Huh News! The Man Who Conned the Pentagon

Image via Wikipedia

Aram Roston writes in Playboy.com about The Man Who Conned The Pentagon. I tell you, this is like watching a really bad, bad comedy movie. It’s funny if only it were not too painful to laugh at taxpayer’s money down the drain. Quick excerpts below.

[T]there were no real intercepts, no new informants, no increase in chatter. And the suspicious package turned out to contain a stuffed snowman. This was, instead, the beginning of a bizarre scam. Behind that terror alert, and a string of contracts and intrigue that continues to this date, there is one unlikely character.The man’s name is Dennis Montgomery, a self-proclaimed scientist who said he could predict terrorist attacks. Operating with a small software development company, he apparently convinced the Bush White House, the CIA, the Air Force and other agencies that Al Jazeera—the Qatari-owned TV network—was unwittingly transmitting target data to Al Qaeda sleepers.[…]Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte weighed in. What secrets—what embarrassments—could be exposed if Montgomery and Trepp were to depose intelligence and military officials? Negroponte issued a declaration that warned of “serious, and in some cases exceptionally grave, damage to the national security of the United States.” He invoked the state secrets privilege. The judge in the case issued a protective order; the secrets of eTreppid’s government business would remain untold.

Active links added above. Read the whole spectacular story here.

Business Class Travel is Not a Thing of the Past?

Image via Wikipedia

Each OES official used business class for every trip

The State Department’s OIG office had just posted its limited review of Business Class Travel Made by Front Office Officials of the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs (AUD/SI-09-08, Jan. 2009). The review was apparently requested by U/S for Management Patrick F. Kennedy. Below is an excerpt:

Per your December 2008 request, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a limited review of business class travel made by officials of the Front Office of the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs (OES) during fiscal years 2007 and 2008. The purpose of the review was to determine whether the OES Assistant Secretary and the four deputy assistant secretaries complied with federal and Department of State guidance as it relates to overseas and business class travel. OIG found that OES officials did not always adhere to travel regulations for properly preparing, authorizing, and maintaining documentation required by the guidance.[…]OIG reviewed 30 travel authorizations; 30 travel vouchers; and supporting documentation that included DS Form 4087, Authorization Request for Business Class Air Travel, memoranda, travel itineraries, airline tickets, and receipts for lodging and miscellaneous expenses. OIG compared the travel authorizations with the itineraries and the vouchers to determine when travel authorizations were created, authorizations were properly approved by a supervisor, and expenses were accurate and allowable.OIG found that business class travel expenses represented $258,512 (about 83%) of the $311,154 of total travel expenses for the 30 vouchers. Each OES official used business class for every trip.

Of the 30 travel authorizations reviewed, OIG identified the following deficiencies (more than one deficiency may apply to one authorization):

• 25 authorizations included a DS Form 4087 citing travel in excess of 14 hours, the length of travel required to justify business class accommodations. However:

• Five of these trips were actually less than 14 hours (from one TDY stop to another).

• Four of these authorizations were signed by officials at a leve1 lower than that of the traveler.

• Three authorizations had no authorization signature, employee signature, or authorization date.

• 5 travel authorizations did not include a DS Form 4087.

• 8 authorizations included actual expenses for lodging and meals but were not supported by a memorandum indicating approval that actual expenses could be incurred. The analysis showed that lodging expenses exceeded the established per diem rate by up to $188 per night.

• 11 authorizations were prepared after the traveler had returned from TDY.

• 7 authorizations did not reflect the business class authorization in Section 5, "Other Authorizations," or Section 11, "GTR Ticket Information" of the travel authorizations.

The IG office was careful to point out that “the Department's travel regulations are clear and are in agreement with Federal Travel Regulations. The requirements are not flexible but are important in the government-wide policy on travel. However, additional oversight is needed to ensure that OES Front Office staff complies with the established travel regulations.”

Holy mother of goat and all her crazy nephews!

