Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Under fire, Napolitano halts projects for review

By EILEEN SULLIVAN

WASHINGTON (AP) - Facing criticism for her handling of federal stimulus money, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Wednesday that she would not start any new border construction projects while the department reviewed how projects were selected.

Napolitano has faced questions since The Associated Press reported last month that Homeland Security officials did not follow their internal priority lists when choosing which border checkpoints would get money for renovations. Under a process that is secretive and susceptible to political influence, officials planned to spend millions at tiny checkpoints, passing over busier, higher-priority projects. ....

'Miranda warning' for Pledge of Allegiance?



(Fox News) Some are advocating a "Miranda warning" for the Pledge -- an administrative notice to students that they have the right to remain silent ...

Companies Patch OS Holes, but Biggest Priority Should Be Apps

by Ellen Messmer

Corporations appear to be much slower in patching their applications than their operating systems -- even though attackers are mainly targeting vulnerabilities in applications, according to a new report.
"Now we know which vulnerabilities are being patched and which are not," says Alan Paller, director of research at the SANS Institute.

The report, "The Top Cyber Security Risks," is based on data collected between March and August and was a collaborative effort by SANS, TippingPoint and Qualys. The group analyzed six months of data related to online attacks, collected from 6,000 organizations using the TippingPoint intrusion-prevention system, along with data related to more than 100 million vulnerability scans performed on behalf of 9,000 customers of the Qualys vulnerability assessment service.

The report shows that 80% of Microsoft operating system vulnerabilities are being patched within 60 days, but only 40% of applications, including Office and Adobe. Meanwhile, the majority of online attacks are aimed at applications, particularly client-side applications, making this the No. 1 priority named in the report.

During the six-month timeframe, more than 60% of all attack attempts monitored by TippingPoint were against Web applications in order to convert trusted Web sites into malicious sites serving up malware and attack code to vulnerable client-side applications. The main attack methods used against Web sites were SQL injection and cross-site scripting. ....

Now Protesters are KKK applicants, not merely racists

(Analyst's note: These politicians clearly run in different circles than me. I'm simply not seeing or hearing what is being spoken of here on the street.)

By LisaB

Are you tired of white racism being the reason for any opposition to Obama and his policies? Think that protesting his plans or talking about him negatively as a politician is part of your rights in a democratic society? Well, think again. Not only is it not right, now instead of merely racist, you’re on your way to a “white sale” for extra sheets, according to Rep Hank Johnson, D-GA and Rep Dingell, D-MI.

According to Johnson, the only thing keeping whitey from going all KKK on every other person in this country is “rebuking Joe Wilson.”

Seriously.

Rep. Joe Wilson’s outburst last week is drawing new recriminations from his colleagues, with a member of the Congressional Black Caucus suggesting that a failure to rebuke the South Carolina Republican is tantamount to supporting the most blatant form of organized racism in American history.

In an obvious reference to the Ku Klux Klan, Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., said Tuesday that people will be putting on “white hoods and white uniforms again and riding through the countryside” if emerging racist attitudes, which he says were subtly supported by Wilson, are not rebuked. He said Wilson must be disciplined as an example.

Of course, Rep Dingell, D-MI tried this line a couple of days ago too.

White sheets again. Is there a sale at Sears I’ve missed or something? Clearly being called a racist is no longer enough. Now it’s all about the KKK. What’s next?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Carter: Racism plays major role in opposition to Obama



State Department Website Panders To Radical Islamists

by Steve Emerson

The United States government's stepped-up courting of Islamist groups is on display at the State Department web portal www.america.gov. The site bills itself as a place to "meet the people" and "explore the values and ideas that define the character of the United States." But when it comes to American Muslim organizations, that often means providing a U.S. government stamp of approval to organizations linked to the Muslim Brotherhood such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) or apologists like the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).
A September 4th podcast about President Obama's Community Service Initiative illustrates how the federal government gives free and favorable publicity to Brotherhood-linked Islamists. America.gov noted the contribution of Dalia Mogahed (a protégé of terror-apologist John Esposito) to the president's initiative. Mogahed and Esposito work together at the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies. The two collaborated in writing a book. Read a favorable review here.
The podcast added that Mogahed, executive director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies and a member of the President's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, had launched www.MuslimServe.org, "a Web site that identifies a national goal of 1,000 service projects for Muslim Americans." It quoted at length from a speech Mogahed delivered to ISNA's national convention setting out principles for the president's initiative.
During the Cold War, government bureaus like the United States Information Agency worked to counter disinformation by driving home the point that freedom and democracy are superior to communism and tyranny. But Zuhdi Jasser, head of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, says that in today's struggle with radical Islam, the United States government is doing something very different – even perverse.
It is aiding and abetting the efforts of groups like CAIR and ISNA to anoint themselves representatives of all American Muslims – even though many Muslims want nothing to do with the Islamists. ....

