Archive for the 'State Department' Category

News.

In a reversal of Trump administration policy, the State Department on Tuesday disclosed the number of nuclear weapons in the U.S. stockpile. It said this will aid global efforts to control the spread of such weapons.

The number of U.S. weapons, including those in active status as well as those in long-term storage, stood at 3,750 as of September 2020, the department said. That is down from 3,805 a year earlier and 3,785 in 2018.

As recently as 2003, the U.S. nuclear weapon total was slightly above 10,000. It peaked at 31,255 in 1967.

The last time the U.S. government released its stockpile number was in March 2018, when it said the total was 3,822 as of September 2017. That was early in the Trump administration, which subsequently kept updated numbers secret and denied a request by the Federation of American Scientists to declassified them.

[ … ]

At the Conference on Disarmament last February, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said, “President Biden has made it clear: the U.S. has a national security imperative and a moral responsibility to reduce and eventually eliminate the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction.”

Find any infographic depiction of the number of deaths from conventional war through the centuries, and see where the graphic bottoms out to see the effects for peace brought about by nuclear weapons.  Nuclear weapons are the greatest contributor to world peace in human history.

But Biden and his ilk believe that the entire world is populated by folks with master’s degrees in social work from Ivy League schools who want nothing more than world peace, and are willing to divulge sensitive information about U.S. defense capabilities in order to join the club.

This follows a pattern of divulging OPSEC information, one of which I called out concerning Biden’s plan to share sensitive naval nuclear technology with Australia, whose commitment to protecting that technology will live no longer than the current administration.

It does no good to claim that it was all approve by Biden.  The State Department should not have done that, and Biden should not have approved it.

So after watching the debacle in Afghanistan, and then telling the world the status of our most important defensive capabilities, if you were actively trying to destroy the defense capabilities of America, what would you do any different than the administration?

By the way, a well connected source with the Navy SEALs tells me that morale among SEALs has tanked.  It couldn’t get much worse.

Michael Yon.

We have Americans with blue passports ready to leave Afghanistan. Taliban will allow landing. US Department of State blocking flights. Rick Clay’s team has three jets ready. These jets were on ground on 30 August 2021.

Senator Johnson’s team called us and we on conference call right now.

Our government is blocking taking out Americans from Afghanistan. Taliban is helping. US State Department blocking.

He has started a Go Fund Me campaign to go back to Afghanistan and try to do some good if possible.

I told Michael by text message that none of this is surprising and I still believe there is more than meets the eye.  I do not believe any of this is due to incompetence or accident.  This is all intentional.  Every bit of it.

The Taliban are begging for U.S. diplomats to return to Kabul.  In fact, they’re not begging for it, they’re demanding it.  You see, they want to be recognized.

As I told Michael, they want their very own SpecOps (right, did you see their presence on the runway at the airport with pant legs rolled up, dressed differently from each other, unkempt hair, irregular weapons, etc.).  It’ll be a long time before there is anything special about their SpecOps.

They want to rule, they want money.  Yes, they want aid.  And they want gas pipelines to run through Afghanistan from Turkmenistan to Pakistan (something they’ve wanted for a long time), and they want mining of the precious metals and gems, and they want a cut of all of that money.  They want to live in big homes like rich people, and they want to sit in front of cameras and look important.

And guess what – they’ll get it.  Leaving Americans in Afghanistan is the perfect pretext for the State Department to return so that “diplomatic solutions to our problems can be worked out.”  The State Department wants to recognize the Taliban.  They’re another Muslim people to court, and the State Department has never seen an America-hating Muslim people they don’t love.

Beware what you ask for.  You might get it.  There is an eternal jihad.  The silliness and absurdity of the situation has even caught the attention of Chris Muir (sent to me by Michael).  Good.  But besides the absurdity, there are dangerous machinations afoot, the effects of which will carry on long after this absurdity is over.

Stars and Stripes.

The U.S. is temporarily halting a program under which bomb-sniffing dogs were sent to countries in the Middle East after a report released Friday found at least five more of the specially trained dogs had died in Jordan and Egypt following poor care, mistreatment or negligence.

One of the dogs in Jordan died after overheating in June, and another was poisoned by insecticide sprayed near its kennel in September, the report by the State Department’s Inspector General said.

Three of 10 dogs the U.S. has provided to Egypt in the past year have also died — one from lung cancer, one from a ruptured gall bladder and one from heat stroke, the report said.

