Thursday, July 24, 2008

Must Read Articles: Congress Should Reform Its Homeland Security Maze

A growing, urgent and bipartisan consensus is emerging to demand that Congress implement the recommendation by the 9/11 Commission that it reform its maze of eighty-plus committees that set competing and often conflicting priorities. rca

Two must read articles include:

CQ Homeland Security story notes that as Congress looks toward DHS Transition, with a series of hearings, members of the 9/11 Commission urge that it clean up its own house:

Sept. 11 commissioners said that if Congress wants to find an example of flagrant disregard for their recommendations, it needs only to look in the mirror.

They said Congress seems to have ignored a crucial recommendation in their report: consolidate DHS oversight to one authorizing committee and one appropriations subcommittee in each chamber.

“Congress needs to establish for the Department of Homeland Security the kind of clear authority and responsibility that exist to enable the Justice Department to deal with crime and the Defense Department to deal with threats to national security,” the report said.

[9/11 Commission Vice Chairman Lee Hamilton] said that just because DHS needs to step up its performance doesn’t let Congress off the hook.

“When you have that many committees and subcommittees to report to, it’s an absurdity,” he said. “Congress has to get its part in order, too.”

In a NY Times Op-Ed, DHS Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy Stephen Heifetz Pleads with Congress to Take Action and Reform Its Conflicting Maze of Oversight Committees (”The Risk of Too Much Oversight”)

In a city known for paralyzing bureaucratic turf fights, one of the most debilitating and potentially disastrous has received scant attention: it’s the Congressional mess that produces tangled homeland security laws. This tangle obstructs our ability to prioritize risks at the Department of Homeland Security, where I work alongside more than 200,000 colleagues, almost all of us civil servants (not political appointees) who will remain in place after the election.

In a backgrounder for the Heritage Foundation, Jena Baker McNeil comments on the dire need for an overhaul of Congressional oversight of DHS.

Despite the 9/11 Commission’s recommendation that Congress consolidate oversight of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) into a single, principal point of oversight, Congress has done little to implement this recommendation.

Congress’s commitment to the status quo threatens the DHS’s ability to identify and respond effectively to security threats. The current oversight system is impractical, constitutionally deficient, and simply poor management. Congress should immediately take steps to streamline oversight of the DHS.

3 Shot at South Mountain Community College

Officials say three people were shot Thursday afternoon at South Mountain Community College in Phoenix.

The Phoenix Police Department said the shooting took place in the computing commons of the Technology Center building located at the southern end of the campus.

It took place around 4 p.m. when officers said the suspect walked into the computer lab and picked a fight with the 19-year-old victim. Police said it appears the men have a long-standing feud.

“This was not a random act against the school or a classroom,” said Phoenix Det. Reuben Gonzales.

After shooting the victim, the suspect then shot a 20 year-old female and a 17-year-old boy before leaving the area, police and witnesses said.

All three victims were transported to the Maricopa County Medical Center where the female and boy were listed in stable condition. The 19-year-old male is in critical condition.

The names of the victims are unavailable, but Jay Taylor, of Phoenix, said his younger brother Christopher is the 17-year-old victim.

Tehran's winning streak

... The nuclear talks are going nowhere, and that's a good thing for the Iranian regime, because time is on its side. Today, without nuclear weapons, Iran has been extraordinarily successful at projecting power throughout the Middle East. Although the U.S. troop surge has for now blunted Iran's efforts to subvert Iraq, Tehran is ascendant almost everywhere else in the region. In Afghanistan, its allies in al Qaeda and the Taliban have stepped up their efforts to overthrow that nascent democracy. In Lebanon, Iran's proxy Hezbollah fought Israel, the Middle East's regional superpower, to a draw in their 2006 war. In May, Hezbollah staged a coup, leaving it the dominant political power in Lebanon. Last week, the terrorist organization achieved a huge political triumph when Israel freed Lebanese terrorist Samir Kuntar in a prisoner exchange. Iran and Syria have replenished the Hezbollah weaponry that Israel destroyed in the 2006 war, and Hezbollah has rebuilt its elaborate system of military fortifications throughout Southern Lebanon. The Israeli military believes Hezbollah has deployed upgraded anti-aircraft missiles that could enable it to shoot down Israeli warplanes over Lebanon.

Last summer, Iran's ally Hamas staged a coup that made it the absolute ruler of Gaza - which it has turned into a launching pad for rocket attacks in Israel. In January, Hamas demonstrated its ability to undermine stability in Egypt by destroying part of the border fence with Gaza and permitting hundreds of thousands of people to pour across the border into the Sinai Peninsula. And Iran has dispatched Hezbollah trainers to Gaza to assist Hamas.

All of this is occurring at a time when Iran lacks nuclear weapons. But, here again, time is on the mullahs' side. Iran is betting that it can successfully continue to stall the nuclear talks until it eventually gets nuclear weapons - and with them the ability to deter its mortal enemies: The United States and Israel.