AUDIO - Massive tax disguised as 'cap-and-trade' Analyst: Typical American family will see minimum hike of $1,761 per year

FBI unit set for more anti-terror raids in Queens; Fears of Madrid-style subway bombings - sources

By James Gordon Meek In Washington and Rocco Parascandola, Alison Gendar and Larry Mcshane

Fear was no excuse to condone torture

In the fear that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Americans were told that defeating Al Qaeda would require us to ``take off the gloves.'' As a former commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps and a retired commander-in-chief of U.S. Central Command, we knew that was a recipe for disaster.

But we never imagined that we would feel duty-bound to publicly denounce a vice president of the United States, a man who has served our country for many years. In light of the irresponsible statements recently made by former Vice President Dick Cheney, however, we feel we must repudiate his dangerous ideas -- and his scare tactics.

We have seen how ill-conceived policies that ignored military law on the treatment of enemy prisoners hindered our ability to defeat al Qaeda. We have seen American troops die at the hands of foreign fighters recruited with stories about tortured Muslim detainees at Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib. And yet Cheney and others who orchestrated America's disastrous trip to ``the dark side'' continue to assert -- against all evidence -- that torture ``worked'' and that our country is better off for having gone there.

In an interview with Fox News Sunday, Cheney applauded the ``enhanced interrogation techniques'' -- what we used to call ``war crimes'' because they violated the Geneva Conventions, which the United States instigated and has followed for 60 years. Cheney insisted the abusive techniques were ``absolutely essential in saving thousands of American lives and preventing further attacks against the United States.'' He claimed they were ``directly responsible for the fact that for eight years, we had no further mass casualty attacks against the United States. It was good policy . . . It worked very, very well.''

Repeating these assertions doesn't make them true. We now see that the best intelligence, which led to the capture of Saddam Hussein and the elimination of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was produced by professional interrogations using non-coercive techniques. When the abuse began, prisoners told interrogators whatever they thought would make it stop.

Torture is as likely to produce lies as the truth. And it did.

What leaders say matters. So when it comes to light, as it did recently, that U.S. interrogators staged mock executions and held a whirling electric drill close to the body of a naked, hooded detainee, and the former vice president winks and nods, it matters.

The Bush administration had already degraded the rules of war by authorizing techniques that violated the Geneva Conventions and shocked the conscience of the world. Now Cheney has publicly condoned the abuse that went beyond even those weakened standards, leading us down a slippery slope of lawlessness. Rules about the humane treatment of prisoners exist precisely to deter those in the field from taking matters into their own hands. They protect our nation's honor.

To argue that honorable conduct is only required against an honorable enemy degrades the Americans who must carry out the orders. As military professionals, we know that complex situational ethics cannot be applied during the stress of combat. The rules must be firm and absolute; if torture is broached as a possibility, it will become a reality. Moral equivocation about abuse at the top of the chain of command travels through the ranks at warp speed.

On Aug. 24, the United States took an important step toward moral clarity and the rule of law when a special task force recommended that in the future, the Army interrogation manual should be the single standard for all agencies of the U.S. government.

The unanimous decision represents an unusual consensus among the defense, intelligence, law enforcement and homeland security agencies. Members of the task force had access to every scrap of intelligence, yet they drew the opposite conclusion from Cheney's. They concluded that far from making us safer, cruelty betrays American values and harms U.S. national security.

On this solemn day we pause to remember those who lost their lives on 9/11. As our leaders work to prevent terrorists from again striking on our soil, they should remember the fundamental precept of counterinsurgency we've relearned in Afghanistan and Iraq: Undermine the enemy's legitimacy while building our own. These wars will not be won on the battlefield. They will be won in the hearts of young men who decide not to sign up to be fighters and young women who decline to be suicide bombers. If Americans torture and it comes to light -- as it inevitably will -- it embitters and alienates the very people we need most.

Our current commander-in-chief understands this. The task force recommendations take us a step closer to restoring the rule of law and the standards of human dignity that made us who we are as a nation. Repudiating torture and other cruelty helps keep us from being sent on fools' errands by bad intelligence. And in the end, that makes us all safer.