The announcement that the program is being stopped comes months after American inspectors found that at least 12 of the U.S.-trained canines sent to Jordan under an antiterrorism program had died from medical problems. Others were overworked, unhealthy and forced to live in kennels with “barely existent” sanitation, the officials said in an evaluation released in September.

At the time, the IG called for the U.S. to stop sending dogs to Jordan until a plan could be put in place to ensure the animals’ health and welfare, but State Department officials refused to do so. The department’s top security and counterterrorism officials said at the time their divisions were taking steps to improve monitoring of the health and training of dogs provided to foreign partner countries.

But the IG learned through a hotline complaint after the original report was published that two additional dogs had died in Jordan of “non-natural,” preventable causes.

“The death of two canines from non-natural causes — namely, hyperthermia and poisoning — since June 2019 raises serious questions about the Department’s contention that it has taken adequate steps to protect their health and safety,” said the report released Friday.

A third dog in Jordan was infected with leishmaniasis, a preventable disease spread by sand flies, officials told the IG in October. Last year, a 3-year-old Belgian Malinois provided to Jordan had to be euthanized after being infected by the same disease.

Jordan is the main recipient of U.S.-trained bomb-sniffing dogs but several other countries have also received canines under the program, which has been running for some 20 years.

Two of the deaths in Egypt were not previously disclosed to the IG, the new report said. Egypt had denied U.S. officials permission to visit the kennels or the airport where the animals would work, and would not allow U.S. mentors to accompany the dogs to Egypt for in-country training.

[ … ]

In its earlier evaluation, the IG said the department could not provide detailed information about programs in nine other countries which had a total of between 75 and 100 dogs as of last September.

In August, the State Department repossessed 10 dogs from Morocco because they were not being used for their intended purpose, the IG said.

Oh.  Okay.  It all makes sense now.  The State Department is responsible for this grotesque program.

Now see, this really pisses me off.  We’ve bred wolves (and then dogs) for millennia to be our under-foot partners and companions, always with us, faithful and loyal to us to the end.  This kind of treatment in return is an abomination.  End the program … NOW!  Totally and completely, no second chances, no modifications, no alterations.  End the program.  That’s the only thing I’ll accept.

A good man has regard for the life of his beast, the evil man doesn’t.  The State Department is evil for doing this, among many other reasons.  The article has pictures of starving dogs that I can’t bring myself to embed.

So the U.S., under the flag of foreign relations, spends a ton of money training dogs to detect explosives, sends them overseas to be used, and instead of taking care of them, they are abused by their handlers if used at all for their intended purpose.  And after finding that out, the State Department refused to stop the program.

Why does the State Department exist?  Rex Tillerson made this major mistake, among many moderate and smaller ones.  When he fired an entire floor of employees from the State Department, he should have emptied the building and permanently shuttered it.  It’s good for nothing at all.

So the intent is to detect explosives?  The Arabic culture disrespects dogs?  Fine.  Let those countries explode to hell and back.  I don’t care.

My own Marine who did a tour in Fallujah in 2007 came home disgusted and repulsed by the obscene and revolting treatment of dogs in middle eastern culture.  If you look at dogs the way they do, I look at you the way I look at the middle eastern culture.

There.  Is that clear enough for you?  On both accounts?

David Codrea:

“In terms of ‘why,’ the State Department has authority under the statute (the Arms Export Control Act) to govern exports ‘in furtherance of world peace and the security and foreign policy of the U.S.,’” Reeves elaborated. “Under the law they do not have to get more specific, although sometimes they may give more information concerning a specific export. The courts have held there is no constitutional right to engage in exports or imports, and there is considerable deference granted to the State Department for making national security or foreign policy decisions.”

[ … ]

It would be an overdue gesture of support to see the president actually do something pro-active to advance the interests of the firearms community. It would be a welcome reversal of some baffling “concessions” the president has made on “bump stocks,” on “red flags,” and most recently, on suppressors.

As scary as the thought of Democrats taking over in 2020 is, talk is now coming from some with national voices about the possibility of a critical mass of thoroughly disillusioned gun owners sitting things out. And this isn’t a matter of “Would you rather have Biden?” or Harris or Buttigieg, as the “Hear No Evil/3D chess” Trump apologists angrily challenge back.

I simply don’t buy that this is merely a function of the administrative state, owned and operated by progressives for progressives.  No, this administrative state is owned by Donald Trump.  He could have put anyone he wanted in charge of the State Department, and apparently someone is in charge who doesn’t care to change these things.