Let’s rewind a few years back when the State Department was slammed hard for its ineffective oversight on business class travel, as a result of which everyone -- with very few exceptions, even those traveling over 14 hours, were no longer allowed to travel business class. Read on and weep:

From the GAO’s 2006 report State’s Centrally Billed Foreign Affairs Travel: Internal Control Breakdowns and Ineffective Oversight Lost Taxpayers Tens of Millions of Dollars | March 2006):

“We found that some of State’s top executives, including some under secretaries and assistant secretaries, often used premium-class travel regardless of the length of the flight. We found that State spent over $1 million dollars on premium-class flights for 17 senior executives during most of fiscal years 2003 and 2004. Our analysis indicated that most of these flights were domestic or to destinations in Western Europe or South America and did not last more than the 14 hours required by federal and state regulations to justify use of premium-class travel. Further, many of the executives used blanket travel orders signed by subordinates to justify purchasing premium-class travel. […] We continue to consider authorization of premium-class travel by employees subordinate to the traveler to be a weak internal control due to both the additional cost and the potential for abuse associated with premium-class travel. As we have reported in the past, travel authorized by subordinates is in effect self authorization, which constitutes a lack of controls over executive premium-class travel.”

I wonder if that GAO report was required reading for the engine room bees who wanted to argue about traveling over 14 hours, but not for officers on the bridge?

The Acting IG, Harold W. Geisel writes that OIG “would appreciate a response from an appropriate Department official within 30 days as to the actions taken or planned to address recommendation.” Here is the old crew of the OES Bureau before the new Administration took over. Who’s left behind to give an appropriate response?

Peter Galbraith in the News Again

Image via Wikipedia

Peter Galbraith was thrown under the bus over the Afghan election in late September. Last week, Nate Jones over at the Unredacted Blog of the National Security Archive blogged about their “hot doc,” released by the Department of State to Archive analyst William Ferroggiaro on 22 June 2004; it features Galbraith who was then US Ambassador to Croatia.

"This 1994 State Department cable, penned by then US Ambassador to Croatia Peter Galbraith, described as “MUST READ” by its cover letter, was disseminated to White House personnel. Galbraith reported that the criteria for genocide, as defined by the Geneva Convention, were being met in the three-party war raging in the former Yugoslavia." Click here on how to decipher a State Department cable.

On November 11, NYT published U.S. Adviser to Kurds Stands to Reap Oil Profits:

Peter W. Galbraith, an influential former American ambassador, is a powerful voice on Iraq who helped shape the views of policy makers like Joseph R. Biden Jr. and John Kerry. In the summer of 2005, he was also an adviser to the Kurdish regional government as Iraq wrote its Constitution — tough and sensitive talks not least because of issues like how Iraq would divide its vast oil wealth.Now Mr. Galbraith, 58, son of the renowned economist John Kenneth Galbraith, stands to earn perhaps a hundred million or more dollars as a result of his closeness to the Kurds, his relations with a Norwegian oil company and constitutional provisions he helped the Kurds extract.

The Editors of NYT are none too happy about this. On November 12, it also published an Editors’ Note:

Like other writers for the Op-Ed page, Mr. Galbraith signed a contract that obligated him to disclose his financial interests in the subjects of his articles. Had editors been aware of Mr. Galbraith's financial stake, the Op-Ed page would have insisted on disclosure or not published his articles.

• As Iraqis Celebrate, the Kurds Hesitate(February 1, 2005)
• Our Corner of Iraq(July 25, 2006)
• Make Walls, Not War(October 23, 2007)
• Questions for the Next Vice President(October 2, 2008)

Last night, Galbraith spoke openly about the issue at an appearance at the Centre Congregational Church in Brattleboro, Vermont. The Brattleboro Reformer reported that Galbraith spoke to a large crowd regarding the recent elections and future American involvement in Afghanistan, where he served as the deputy special representative to the United Nations. The conversation reportedly shifted quickly to the new reports of his business interests in Kurdistan. Excerpts below:

Defending his business decisions, Galbraith said "I actually find the article quite, well, it is full of innuendo. If you read the facts [with the implications and innuendo], I find [it] offensive."[…]In August 2005, Galbraith said he was asked by the Kurds to advise them on a permanent constitution, even after they were aware of his business interests with foreign oil companies. With the Kurdish political leaders controlling their own oil industry, it provides them an economic base for the people, a goal Galbraith said he always supported."I gave them advice and the end result that they achieved was identical to what was already proposed in February 2004," he said. "Now, it’s true that people in Baghdad may disagree with that, people in Washington may disagree with that, but there’s no conflict there. The advice I was giving and the economic interest were exactly, exactly congruent."If you talk to a majority of the Kurdish people, they say the oil under their feet is a curse because it has given former Iraqi leaders the financial means to kill them, said Galbraith. By having their own natural resources, the Kurds have a vehicle to defend themselves against future attacks, he added."I make no apologies for my role here ... at that time, I was a private citizen. Private citizens engage in business, that’s what I did."