China says breaks up international terrorist cell

BEIJING (Reuters) - Shanghai police have broken up an international terrorist group that had planned to attack an Olympic football preliminary match in the city, state news agency Xinhua said on Thursday. ...

Fighting Terrorism Since 1492

The original homeland security.

Ask the Indians what happens if you don't control immigration

What Part of 'Drill Now' do they Not Understand?

Out here in West Texas we love our guns, we support our troops, and we treasure our freedom. We are an independent bunch and -- pardon me, Senator Obama -- fiercely but not bitterly so. We are proud to have our own things to do with as we choose to, as free people of the freest nation in the history of the world.

We also walk around on top of oil: yes it’s far beneath us, but it’s there. And all these aspects of West Texas come together to our astonishment and anger over the fact that our independence is limited by an intrusive federal government that tells us what oil we can and can’t access through drilling, and ultimately makes us dependent upon other nations for our own fuel supplies.

This dependence is made worse by the fact that it is arbitrary: that is, we don’t have to rely on foreign sources of oil because we lack our own but because our government has chosen foreign importation over domestic production. And we name names where I am from, so for clarity’s sake allow me to say that Senators Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, and Kay Bailey Hutchinson are not keeping us in this position, but are pushing for common sense changes in energy policies that will result in greatly expanded domestic production.

The two main culprits here are Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who are currently enjoying a 9% favorable approvable rating among the American people. Perhaps you will remember Reid as the man who boldly declared we had lost the war in Iraq a year ago: the war we are clearly winning today. His poor judgment in war-fighting and his lack of faith in our troops are matched by his energy policies that keep us dependent on oil from the very parts of the world with which we are at war.

Reid, and his cohort Pelosi, mock Republicans like McConnell, Cornyn, and Hutchinson for their belief that we can “drill our way out of this energy crisis.” But why can’t we drill out way out? Is oil that much different than other commodities? It is traded on the futures market and its elevated prices currently result from a demand that promises to be greater than future supply. Gold is a commodity, what would happen to it if we suddenly realized it is more plentiful than needles on a pine tree? I can tell you what would happen -- the value of an ounce of gold would plummet: its value is directly linked to its scarcity.

Recently, President Bush did something that should have been done years ago: He lifted the Executive Ban on off-shore drilling. This means we not only have the oil deposits throughout the western United States which we could access in order to be energy dependent but the great oil deposits miles away from our shores as well.

In Colorado and Wyoming alone we have oil deposits sufficient to rival those of Saudi Arabia. Those, plus the use of ocean rigs, would easily result in over a hundred years of fuel for our nation. Yet Reid and Pelosi will not even consider removing the Congressional ban on offshore drilling. Rather, they spend their time talking about the current “energy crisis.” But with oil supplies such as those in Colorado, Wyoming, and the ocean untapped, this doesn’t really seem like an energy crisis as much as it seems like a concerted effort on the part of Reid and Pelosi to keep America from enjoying her independence.

And there’s more -- We also have a rock quarry named ANWR from which we could double the amount of the oil we would draw from the western U.S. and ocean rigs. (I know all of ANWR doesn’t look like a rock quarry; but the part we would drill in does.) And there is nothing pristine about a rock quarry; no viable reason for keeping our oil companies from drilling there. Yet Reid and Pelosi oppose President Bush’s attempts to let Exxon and others pull oil out of ANWR as well. What’s wrong with these people?

The common opposition given against drilling offshore is the fear of oil spills. Does anybody remember hurricane Katrina? The havoc she wreaked on oil rigs in the gulf was unbelievable. Some of these were so damaged that they are yet to be back online. Winds well over 70 miles an hour and the resulting ocean surges pummeled the oil rigs late in the night of August 28 and into the early morning hours of August 29, 2005. And how much oil was spilled? Not one drop. (I am sure that Reid and Pelosi believe President Bush, “an oil man,” orchestrated the hurricane in such a way as to displace a hundred thousand New Orleans’ residents while sparing the oil in the gulf.)

On the other hand, the opposition to drilling in ANWR is usually cited in terms of the damage it would do to the caribou. In all honesty, how out of whack can things get? My friends and I shoot animals as big as caribou in our part of the country every year. We shoot deer, elk, bear, antelope, and aoudad, yet guess what happens without fail? Every few years the hunting seasons are lengthened because the animal populations are still so great that they require more thinning. Add to this the fact that the caribou around the current Alaskan pipeline are thriving and the arguments against drilling in ANWR go from ridiculous to asinine.

I am worried about having politicians in office who are more concerned about hoofed creatures than they are about human beings. Like President Bush, we still read our Bibles in West Texas and from it we learn that mankind was placed over nature not under it. Our Founding Fathers concurred.

We need to drill here and we need to drill now, as Newt Gingrich, McConnell, Cornyn, Hutchinson, and others who value America’s independence assert. It’s not a question of whether the oil is or isn’t there -- we know it’s there -- the question is whether we as a people will muster the wherewithal to tell politicians like Reid and Pelosi to remove the Congressional ban on drilling because America, rather than the Democrat Party or the caribou, comes first. In the end, this is tantamount to saying people come first; people of all economic classes who need gasoline for their cars, diesel for their trucks, oils to heat their homes, and the natural gas required to produce the electricity we are accustomed to having at the flip of a switch.