What Rex Tillerson did was just a start.  The vast majority of the statist apparatchiks there need to be given their pink slips and told to find real work.  Then they may not be able to find the time to undermine the country and interfere with free trade.

Politico:

The deconstruction of the State Department is well underway.

I recently returned to Foggy Bottom for the first time since January 20 to attend the departure of a former colleague and career midlevel official—something that had sadly become routine. In my six years at State as a political appointee, under the Obama administration, I had gone to countless of these events. They usually followed a similar pattern: slightly awkward, but endearing formalities, a sense of melancholy at the loss of a valued teammate. But, in the end, a rather jovial celebration of a colleague’s work. These events usually petered out quickly, since there is work to do. At the State Department, the unspoken mantra is: The mission goes on, and no one is irreplaceable. But this event did not follow that pattern. It felt more like a funeral, not for the departing colleague, but for the dying organization they were leaving behind.

As I made the rounds and spoke with usually buttoned-up career officials, some who I knew well, some who I didn’t, from a cross section of offices covering various regions and functions, no one held back. To a person, I heard that the State Department was in “chaos,” “a disaster,” “terrible,” the leadership “totally incompetent.” This reflected what I had been hearing the past few months from friends still inside the department, but hearing it in rapid fire made my stomach churn. As I walked through the halls once stalked by diplomatic giants like Dean Acheson and James Baker, the deconstruction was literally visible. Furniture from now-closed offices crowded the hallways. Dropping in on one of my old offices, I expected to see a former colleague—a career senior foreign service officer—but was stunned to find out she had been abruptly forced into retirement and had departed the previous week. This office, once bustling, had just one person present, keeping on the lights.

When Rex Tillerson was announced as secretary of state, there was a general feeling of excitement and relief in the department. After eight years of high-profile, jet-setting secretaries, the building was genuinely looking forward to having someone experienced in corporate management. Like all large, sprawling organizations, the State Department’s structure is in perpetual need of an organizational rethink. That was what was hoped for, but that is not what is happening. Tillerson is not reorganizing, he’s downsizing.

An “organizational rethink.”  He’s shocked to find downsizing.  Shocked.  But was happy to see someone with corporate experience take the helm.  What does he think happens in the corporate world?

This kind of report makes me happy.  I see that Tillerson is draining the swamp and warring against the deep state.  Good for him.  Let me assist just a bit.  Everyone who went to college where they were trained by America-hating Marxists, and everyone who is a political appointee of Obama, just go ahead and turn in your resignations now.

Save us the hassle of rooting you out later.  We might fill the positions, we might not.  Either way, ridding ourselves of people who want to destroy America makes us better, not worse.  So go cry me a river, and market that “experience” in international affairs.  Let me know when you land a job.

News from the rectum of America.

Some congressional Republicans were quick to agree Thursday with Democrats calling for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself from investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election, following leaks and media reports that Sessions met with Moscow’s ambassador twice last year.

The allegations, leaked from intelligence sources, were first reported by The Washington Post.

“I have not met with any Russians at any time to discuss any political campaign,” Sessions said Wednesday evening when confronted with the allegations. “And those remarks are unbelievable to me and are false. I don’t have anything else to say about that.”

A Sessions spokesperson elaborated on why Sessions had been truthful.

“He was asked during the hearing about communications between Russia and the Trump campaign — not about meetings he took as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee,” Sessions spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores explained.

In January, Sessions was asked by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) for answers to written questions, including if he had “been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after Election Day?” The attorney general was not asked if he had been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government for any reason during the entire course of the year.

Nevertheless, a number of Republicans were quick to give in to the media narrative.

During a town hall with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on CNN Wednesday evening, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) said that if Sessions had spoken with the Russian ambassador, “then for sure you need a special prosecutor.”

Graham did later call demands for Sessions’ resignation “crazy” in a series of Thursday tweets, but added “Sessions needs to explain his contacts with the Russian ambassador during his service as a Senator – that’s appropriate.”

“AG Sessions should clarify his testimony and recuse himself,” House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) tweeted early on Thursday.

“I think, the trust of the American people, you recuse yourself in these situations,” House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Thursday morning.

McCarthy, in a later appearance on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” backtracked and said he wasn’t calling on Sessions to recuse himself.

“I’m not calling on [Sessions] to recuse himself,” McCarthy said. “It’s amazing how people spin things so quickly.”