Read the whole thing here.

Related articles by Zemanta

• American Adviser to Kurds Stands to Reap Oil Profits (nytimes.com)
• A $100 Million Conflict Of Interest (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)

Huh? News: Sudan Strategery

Image by slushpup via Flickr

"We've got to think about giving out cookies[…] Kids, countries -- they react to gold stars, smiley faces, handshakes, agreements, talk, engagement."

Maj. Gen. J. Scott Gration (Ret.)Special Envoy to SudanU.S. Envoy's Outreach to Sudan Is Criticized as NaiveWashington Post Foreign Service | Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Related articles by Zemanta

• Sudan Sees Little Change in U.S. Relationship (blogs.wsj.com)
• Envoy queries Sudan terror status (news.bbc.co.uk)
• Envoy says sanctions hurt rebuilding effort in Sudan (ctv.ca)

10 Things to Say When Dealing with Reports of Excessive CEO Crap

Image by DennisSylvesterHurd via Flickr

Don’t you feel just a tad sorry for those aid group CEOs who have recently been slammed for “excessive” executive compensation by USA TODAY? And whatsup with Senator Leahy? Sigh! Everybody is a critic these days; don’t you just hate that?

I started reading the online comments and I just had to stop; it was unbearable – oh, the ignorance! Someone said “any nonprofits overhead costs (including salaries) should be no more than 5% of gross. Anything else is unjustified stealing from the charity they are supposed to be serving.” How could anyone say that? Another suggested a salary cut up to 50%. So unbearably cruel. My own neighbor said this type of compensation should be capped at 150K. Capped? Good gracious me! (He’s going to get a $2/bottle of wine the next time he comes over for a drink!). How can anyone – anyone live on 150K a year? That reporter Ken -- did a good job but he just has no idea how much work a top executive under a USAID grant does and what types of responsibilities and accountability go with it. Truth to tell, folks generally have no idea what it’s like working in the developing world. So we’ve come up with ten things to say if you need help dealing with this crap(Tips: 1) It might help if you practice this in front of a mirror; 2) don’t mention the USAID paperwork, it’s boring; and 3) do not/not blink).

#1. This is not really as bad as you think.

#2. This is not a bail-out, period.

#3. This is not a dole-out. Trust me.

#4. My personal philosophy is never to talk about compensation issues and just do the job.

#5. Whatever is the amount of my executive compensation, I have nothing to do with it. Honest.

#6. Whatever they give me, I accept. (Well, except for that $1 a year offer; who the heck can live on that?) I have nothing more to add.

#7. While it is true that I have family members working in this cottage industry, we do it because we love what we’re doing. And we have a higher calling to serve the underprivileged (they don’t like being called poor). What have you done for them lately? #8. We live frugally. My family can’t even afford a vacation to Vail or St. Moritz in winter, or Martha’s Vineyards in summer.

#9. I’ve never thrown $1.2 million birthday parties like Mugabe, and I don’t have a $7K shower curtain. So you’re barking on the wrong tree, pal.

#10. If President Obama had my job running a development operation in a foreign country -- where people don’t speak English, don’t have proper toilets or toilet paper (squat toilets and coconut husks!), no safe drinking water ... where bugs are salad sprinkles, where mosquitoes are huge as bats, where beds are either hard as rock or moldy as a week old bread and blah, blah, blah – he would want compensation more than $400K, too. Trust me.Okay -- if none of the above work, just zip it, keep your cool and walk away like a real pro. We'll chat again, ta-ta!

Quickie: USAID as a “check-writing agency?”

Image by DavidDMuir via Flickr

Ken Dilanian of USA Today has an interesting piece on the CEO compensations of American aid groups. (h/t to RL for the tip). These aid groups are for-profit companies and tax-exempt groups paid by USG to deliver foreign assistance programs.

USA TODAY reports that it “examined total CEO compensation of the 10 largest recipients of foreign aid grants and contracts that also derive at least 70% of their revenue from U.S. taxpayers. Each one receives a 501(c)3 charitable exemption from federal taxes.”

Number #1 in the USA TODAY list is American Institutes for Research (AIR); its president was paid $1.1 million in 2007, the highest in the group.