Just what part of “drill now” do they not understand?



AWR Hawkins is a Ph.D. candidate at Texas Tech University. His doctoral studies are focused on the U.S. Military and his dissertation on the Civil War era. He has been published on topics including the U.S. Navy, Civil War battles, Vietnam War ideology, the Reagan Presidency, and the Rebirth of Conservatism, 1968-1988. More of his articles can be found at www.awrhawkins.com.

(Compiler's note: Lots of interesting feedback on the original document, so don't miss them)

Russia Rages Against U.S. Missile Defense Plans

Russian officials and analysts yesterday blasted U.S. plans to deploy missile defenses in Eastern Europe, questioning the sincerity of the Bush administration and the nature of the actual weapons to be installed (see GSN, July 23).

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov discussed the matter with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday in Singapore.

“We emphasized the necessity of actually bringing some clarity to the situation around the missile shield, in so much as the promises made to us by our U.S. colleagues for transparency and building trust have not as yet materialized into anything concrete and tangible,” he told reporters.

Citing concerns over Iran’s future ballistic missile capability, the Bush administration has sought to deploy 10 missile interceptors in Poland and a missile-tracking radar in the Czech Republic. Russian requests for confidence-building measures, such as allowing Russian officials to monitor the U.S. facilities on site, have so far been rebuffed (RIA Novosti, July 23).

One analyst suggested that the U.S. plans are actually an effort to deploy nuclear-armed missiles closer to Russian territory.

“I cannot see Iran having intercontinental missiles in the nearest future. Besides Iranian leaders are not so crazy as to attack the U.S. with one or two intercontinental missiles,” said Alexander Khramchikhin of the Institute of Political and Military Analysis.

“This is why there are suspicions that the silos that are being built will contain not antiballistic missiles, but medium-range missiles with nuclear warheads,” he added.

Another analyst was less dramatic, but still questioned U.S. motives.

“The U.S. has been deliberately misleading throughout the process of NATO expansion,” said Alexander Pikayev of the Institute of International Economic Relations. The U.S. is going to build missile silos dozens of kilometers from our border. If they wanted to protect themselves from an Iranian attack, they would build silos closer to Iran” (Interfax, July 23).

U.S. to Expand Domestic WMD Response Forces

By Diane Barnes
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTONThe United States has begun to reorganize its military response to a domestic WMD attack by establishing three widely dispersed groups, each numbering in the thousands (see GSN, March 7).

The first such force would include specialists in responding to chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear attacks — such as Army chemical decontamination and biological defense personnel — who were originally charged with working on Cold War battlefields.

That group, the WMD Consequence Management Response Force, is set to begin operating its first unit on U.S. soil for in October. The U.S. Northern Command would control the force, which would include personnel from a wide variety of military branches.

“This is historic,” U.S. Assistant Defense Secretary Paul McHale told Global Security Newswire. “When all of these units are combined for the first time in our nation’s history, we will have more than 20,000 men and women whose primary mission will be domestic catastrophic response.”

It would likely arrive at the site of a major attack after smaller teams provide reconnaissance and initial response services.

First to an attacked site would be a state-based WMD Civil Support Team run by the National Guard. These teams are designed to mobilize within two or three hours of an attack to gather information about possible chemical, biological or radiological contamination (see GSN, March 8).

Last December, the Pentagon certified the 53rd of 55 planned National Guard teams (see GSN, Dec. 19, 2007). Congress has called for establishing at least one such team in each U.S. state and territory as well as the District of Columbia.

Drawing from information gathered by civil support teams, the governor of the attacked state could then choose to deploy one of 17 National Guard WMD Emergency Response Force Packages, units of about 300 troops that can perform decontamination and provide medical services.

Elements of the National Guard units might later be reassigned to work within the larger federal response forces, enabling the Pentagon to assert control over normally state-administered forces, the Air Force Times reported last month.

“What you [would] see is a coordinated deployment of military forces, some within the National Guard, some within the active-duty military, in order to achieve a unified military response to the requirements of the WMD event,” McHale said, noting that the nature of an attack would determine which personnel are deployed.

It is likely that the response of the [National Guard teams] would be measured in hours, it is probable that the main body of the [response force] would arrive within several days,” he said.

When the larger group arrives, they would bring permanently assigned aviation crews to carry out search-and-rescue activities as well as specialists for extracting people from debris and medical workers.

To meet what McHale described as “a sobering mission requirement,” mortuary specialists would be available to handle the contaminated remains of people killed in the attack (see GSN, Nov. 13, 2003).

McHale said the response forces would demonstrate great flexibility.

“It might be that we experience an attack, for instance a nuclear detonation, that might require the assistance of more than one [response force]” or “we might have multiple chemical attacks that would involve the capabilities of less than one [team],” he said. He added that additional U.S. troops could be pulled from overseas if they are needed as reinforcements.