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) joined in during an appearance on NPR on Thursday morning. “It is potentially the case that there is going to be Justice Department recommendations or referrals based on anything regarding the campaign, he said. “Depending on what more we learn about these meetings, it could very well be that the attorney general, in the interest of fairness and in his best interest, should potentially ask someone else to step in and play that role.”

[ … ]

Not every Republican declined to defend Sessions, however.

“What we are seeing is a lot of political theater,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said on “Morning Joe.”

“This morning, everyone is in high dudgeon about the meeting,” Cruz continued. “The underlying meeting is a nothing burger. It’s what senators do every day. Meeting with foreign ambassadors, that’s part of the job,” he said.

“I think everyone is getting all worked up because it’s a chance to beat up the attorney general and to beat up the president,” said Cruz.

Mark my words.  Hear me carefully.  Every politician, from democrats to republicans (most democrats, Graham, Rubio, McCain, McCarthy, etc.) who calls for a full investigation into the awful Russian things, they know not what they are, is hiding something.

Every … one … of … them … is compromised by or implicated in pedogate, nation toppling in North Africa, oil plays, money laundering, human trafficking, human organ harvesting, weapons and precious metals, along with DynCorp, the CIA, the State Department, the Clinton Global Initiative, and part of the FBI (Andrew McCabe, call your office).  Every one of them.

Cruz is not implicated.  Read it all again.  Their words prove them out.  It’s easiest when the guilty self identify.  It makes our job quicker.

This all has nothing whatsoever to do with Russia.  It’s all a smokescreen to hide the real evil, a subterfuge, a magician’s distraction from the real trick.  But not a good one for educated men and women.  We all know better.

Death to the deep state.

The narrative changes yet again.

The size and “lethality” of the attack on the U.S. consulate compound in Benghazi, Libya, that left Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans dead was “unprecedented,” a senior State Department official said today.

Senior State Department officials today gave the most detailed account to-date of the attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on Sept. 11, which killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other diplomats. One official said the nature of the assault was unparalleled in recent history.

“The lethality and number of armed people is unprecedented,” one of the officials said. “There was no attack anywhere in Libya — Tripoli or Benghazi — like this, So it is unprecedented and would be very, very hard to find a precedent like that in recent diplomatic history.”

So there was no reason to have suspect such an event could have occurred, or so the State Department seems to want us to think.

I give you Jeddah in 2005.

It took only five seconds for al Qaeda terrorists to break into the U.S. compound in Jeddah in an attack that killed five people, according to tapes obtained exclusively by ABC News.

The terrorists entered the compound at 11:16 a.m. on a day when the compound was supposed to be at a critical threat level. As seen on tape, a white U.S. government consulate vehicle pulls up to a side gate where it waits for two security barriers to be opened. Chanting “God is great” over a cell phone to their accomplices, the terrorists pull up in their four-door sedan just as the consulate car is cleared.

“Obviously they’d done a surveillance action on this facility,” said Tony Deibler, a former State Department security officer, as he watched the tapes of the December 2004 attack.

The terrorists’ car is blocked, but they exit on foot and open fire. Within five seconds, they get through the security gates, including an expensive obstacle known as a Delta barrier.

As the terrorists run inside, the Saudi National Guard troops assigned to protect the consulate run in the opposite direction — away from the fight.

“Well, I hate to say it because I have a lot of friends who are on the Saudi National Guard, but they’re running away,” Deibler said. “At least, that National Guardsman took his weapon with him, although he’s going the wrong way.”

One minute into the attack, the terrorists have the run of the compound as employees run for their lives. The attackers open fire on several buildings. By 11:19 a.m., all Americans are safely secured inside the consulate’s main building after what is known as the “duck and cover” alarm. Meanwhile, the terrorists attempt unsuccessfully to get past security doors and rig an explosive charge. Four minutes later, the Marines release tear gas, but the State Department uses a weaker version than the military so it appears to have little effect on the attackers.

“You can see it’s dissipating already, and it’s not even, it’s not having any effect at all,” Deibler described, as he watched the tapes of the attack.

At 11:47 a.m., the terrorists take down the American flag in front of the consulate. After that, out of the sight of the cameras, they take four U.S. employees and a local guard hostage, all of whom are later killed. Ten others under the protection of the U.S. consulate will be injured.

And Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.

The near-simultaneous bombing attacks on the US Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania took place on 7 August 1998. In Nairobi, where the US Embassy was located in a congested downtown area, the attack killed 291 persons and wounded about 5,000. The bombing in Dar es Salaam killed 10 persons and wounded 77.