Number #2 is the Academy for Educational Development; its president was paid $879,530 in total compensation in 2007, tax records show, a figure that includes "catch-up retirement restoration payments."

Number #3 is the Research Triangle International whose 2007 chief executive compensation was $658,844.

The report quoted Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who chairs the subcommittee that funds foreign aid: "It conflicts with most people's notion of what a non-profit organization is about when they're paying themselves salaries that are several times higher than what a U.S. Cabinet secretary would earn." This leads the senator to conclude that “an understaffed USAID has become “a check-writing agency."

To put this in context salary-wise, I’d like to note that the President of the United States earns $400,000 a year. The vice president's annual salary is $221,100. Secretary of State Clinton earns $186,600. So the top aid CEO’s salary is almost three times that of President Obama; almost five times Vice President Biden’s salary and almost six times that of Secretary Clinton. I don’t know at what level the USAID Administrator is paid, but the top level of the executive schedule in 2009 is paid $196,700 a year.

What might be the compensation of a president of a third world country where these aid groups operate? Philippine President Gloria Arroyo earns about $1,333.33 a month or approximately $16,000 a year. Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe’s salary was reportedly pegged at US$20,800 for 2009. Oh, wait -- I’m not sure it’s wise to mention Fruitcake Bob, given that he has a fondness for expensive parties; remember that $1.2 million birthday bash and his shindig earlier this year? [Oh, frack! too late now!]

Read the whole thing here.

Huh News? 2009 AFSA Election is Over

Just saw this post in E3 Team AFSA website. I don’t know if you can make something out of this (see original post here):

AFSA Voters

Great results. a great finish for TEAM AFSA 2009 and a long and worthwhile journey! As of late, yesterday evening the results are in, and will be officially declared as of this Monday. While the election committee still has a few issues to resolve, the basic fact is clear- the 2009 AFSA election is over.

It's important to note that while many bask in the glory of the results, one candidate who fancies himeself student of Churchill, let's allow the days and weeks to play out out before declaring victory.

Huh? Translation for people in pjs desperately needed, please.

Amb Eikenberry Visits Kunar Prov: Pinhead Photos Available

On May 16, US Ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry visited Kunar Province and gave a speech. The embassy says that “5 Afghan journalists, from Ariana TV, Shamshad TV and Pajhwok News Agency accompanied Ambassador Eikenberry on his recent visit to Kunar province. The trip was widely and positively reported in the media, who also highlighted the presence of the Governor, two Afghan ministers and one deputy minister. Local media in Kunar, including BBC and RTA also covered elements of the trip.”

US Embassy Kabul posted some 20 photos of the trip both in its Facebook and Flickr page. They’re all postage stamp size like this one:

Its Flickr page does not have any other size except for what they call a “large” size at 129 x 85.


Gosh! Why even bother sharing these photos in social networking media if all you have are pinhead size versions? Whose bright idea is this?

I must note that the big guy in the White House has his own photostream in Flickr. The photos are all good quality in various sizes for download. They are all marked "United States Government Work" and except for the following notation, are available to the public under Creative Commons.

This official White House photograph is being made available for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way or used in materials, advertisements, products, or promotions that in any way suggest approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House.

Secretary Clinton also has her own photostream in Flickr. All sizes are available for download under the Attribution-No Derivative Works 2.0 Generic Creative Commons license.


So really -- I don't know what kind of thinking went into this ...

Huh? News: U.S.-born Children in State Foster Care Sent Overseas?

Alexandra Andrews writes “Oregon’s Monitoring of U.S. Foster Child in Mexico Missed Abuse”for ProPublica on March 16, 2009 1:26 pm EDT

“Oregon officials placed a 4-year-old American foster child with relatives in Mexico, where she enduring months of abuse and died, reports the Oregonian. Oregon still had legal responsibility for the girl, but according to the paper, "the state's monitoring of her welfare was limited to occasional phone calls -- mostly to her abusers -- and unquestioning dependence on welfare workers in Mexico." The girl's caseworker "insists he saw no red flags that would have prompted him to bring [the girl] back from Mexico before she died." The majority of U.S.-born children sent from state foster care to live in other countries go to Mexico, but "little has been done on either side of the border to ensure [their] safety," reports the Oregonian.”