The Pentagon is still working on price estimates of the reorganization, but McHale said it cost roughly $19 million to stage a 2007 exercise that involving roughly one-third of the forces contained in a response force grouping.

The first grouping, ready to become operational in October, will probably incorporate more federal active-duty and reserve forces than the second and third groups, which would emphasize National Guard personnel. The Defense Department plans to prepare the second grouping in late 2009 followed by the third in late 2010, McHale said.

However, it remains uncertain whether personnel will be available to staff the second and third forces when the groups are scheduled to become operational, according to an April report by congressional investigators.

“Despite being the only set of capabilities dedicated to a [domestic] civil support plan, the [response force] has never been fully manned and equipped by the Defense Department because many of the units that would make up the force have been deployed to their wartime missions or because of other availability or sourcing issues,” the Government Accountability Office report states.

Fighting Our Fight

American pop culture has skewed the public’s view of what makes a hero in today’s world and what types of behavior make a person worthy of our attention and accolades. Those who contribute to the greatness of our country are largely ignored by the media who worship the cult of celebrity.

Most Americans are familiar with the latest celebrity scandal; they can recite the particulars of the latest Hollywood divorce and Rattle off a list of “American Idol” winners. They know who set the new home run record or led his team to a Super Bowl victory. But if asked to name any Medal of Honor recipient from Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom, most Americans likely could not answer Paul Smith, Jason Dunham, Michael Murphy or Michael Monsoor.

The problem, of course, is not really with “most Americans,” but with the masters of the so-called mainstream media—those who decide what is and isn’t “news” for the rest of us. In this celebrity-driven, info-entertainment age, both television and print media elites devote far more broadcast time and column inches to the foibles of the famous than on those who serve our nation in uniform.

Those who give us our “news” are much more likely to define a hero” as a record-setting athlete, a “daring” politician or even a cartoon character wearing a spandex suit and a cape. In the midst of a war against a brutal enemy, that’s not just a shame—it’s dangerous. Yet, as I have traveled our country signing copies of my new best seller, “American Heroes,” I find that it is pervasive, despite the fact that we’re celebrating the 232nd anniversary of our Independence.

A true hero is a person who puts himself at risk for the benefit of another. My heroes wear flak jackets, helmets, flight suits and combat boots—and they serve our country in ways that quite frankly aren’t recognized enough by our countrymen.

Know the Enemy

To understand the heroism of those who serve in our military, consider the danger that confronts those who serve on the front lines.

Though it’s not politically correct to say so, radical Islam is, perhaps, the greatest threat we have ever confronted as a nation. It is an ideology of hatred whose most virulent adherents and leaders convince their followers to kill themselves in the process of killing those they describe as infidels or kuffars.

During World War II in the Pacific Theater, we faced an adversary who wanted to die in order to kill us. Kamikazes and Banzai attacks pitted us against members of a military machine who intended to die in carrying out their attacks. But even these assaults were aimed at our soldiers, sailors and Marines. Radical Islamic terrorists don’t care if their targets are men or women, military or civilian, Christians, Jews—or even fellow Muslims.

In their own writings, these radicals state that their immediate goal is to re-establish an Islamic Caliphate from Casablanca in the west to Bali in the east. Within that caliphate, no element or institution of Judeo-Christian culture will remain. To achieve that goal, they have launched a jihad against anyone they perceive to be an opponent. That’s why Sept. 11 happened and why there have been so many suicide-homicides—from London to Tel Aviv, Madrid, Amman, Mosul, Bali and Baghdad.

Our military is doing everything it can to respond to this jihad. A major part of the answer is seen in what young American troops have been doing at great personal risk and hardship in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Philippines, the horn of Africa and the Persian Gulf. These Americans have become the protectors of Muslim women. Women with fingers still purple from voting in free elections don’t cast a ballot to have their sons become suicide terrorists. They want their children to get an education, to have basic human rights, to have an opportunity to live the right way—not die a martyr’s death. Muslim women are key to ending the jihad.

The Surge Is Working

Everywhere I go in the United States, I’m repeatedly asked if the “campaigns” in Iraq and Afghanistan are winnable and if the surge is working. I certainly don’t pretend to have the gift of prophecy—but there is no doubt from all that I saw on my last trip out there that the surge in Iraq is working. We’re now “surging” more U.S. troops to Afghanistan, which I believe will work, too.

When my friend and editor Chuck Holton and I were in Iraq wrapping up “American Heroes,” we walked down the streets of Fallujah and Ramadi on which I had been shot at every time I had been there. I went into the Souk—the market—without wearing a flak jacket or helmet. We went on operations with Iraqi units that didn’t even exist before the surge. Everyone ought to read what the Iraqis themselves are saying about the progress they are making and why they “came over”—whether they were Sunni or Shiite. Unfortunately, none of this is in the mainstream media.