As early as December 1993, a team of al Qaeda operatives had begun casing targets in Nairobi for future attacks. It was led by Ali Mohamed, a former Egyptian army officer who had moved to the United States in the mid-1980s, enlisted in the U.S. Army, and became an instructor at Fort Bragg. He had provided guidance and training to extremists at the Farouq mosque in Brooklyn, including some who were subsequently convicted in the February 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. The casing team also included a computer expert whose write-ups were reviewed by al Qaeda leaders.

The team set up a makeshift laboratory for developing their surveillance photographs in an apartment in Nairobi where the various al Qaeda operatives and leaders based in or traveling to the Kenya cell sometimes met. Banshiri, al Qaeda’s military committee chief, continued to be the operational commander of the cell; but because he was constantly on the move, Bin Ladin had dispatched another operative, Khaled al Fawwaz, to serve as the on-site manager. The technical surveillance and communications equipment employed for these casing missions included state-of-the-art video cameras obtained from China and from dealers in Germany. The casing team also reconnoitered targets in Djibouti.

I suppose that we could attribute the ignorance to young State Department employees, recent graduates of international studies programs, who have no personal recollection of these attacks and believe that we are going to solve all of the world’s ills by dialogue.

But does anyone at State use Google?  Do these clowns scrutinize anything before they release it?

I am sorry and sad to say that we must cease the celebratory mood over this day being the remembrance of the federal assault weapons ban sunset provision in order to deal with something else.  While we’re debating whether a gunship should have been with the Marines who attempted to defend the Libyan embassy, or whether they should have had a FAST or fleet infantry Marine mindset, whether they should have used massive fire to close with and destroy the enemy, and so on and so forth, there is this sad, sad report from Egypt.

U.S. Marines defending the American embassy in Egypt were not permitted by the State Department to carry live ammunition, limiting their ability to respond to attacks like those this week on the U.S. consulate in Cairo.

Ambassador to Egypt Anne Patterson “did not permit U.S. Marine guards to carry live ammunition,” according to multiple reports on U.S. Marine Corps blogs spotted by Nightwatch. “She neutralized any U.S. military capability that was dedicated to preserve her life and protect the US Embassy.”

U.S. officials have yet to confirm or comment on the reports. Time magazine’s Battleland blog reported Thursday “Senior U.S. officials late Wednesday declined to discuss in detail the security at either Cairo or Benghazi, so answers may be slow in coming.”

If true, the reports indicate that Patterson shirked her obligation to protect U.S. interests, Nightwatch states.

“She did not defend U.S. sovereign territory and betrayed her oath of office,” the report states. “She neutered the Marines posted to defend the embassy, trusting the Egyptians over the Marines.”

While Marines are typically relied on to defend U.S. territory abroad, such as embassies, these reports indicate that the Obama administration was relying on Egypt’s new Muslim Brotherhood-backed government to ensure American security, a move observers are questioning as violence in Cairo continues to rage.

Marc Toner, the State Department’s deputy spokesperson, did not respond to a request for comment from the Free Beacon. White House National Security Council spokesperson Tommy Vietor also did not respond to a request for comment.

Failing to respond to requests for information is a sure sign of sin and misdeed by the State Department.  It’s too easy simply to reply to requests.  Therefore, we may only assume the accuracy of this report, and remark how sad, immoral and asinine it is for the U.S. Marines to be subject in any way to some idiotic State Department employee.

From The Washington Post:

The United States will continue to support Iraq as it moves toward democracy, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Saturday as she wrapped up a weeklong overseas trip.

Without mentioning Iran by name, Clinton warned Iraq’s neighbors against meddling and said the U.S. and Iraq would remain close allies.

“As we open this new chapter in a relationship with sovereign Iraq, to the Iraqis we say: America is with you as you take your next steps in your journey to secure your democracy,” she said.

“And to countries in the region, especially Iraqi’s neighbors, we want to emphasize that America will stand with our allies and friends, including Iraq, in defense of our common security and interests.”

She said the United States would have a “robust, continuing presence throughout the region, which is proof of our ongoing commitment to Iraq and to the future of that region.”

The problem with Iran began more than a quarter century ago, and for Operation Iraqi Freedom, even before the campaign began.  We could have addressed the present problem, at least in part, when Maliki’s rule was hanging by a thread and Iraqi lawmakers were waiting to see who the U.S. would support.  While I argued for support of Allawi, the U.S. policy-makers decided to support the Iranian apparatchik Maliki.  At that point we may as well have withdrawn troops, and afterward a downward spiral took effect in Iraq, from a poor status of forces agreement to increased Iranian hegemony.