The Oregonian reports that “nobody can say exactly how many U.S.-born children have been sent from state foster care to live in other countries. There's no reliable system to keep track of what happens to these children.”

Reporters for The Oregonian have apparently filed records requests and interviewed state officials about the case since August. On Tuesday, as their series was being prepared for publication, Oregon's Department of Human Services announced a moratorium on sending foster children out of the country. State officials say they want to develop international agreements before more children are sent abroad.

Huh? Ought this not be the other way around?

The Oregonian reports that the State of Oregon has sent 13 children to Mexico for adoption since 1999; state officials expect the number to grow. Five children were in the pipeline for Mexico when the moratorium took effect.

Since 1999! Ten years ago – and just chatting about international agreements now?

I wonder if any U.S. state notifies the federal government when they do this? These American kids -- they just fall through the cracks? A shameful shade of gray and no one's at fault?

USAID Local Employees Arrested in Zimbabwe

Air Force Commander Air Marshal Perence Shiri (middle)
Photo from newzimbabwe.com

As best as I could trace this ridiculous story, it started in mid December when newzimbabwe.com reported that Zimbabwe’s Air Force Commander Air Marshal Perence Shiri survived an attempt on his life. This is the same Perence Shiri who according to reports was the commander of the North Koeran-trained 5 Brigade army unit which was deployed in the Matabeleland and Midlands regions in 1982 to hunt down alleged dissidents. At the end of its activities, in 1986, human rights groups say 20 000 civilians were dead, thousands more missing and others displaced.

Shiri was reportedly hospitalised after suffering a gunshot wound to his arm, a senior official from Zimbabwe’s ruling Zanu PF party told the website. Shiri, driving alone in his official car, is said to have been leaving his farm in Mashonaland West Province on Saturday night when he was ambushed. “He came under fire from a sizeable number of professional hitmen. He survived the attack, although he was shot on the arm,” the official said, speaking on condition he is not named.

Zimbabwe’s Home Affairs Minister Kembo Mohadi said the attack on Shiri, who was alone at the time, appeared to be “a build-up of terror attacks targeting high-profile persons, government officials, government establishments and public transport systems”. Mohadi also said the attack on Shiri, 53, “showed the assailants were well trained and there was a clear attempt to destabilise the country through acts of terrorism”.

Mohaid's pronouncements is kind of like the equivalent of the red/severe level in DHS's homeland security threat advisory, only more cranky. One for the Huh? News, you think?

Let’s see -- a top military official was driving alone (It's Africa people, what happened to military escorts and aides?), he came under attack by “professional hitmen,” (I wonder if they’re the Fargo kind) and he was hit on the arm (or the palm of his hand in some other reports; apparently they're "well trained").

Borat could do a better job with this material if only Zim has not gone bat crazy.

On January 22, Frank Muchirahondo, a driver for USAID was arrested accused of shooting Air Force Commander Perence Shiri; Muchirahondo is facing attempted murder charges. Another USAID employee Daniel Mlenga, has apparently also been arrested.

Muchirahondo's lawyer Chris Mhike of Atherstone and Cook said bail was denied and his client’s application could not be heard and that the matter was postponed until February 24.

The US embassy has reportedly issued a statement condemning Muchirahondo's arrest and dismissing all allegations against the employee saying he was among other employees doing humanitarian work for the organisation at the time of the shooting. I could not locate any statement in state.gov or Embassy Harare’s website. If you have a link to the official statement, please let me know.

In the meantime, the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum (the Forum) has released a statement: The Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO is deeply concerned and condemns the failure by the political parties to ensure the release of Jestina Mukoko, the Director of the Zimbabwe Peace Project, Frank Muchirahondo and Daniel Mlenga, both USAID employees, and many other prisoners of conscience from Chikurubi Prison and other places of detention. We strongly believe that they are being held on frivolous, trumped-up political charges, which have no substance at law. Further, it is becoming increasingly evident that political prisoners were used as mere pawns by the political protagonists for political leverage.

Robert “Zimbabwe is mine” Mugabe must be getting his state of play from the Marcos playbook. When Ferdinand Marcos was in power, General Fabian Ver, his cousin, was the Philippines AFP Chief of Staff and his most trusted general (later implicated in the assassination of Benigno Aquino). Gen. Perence Shiri is as well, a cousin of Robert Mugabe and has been named the prime mover over the military’s ugly fight over the diamond fields in eastern Zimbabwe.