Americans are not hearing more about the good news in Iraq largely because we don’t have enough correspondents out in the field. A lot of reporters and bureaus are back in the “green zone” in Baghdad filing balcony shots from air-conditioned hotel rooms and buying tape from guys with “Al-Jazeera” or “Al-Arabia” or even “Iranian TV” emblazoned on the sides of their cameras. A good number of those cameras spend a lot of time traveling with the bad guys. When we go out there, we live with the good guys. It offers a dramatically different perspective than you get at home from the mainstream media.

I’ve been to this war a dozen times and can attest that our troops are superb. Yet the fighting continues and the operation remains widely unpopular at home.

Have mistakes been made? Certainly, but what Americans should understand is that most of the things that went wrong were the consequence of high-level political decisions.

For example, as I’ve discovered in the hundreds of interviews I’ve conducted with troops, and the analysis I’ve done for my reports for Fox News, my Townhall.com columns and “American Heroes,” few people outside our military actually seem to realize that the war that is being waged against us is much more than Iraq or Afghanistan. Those are just two campaigns in a much wider struggle against radical Islam. For a variety of reasons, our political leaders failed to mobilize our nation to the magnitude of the threat we face after the attack of Sept. 11. There is also the fact that our all-volunteer military is too small to “go-it-alone.” With the exception of the British and the Australians, our military “allies” did not join us in a broad-based coalition that would allow us to put “boots on the ground” everywhere we needed to go. After the liberation of Baghdad, we did not recall the Iraqi Army like we did the German Army in 1945.

None of this, however, should diminish the extraordinary courage, perseverance and success achieved by the troops themselves—or the sacrifices of their families.

High-Caliber Men and Women

No nation has ever had soldiers, sailors, airmen, Guardsmen and Marines as bright, well educated and, now, as combat experienced as those serving our military today. These are remarkable young Americans. They are all volunteers. They committed themselves to service in a time of war. They know that by volunteering to wear a U.S. military uniform they will likely be sent into harm’s way and to serve in some of the most difficult places and dangerous circumstances on earth.

Today, the re-enlistment rate—the best barometer of troop morale—is the highest it has ever been. All of this is occurring in the midst of extremely adverse publicity from my colleagues in the so-called mainstream media. The troops who have “been-there-done-that” know that they are winning the fight against radical Islam—and they wouldn’t “re-up” if they believed they were serving in a losing cause.

I’m a son of what Tom Brokaw called the “greatest generation.” My Mom and Dad weathered the Great Depression, met at a USO dance and married before he went off to fight the Nazis in Europe. All my uncles served in World War II. Growing up, all my heroes were people who had fought in World War II, Korea or both. All of my brothers and I served in combat. That’s the context for my observations of those who serve in uniform today. It is what leads me to conclude that these men and women are of a different mold.

The troops that famous World War II reporter Ernie Pyle covered were part of a U.S. military that numbered more than 16.5 million men and women in uniform—and it’s said that every American family knew the name of someone serving. All of that has changed. Today our country’s population is nearly twice as large—but our active-duty military is fewer than 2 million strong. Even though more than 1 million young Americans have served in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2001, fewer than 2 percent of the American people even know the name of someone serving in uniform.

Unique in This Era

Today’s military is better educated than the general population. Overall, they are more goal-oriented than their peers. They have a clear sense of purpose in what they have chosen to do and know that they are part of something bigger than “self.” In my conversations with them, it is also evident that a remarkable number of them have extraordinary faith.

Some troops may still be able to take obscene language to the level of a new art form, but an astounding number of them know the Lord, they know the Good Book and they’re unashamed to be seen reading from it. They pray before going out on missions, lead Bible studies and willingly attend memorial services for their fallen brethren. The photos I put in “American Heroes” of them praying aren’t staged. They aren’t getting ready for a football game. They are going into harm’s way. They know that they’re in grave jeopardy, and yet they constantly go back and do it day in and day out. They have a selflessness that is literally biblical.

War changes everyone it touches. Ground combat is the most awful experience a human can endure. Even though I have spent most of my life in and around the military, I never used to think that post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was real. Now, I know better—in large part because of what I have observed on the battlefield over the last seven years.

My time with the troops has bolstered my own faith. I have long known where I am going and why I am going there, but these men and women have also reinforced my belief that God has purpose for my life beyond what I can comprehend.

Covering this war has also made me even more grateful for the support, encouragement and prayers of my family when I’m in harm’s way and has also changed my perspective on the women who serve in our Armed Forces, giving me a greater awareness of the sacrifices demanded of their families back home.

Where We Could Do Better

Our military has experienced great success in the fight against radical Islam, but more needs to be done on other fronts.

First, we ought not to be afraid to describe ourselves as we really are. Christianity and our Judeo-Christian value system are not a threat to anybody, and we should never be ashamed of that. The United States has introduced freedom to more people on the planet than anybody or any combination of countries has ever done. We need to tell that story more often.