To be sure, the Obama administration could have projected strength, but did not and will not, and hence Maliki feels even more emboldened to follow the dictates of his puppet masters in Iran.  While the Obama administration did nothing whatsoever to help the situation, the problem began years ago with our refusal to engage Iran in the war that they declared on us.

I haven’t recommended full scale conventional warfare with Iran.  That’s clearly not necessary.  But what is necessary – support for the Green movement, a campaign of assassinations against Quds commanders, fomenting an insurgency within Iran, and robust covert warfare against Iranian forces around the Middle East, from Quds forces in Iraq, to Hezbollah in Lebanon – will not happen because neither the Obama administration nor the Bush administration has or had the stomach for winning the global war on terrorism.

The Iranian Mullahs know that.  We don’t even have the sway left in Iraq to have gotten a renewed status of forces agreement that prevents our Soldiers from being held on charges in Iraqi courts, much less to prevent the expansion of Iranian power in the Middle East.

Thus, this warning to Iran must seem like the silliest, most self-delusional piece of propaganda ever to be issued from the offices of the State Department.  We have sunk to a new low.  We now traffic in complete lies without  the slightest concern over the fact that not even the enemy believes us any more.

Little more than one week ago, Admiral Mullen said the following concerning Iran’s aid to Shi’ite fighters in Iraq.

“Iran is very directly supporting extremist Shiite groups which are killing our troops,” said Adm. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “There is no question they are shipping high-tech weapons in there…that are killing our people. And the forensics prove that.”

Around the same time, Major General John Toolan, the top Marine in Afghanistan, observed that the Marines in RC South are dealing with Iranian (and Iranian-trained) snipers.  Now comes a report directly from the Treasury Department.

Shiite-dominated Iran is allowing Al Qaeda, a predominately Sunni group, to funnel funds and operatives through its territory, the Treasury Department said Thursday.

In announcing sanctions on six alleged Al Qaeda operatives, a Treasury official said the terrorist group had entered into a “secret deal” with Iran, despite their differences.

Treasury sanctioned Ezedin Abdel Aziz Khalil, whom it described as a prominent Iran-based Al Qaeda facilitator, and five other members of an alleged Al Qaeda network that spans the Middle East and South Asia.

Thursday’s announcement marked the second time Treasury has drawn a link between Tehran and Al Qaeda. In 2009, Treasury sanctioned an alleged Al Qaeda associate, Mustafa Hamid, whom officials said acted as an interlocutor to the group and Tehran. At the time, Treasury sanctioned three other alleged Al Qaeda operatives, including Osama Bin Laden’s son, Sa’ad bin Laden, who had been detained in Iran.

Thursday’s sanctions, however, asserted a deeper connection. Treasury said Iranian authorities have permitted Khalil to operate within the country’s borders since 2005. He moves money and terrorist recruits from the Middle East into Iran, and then on to Pakistan, Treasury said.

Two alleged Al Qaeda members in Qatar, Salim Hasan Khalifa Rashid al-Kuwari, Abdallah Ghanim Mafuz Muslim al-Khawar, were sanctioned for allegedly providing financial and logistical support to the terrorist group through operatives in Iran.

“By exposing Iran’s secret deal with Al Qaeda allowing it to funnel funds and operatives through its territory, we are illuminating yet another aspect of Iran’s unmatched support for terrorism,” David Cohen, undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said in a statement.

 Note the strong wording: “Iran’s unmatched support for terrorism.”  True enough, but this shocks no one.  It simply highlights what the top generals are willing to say, regardless of what the official policy is for Iran.

And speaking of “official policy,” is there any?  Jennifer Rubin sees none.

I spoke to Mark Dubowitz of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies yesterday about the state of the administration’s Iran policy. He was blunt:

I’d start with asking these questions:
1. Apart from sanctions, is anything else happening? What is the comprehensive strategy?
2. Who is driving Iran policy at the interagency level? Dennis Ross, Gary Samore, David Cohen, Bob Einhorn, Michele Flournoy, Tom Donilon, anyone else?

His conclusion on the first item is that nothing is happening, and we have no comprehensive approach. On the second, he says, “No one.”

It wouldn’t matter.  With the likes of Michele Flournoy and Tom Donilon advising Obama (and his willingness to listen and heed their counsel), even if there was an Iran policy, there wouldn’t be.  Sadly, it looks as if many of my predictions are coming to pass.