Power, money and perpetual rule – they can eat raw at a man’s soul and before long, nothing exist but an abject cast of a man lost for all eternity.


Lost, er unless, they put you in a refrigerated crypt like this one, or in trading cards like this one.

One for the Huh? News: Clinton's "Power Grab"

Media Matters has a lot to say on CNN's Situation Room reporting on the purported Clinton "power grab" at the State Department:

Summary: CNN's Wolf Blitzer teased a segment by saying, "Hillary Clinton's power grab -- at least some are calling it that. The secretary of state wants to take back resources that she feels rightfully belong to her department." During the report, Jill Dougherty stated: "Hillary Clinton is back on the campaign trail, this time to take back power and resources for the State Department." However, neither noted that President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have both supported expanding the role of the State Department.

Oh, my, my! Who are calling it that besides Wolf? and Jill? Read the whole thing here.

One for the Huh? News - From India With Love

PTI News dateline Jan 10 New Delhi has this piece on President Bush’s man in India doing his contribution to the Legacy Project, plus his take on how to deal with the foreign policy conundrum between India and Pakistan. His solution is quite simple: “the United States should not insert itself as the manager or the referee of the process.”

“Amid reports of the Barack Obama administration planning to appoint a special envoy for India and Pakistan, outgoing US Ambassador David C Mulford has said Washington should not "insert" itself as a "referee" between the two South Asian countries.

"I think the two sides (India and Pakistan) should be encouraged but the United States should not insert itself as the manager or the referee of the process," Mulford told Karan Thapar in 'Devil's Advocate' programme.

When referred to reports that a special envoy might be appointed by the incoming Obama administration, he said, "that issue is going to be addressed by other people. I don't think that is going to happen".

He, however, said, "I think the foreign policy which has encouraged both the sides to talk without inserting United States in the middle has been the right thing to do. The Bush approach has been successful. It has produced good results." The Ambassador's comments came in the midst of reports that the next US administration may appoint former diplomat Richard C Holbrooke as a special envoy for India and Pakistan.

“Huh?

Wait, wait - if the U.S. is not a player and should not be a manager or a referee, then the U.S. should be what – a cheerleader?!?

Oh, why would he say something like that? I hate it when folks deviate from the program because it messes up with the folders in my brain. The State Department/USAID Strategic Plan for FY 2007-2012 states under Strategic Goal #1: conflict prevention, mitigation, and response:

We will support conflict mitigation, peace, reconciliation, and justice processes. Our diplomatic and development activities will reduce the threat or impact of violent conflict by developing early warning, crisis response planning and management, and rapid response capability. Peace, reconciliation, and justice processes will stress opportunities to bring together opposing parties, support negotiation processes, promote indigenous peace building efforts, and support appropriate processes to hold accountable perpetrators of mass atrocities. We will emphasize regional solutions to regional problems and sustainable, long-term strategies to address complex challenges.

Can you really do all that by being on the sideline, as a cheerleader? Is it possible to emphasize regional solutions to regional problems by staying on the sidelines and shouting "you go guys! just don't fire your nukes at each other?" I'm going to be walking around confused for the next 168 hours, doggone it!

I don’t know how many people have this report in their reading list, but can we at least get our ambassadors, especially our non career ambos have this in their mandatory reading list before they conduct diplomatic stuff? Oops, forget I said that. A new strategic plan for 2009-2012 is probably in order. That one should be required reading.

Quickie: One for the Huh? News

Otto Kreisher of the CongressDaily filed this report on January 6, 2009 about a State official [who says] Obama will step up fight against terrorism:

“The State Department's top counterterrorism official on Tuesday predicted that President-elect Barack Obama's incoming team would in some ways be more aggressive in fighting terrorism around the world than the Bush administration.

Counterterrorism coordinator Dell Dailey said he did not mean the Obama administration would do more to try to kill terrorists, but would be more aggressive in building partnerships with other nations.

There are counterterrorism efforts in Africa and Asia where "there are no U.S. fingerprints at all," he said. Ambassador-at-large Dailey apparently had nothing but praise for the Secretary of State-nominee, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., citing a "very savvy presentation" she made several years ago after a visit to Afghanistan and her record in the Senate, according to the same report.

It also adds that “He had no objections to Clinton's reported plans to name special envoys to oversee certain hot spots, such as the Middle East.”

Huh?