Second, we need to be straightforward about the nature of radical Islam. We constantly hear that this is not a religious war, but that’s not how the enemy sees it. When a suicide terrorist intentionally puts on a bomb jacket or gets into a vehicle full of explosives and drives it into a crowd of Iraqis, Americans, Britons, Spaniards, Israelis or Jordanians, they intend to die in the process of killing one or more of us. They are not always targeting Americans—many times it’s a crowd of their countrymen and fellow Muslims. These terrorists have been radicalized by people who have taught them to die the “right” way. For us, all the dying was done 2,000 years ago on a hill called Calvary. We’re taught to live the right way. There’s an enormous difference.

Third, we must remember that we didn’t start this war—they did. We need to remind our countrymen and our “allies” in that part of the world, who are glad to get our petrodollars but won’t let a Bible into their country, that not enough is being done to reign in radical Islam. We especially need to remind our fellow Americans who say, “well, gee, this is all our fault,” that it’s not. We didn’t provoke the attack on Sept. 11 or Saddam’s threats. Most importantly, as is evident from the hundreds I interviewed for “American Heroes,” this is a war we can win—and dare not lose.

Those of us who enjoy our liberties in this country need to get to know the men and women serving in uniform. These heroes are the protectors of our liberty. It’s been that way for 232 years. That’s why we can claim that we’re the home of the brave and the land of the free.

Note: The U.S. military has always stood in harm’s way, protecting American liberties and keeping us safe. The soldiers are the true heroes and our source of strength. This feature article by Col. Oliver North was published in the July issue of Townhall Magazine. Click here to receive Townhall Magazine every month.

The Soldier Voting Scandal

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Rep. Roy Blunt, the House Republican whip, on July 8 introduced a resolution demanding that the Defense Department better enable U.S. military personnel overseas to vote in the November elections. That act was followed by silence. Democrats normally leap on an opportunity to find fault with the Bush Pentagon. But not a single Democrat joined Blunt as a co-sponsor, and an all-Republican proposal cannot pass in the Democratic-controlled House.

Analysis by the federal Election Assistance Commission, rejecting inflated Defense Department voting claims, estimated overseas and absentee military voting for the 2006 midterm elections at a disgracefully low 5.5 percent. The quality of voting statistics is so poor that there is no way to tell how many of the slightly over 330,000 votes actually were sent in by the absentee military voters and their dependents and how many by civilian Americans living abroad -- 6 million all total.

Nobody who has studied the question objectively sees any improvement since 2006, and that is a scandal. Retired U.S. Marine Corps Capt. Charles Henry wrote in the July issue of the U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings: "While virtually everyone involved seems to agree that military people deserve at least equal opportunity when it comes to having their votes counted, indications are that in November 2008, many thousands of service members who try to vote will do so in vain." ...

Civil Military Operations Center Opens in Gamsir

At a forward outpost in Garmsir, a line of Afghans wait to talk with Marines at the newly opened Civil Military Operations Center; they have come to voice their claims and receive cash payments for losses incurred while Marines battled insurgents.

Flown over a sparsely decorated tent, three flags representing the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan flap in the wind, showing the people that this is not just a Marine Corps or American program. This is their government responding. The cash payments are in Afghan currency -- the people see the difference and welcome the Marine presence.

"You guys are different" the locals tell Master Gunnery Sgt. John Garth, civil affairs chief, 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which is operating with NATO's International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. ...

Global Warming? Geophysical Weapons, EMP Bombs Pose Threat

CHICAGO – Put global warming aside. Start asking questions about EMP munitions and other geophysical weapons.

About two weeks ago, there was a meeting by the U.S. House of Representatives’ House Armed Services Committee on receiving the latest report from the Congressional EMP commission. A friend of mine attended and said: “Of the 19 Congressmen who were present, most believe this is a real and growing threat.”

The last executive report of that commission I can find is from 2004. Warfare using EMP munitions or new geophysical munitions is a reality that should be understood. These types of bombs can really damage the overall economy by destroying the infrastructure as well as the virtual electronic platform it provides for regional economic development.

EMP (electromagnetic pulse) bombs have been viewed as a real threat since the Cold War. The reality of their development and use is being studied very carefully. It’s not just a weapon for a superpower. It can be something that could be developed and used by a rogue nation, too. Here’s the view of EMP warfare from one recent article:

“What is different now is that some potential sources of EMP threats are difficult to deter. They can be terrorist groups that have no state identity, have only one or a few weapons and are motivated to attack the U.S. without regard for their own safety,” explains a report from the [Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse].

“Rogue states – such as North Korea and Iran – may also be developing the capability to pose an EMP threat to the United States and may also be unpredictable and difficult to deter.”

All an EMP has to do to cause an electronic pulse is be launched by rocket into the atmosphere 20 to 150 miles in the air and be detonated above the Earth. That pulse would cripple electronics that aren’t shielded from this type of blast. There is no need for sophisticated pinpoint accuracy or GPS-based smart-bomb technology.

Think of an umbrella covering the U.S., and within that umbrella of a blast, the electronics underneath that umbrella would be fried and rendered useless. This type of bomb could throw our whole economy back 500 years.

