processes more robust.”

As examples of the measures being taken, the major listed the following:

The ANSF introduced re-vetting procedures for Afghan National Army soldiers returning from leave;

• The ANSF outlawed the sale of uniforms; and

• The ANSF established an anonymous reporting system.

Further, the major explained that Afghan President Hamid Karzai had issued a presidential decree which mandates that Afghan National Army recruits be interviewed by a four-person council consisting of officials from the Ministries of Defense and Interior as well as from the Afghan National Directorate of Security and medical department officials.

In closing, Major Hodge reiterated what I had been told by her predecessor and referred me to the Afghan MoD for further information on vetting procedures:

“While we advise our Afghan counterparts, the vetting of recruits and personnel is an Afghan-led and -owned process and they would be the appropriate authorities to discuss it in more detail.”

Maybe Wendle misinterpreted what was taking place before his eyes.  But I doubt it.

One thing I’m certain about is that Department of Defense leaders are still doing everything they can to keep the best vetting technology available out of the hands of our warfighters.

Be sure to tune in to Freedom 560 with Ken Clark Thursday afternoon at 1:30 p.m. Central Time. I’ll be talking with host Ken Clark about “Green-on-Blue” attacks, Rules of Engagement and other hot topics — many of which I tackle in my book, The Clapper Memo.  More details here.

To learn more about the The Clapper Memo and read some of the endorsements it has received, click here. To order a copy, click here.

Click on image above to order Bob's books.

Click on image above to order Bob’s books.