Put Global Warming Aside

There’s a lot of discussion about the effects of global warming. Many have said it’s junk science hyped to the max. There’s enough controversy and counter explanations to create a lot of doubt if not total skepticism on the whole concept.

On the other hand, the development and use of geophysical weapons is a reality that many have don’t plan for or even fathom. What is a geophysical weapon? This is from a Russian journal:

Geophysical weapons are essentially based on the manipulation of processes that occur in the Earth’s crust – and its liquid and gaseous mantle – for military purposes. An atmospheric layer lying at an altitude of 10 to 60 kilometers is of special importance for this kind of warfare.

When you start looking at the impact of an EMP bomb, you can write off any critical infrastructure like power grids and telecom networks that haven’t been hardened to be resilient from an attack. This should be a concern of every carrier, power utility municipality and company utilizing a data center for their mission-critical applications.

What about geophysical bombs related to EMP bombs? What about a system that can change weather?

Nature or a New Ozone Weapon?

To all the water-cooler experts out there, when you talk about global warming what scientific evidence are you really quoting? Are you just parroting what you heard from an activist Hollywood type who really doesn’t know a Hemi from a hybrid?

What if global warming is really some testing of a next-generation weapon? Is that too far-fetched? What is the framework of your perspective? Here is mine. From the same article that was translated from a Russian journal, there are some interesting revelations:

The so-called “ozone weapon” is [one type] of geophysical weaponry [that] is an assortment of means designed for damaging the ozone layer over an enemy. The damage can be done by using rockets loaded with Freon.

The explosion of such rockets in the ozone layer will produce several “windows” in it and thus create conditions for ultraviolet rays of the sun to penetrate Earth’s surface. The ultraviolet rays are highly detrimental to the cell structure of live organisms [and] especially to their hereditary systems.

As a result, the incidence of cancer will go up dramatically. Depleting ozone will bring about lower mean temperatures and increase humidity, which is especially dangerous for areas of unsustainable agriculture.

This whole article is very eye-opening. Maybe you don’t have to buy that hybrid after all. It’s not global warming. Perhaps it’s a weaponry test.

EMP Attack Would Make Sept. 11, 2001 Look Insignificant

While it’s hard to fathom that statement, it would be accurate.

An EMP bomb would create a much more extensive crippling than what the Sept. 11, 2001attack delivered. Nearly anything electronic would be shut down. This is something to think about when looking at developing or rebuilding the power and telecom infrastructure for new applications within a major city or region.

Carlinism: Significant results can be achieve from very determined people.


See James Carlini interviewed by the Strassman Report in California. The 20-minute video discusses the place of “millennials” in the business world.

Check out Carlini’s blog at CarlinisComments.com.

'N. Korea May Develop Electromagnetic Pulse Weapon System'

By Michael Ha
Staff Reporter

A top U.S. scientist warned American lawmakers of a possible catastrophic national security scenario: a possible development of Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) weapons by rogue states, including North Korea, and a potential detonation of such a device on American soil.

William Graham, chairman of the U.S. government-sponsored ``Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States," told U.S. lawmakers that the Stalinist state has the required technologies to develop such weapons.

In a testimony to the U.S. House Armed Services Committee this month, the scientist said EMP weapons are ``one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of catastrophic consequences." ...

New information sharing office faces uncertain future

By Chris Strohm, CongressDaily

A federal office created to ensure information sharing and prevent terrorist attacks is in jeopardy of losing its funding as early as fiscal 2010, even though its work is far from being done, officials said during a Senate hearing Wednesday. The office is responsible for managing the Information Sharing Environment that Congress created through a 2004 law in response to government failures leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The office opened just over two years ago, charged with ensuring that terrorism and homeland security information is shared between the federal government, state and local governments and private companies. "Unfortunately, there are some who would like to see the Information Sharing Environment program office defunded and disbanded by as early as 2010 and apparently then return to the old ways of doing business,"

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committee Chairman Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., said during a hearing to assess how much progress has been made on improving information sharing. "I want to make clear my firm opposition to any such move," said Lieberman, who was a primary architect of the 2004 law that created the office. Funding for the office would need to be secured by Oct. 1, 2009, the start of the 2010 fiscal year. ...

Michelle Malkin on the demise of John Murtha

In her latest column, nationally syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin says Bill Russell could be the man who helps topple Democratic Party heavyweight John Murtha.

The Pennsylvania Congressman has embarrassed himself and his state repeatedly by being named Porker of the Year for his voracious appetite for pork-barrel spending.

Murtha has also given the state a black eye by his numerous slanderous attacks on U.S. troops fighting valiantly in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In comes Bill Russell, a decorated war veteran and political newcomer.

Despite the efforts of the Murtha camp to knock Russell off the ballot, the political newcomer received enough write-in votes in the April primary to win the GOP nomination for Pennsylvania's 12th Congressional District and faces Murtha in November. ...

Read the full column at michellemalkin.com

Intelligence director urges IT overhaul

BY BOB BREWIN, BBREWIN@GOVEXEC.COM

The U.S. intelligence community must undergo fundamental cultural and organizational changes, including an overhaul of its information technology systems, to adapt to increasing globalization, according to a report released on Tuesday by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

The community is "engaged in a dynamic global environment, in which the pace, scale and complexity of change are unprecedented," Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell said in a forward to the "Vision 2015" report. "It is a networked world where what happens in Peshawar affects Peoria -- and vice versa. Risks are often unforeseen and threats are hidden and agile, making the job of intelligence professionals more critical and more challenging."

McConnell said that to succeed in this world, the intelligence community has to: develop capabilities to address cyber space challenges, put customer service first, draw on the capabilities of all the intelligence agencies for specific missions, develop a system that delivers information when and where it is needed, and integrate housekeeping systems such as budget and finance. ...

Defense earmarks went beyond mission, IG says

By Robert Brodsky

Members of Congress appropriated more than $18 million in Defense Department earmarks in fiscal 2007 for projects that either were not needed or failed to support the Pentagon's mission, according to a report released on Friday.

The Defense Department inspector general reviewed 219 earmarks, each valued at less than $15 million, in the 2007 Defense appropriations bill. Those earmarks were worth a combined $5.87 billion.

While the majority supported Defense Department goals, at least five did not, according to the report. For example, the IG determined a $2 million earmark to support the Army's Night Hunter/Night Hunter II program was unnecessary. The Army agreed and told the IG that it "has no requirements" for the electro-optic and infrared system, which is used for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance and targeting. It has since placed those funds on hold. ...

Muslim Brothers and Sisters Trucking Company busted

Comment by Jerry Gordon

semi-trailer-trucks.jpgA tip of the chapeau to Ann Corcoran of Refugee Resettlement Watch for sending us this story. Here is a dangerous scam prosecuted by the US Attorney in Kansas City, Missouri involving a cabal of Bosnians and Somalis and a commercial drivers school getting false commercial drivers licenses to these brothers in the ummah to hustle semi-trailers down the Interstate carrying what? So, what was Muslim Brothers and Sisters Trucking doing with these fraudulent driving licenses? Were they shipping AK-47’s as we posted on a story out in Fort Wayne, Indiana or perhaps Khat, a class A drug favored by Somali Muslims in several different cities in the US or perhaps counterfeit brand name clothes to sell on the black market and cop the profits to send home to Muslim charities fomenting terrorist groups? Who knows? Is this the ground version of those civilian pilot training schools that the 9/11 perpetrators attended here in the US? Worthy of an investigation if the FBI had its head screwed on properly.

Just Look at the list of those indicted in this Kansas City report and make up your own scenario. ...

UK - Internal Terrorist Threat To Airports Due To Lax Staff Security

It is feared that hundreds of foreigners are being allowed to work in high security parts of Britain’s airports without passing proper criminal record checks.

Despite warnings that terrorists have tried to place sleepers in jobs “airside” in terminals, no attempt has been made to check whether foreign workers have committed any offenses abroad.

A Government-commissioned report today urged for foreign criminal record checks to be made compulsory for airport workers to combat the threat to security. But it called only for new staff to be checked and not those already in post. ...

Philippine bishop reports receiving threat to convert to Islam

MANILA, Philippines (CNS) -- A bishop in the southern Philippines reported receiving a letter threatening him with harm if he does not convert to Islam or pay "Islamic taxes."

Bishop Martin Jumoad of Isabela also told the Asian church news agency UCA News that he got text messages from Catholics saying they, too, had received threatening letters. ...

Are feds stockpiling survival food?

A Wall Street Journal columnist has advised people to "start stockpiling food" and an ABC News Report says "there are worrying signs appearing in the United States where some … locals are beginning to hoard supplies." Now there's concern that the U.S. government may be competing with consumers for stocks of storable food. ...

But Hopkins said it was his opinion the government is purchasing huge quantities of food for stockpiles, and Americans will have to surmise why.

"We don't have shelters that [are being] stocked with food. We're not doing this for the public. My only conclusion is that they're stocking up for themselves," he said of government officials.

Blogger Holly Deyo issued an alert this week announcing, "Unprecedented demand cleans out major storable food supplier through 2009." ...


Professor Lawrence F. Roberge, a biologist who has worked with a number of universities and has taught online courses, told WND he's been following the growing concern over food supplies.

He also confirmed to WND reports of the government purchasing vast quantities of long-term storable foods.

He said that naturally would be kept secret to avoid panicking the public, such as when word leaks out to customers that a bank may be insolvent, and depositors frantically try to retrieve their cash.

"[These] circumstances certainly raise red flags," he said.

U.S. government: We know parenting better than you

(Compiler's note: The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to debate two bills that could give the federal government unprecedented control over the way parents raise their children  even providing funds for state workers to come into homes and screen babies for emotional and developmental problems.)



Proposals would give Washington unprecedented control over kids ...
"This is an expansion of the federal government into education when there really is no constitutional provision for it to do so."