Charles C. Krulak was Commandant of the Marine Corps from 1995 to 1999. Joseph P. Hoar was Commander in Chief of U.S. Central Command from 1991 to 1994.

Obama Backs Extending Patriot Act Spy Provisions

By David Kravets

The Obama administration has told Congress it supports renewing three provisions of the Patriot Act due to expire at year’s end, measures making it easier for the government to spy within the United States.

In a letter to Sen. Patrick Leahy, the Vermont Democrat and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department said the administration might considermodifications” to the act in order to protect civil liberties.

“The administration is willing to consider such ideas, provided that they do not undermine the effectiveness of these important authorities,” Ronald Weich, assistant attorney general, wrote to Leahy, (.pdf) whose committee is expected to consider renewing the three expiring Patriot Act provisions next week. The government disclosed the letter Tuesday.

It should come as no surprise that President Barack Obama supports renewing the provisions, which were part of the Patriot Act approved six weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

As an Illinois senator in 2008, he voted to allow the warrantless monitoring of Americans’ electronic communications if they are communicating overseas with somebody the government believes is linked to terrorism. That legislative package, which President George W. Bush signed, also immunized the nation’s telecommunication companies from lawsuits charging them with being complicit with the Bush administration’s warrantless, wiretapping program. That program was also adopted in the wake of Sept. 11.

These are the three provisions due to expire:

*A secret court, known as the FISA court, may grant “roving wiretaps” without the government identifying the target. Generally, the authorities must assert that the target is an agent of a foreign power and/or a suspected terrorist. The government said Tuesday that 22 such warrants — which allow the monitoring of any communication device — have been granted annually.

*The FISA court may grant warrants for “business records,” from banking to library to medical records. Generally, the government must assert that the records are relevant to foreign intelligence gathering and/or a terrorism investigation. The government said Tuesday that 220 of these warrants had been granted between 2004 and 2007. It said 2004 was the first year those powers were used.

*A so-called “lone wolf” provision, enacted in 2004, allows FISA court warrants for the electronic monitoring of an individual even without showing that the person is an agent of a foreign power or a suspected terrorist. The government said Tuesday it has never invoked that provision, but said it wants to keep the authority to do so.

“The basic idea behind the authority was to cover situations in which information linking the target of an investigation to an international group was absent or insufficient, although the target’s engagement in ‘international terrorism’ was sufficiently established,” Weich wrote.

The American Civil Liberties opposes renewing all three provisions, especially the lone wolf measure.

Michelle Richardson, the ACLU’s legislative counsel, said in a telephone interview, “The justification for FISA and these lower standards and letting it operate in secret was all about terrorist groups and foreign governments, that they posed a unique threat other than the normal criminal element. This lone wolf provision undercuts that justification.”

The committee hearing is set for 10 a.m. Sept. 23 and will be webcast live.
See Also:

U.S. Intelligence Needs More than Another Report

With his slice of the $75 billion annual intelligence budget, top U.S. spymaster Adm. Dennis Blair today issued a thick report saying that a "deeper and broader understanding of threats and opportunities" is "necessary to ensure [success]."

We wish him luck. After all, if understanding what's going on in the world can't be bought for $75 billion a year, what good is U.S. intelligence?

The fact is, there are plenty of bright people laboring away in the analytical bowels of the CIA, Pentagon, etc. But what gets to the President too often is hyped and biased, according to another new report on U.S. intelligence, this one from the Brookings Institute.


That's long been the system. What U.S. intelligence really needs, it suggests, is a good old-fashioned city editor with a sharp blue pencil and a nose for b.s.

City editors, for example, regularly ask tough questions about a reporter's sources, which tends to pin-prick the balloons floating a story far beyond its mooring in facts.

But according to "The U.S. Intelligence Community and Foreign Policy: Getting Analysis Right," the CIA briefers hype their presidential daily briefs (PDFs) with references to hush-hush, classified information.

"But such information is often incomplete, may be less timely than open source materials, lacks important context and" says the study's author, Kenneth Liberthal, a former National; Security Council staffer in the Clinton White House, "is occasionally of dubious reliability."

In the world of intelligence analysts, he suggests, classified -- i.e., stolen -- information is like catnip.

They "tend to gravitate to information obtained by clandestine means. Yet much of that information lacks context and is substantively rather marginal," Lieberthal writes.

"As a consequence, analyses overly driven by classified sources may suffer from ignorance of important information in unclassified sources. This is especially notable with the explosion of unclassified material now available on key targets such as China."
In other words, the analysts should try reading newspapers.

Perhaps even worse, Lieberthal alleges, analysts "sometimes 'save[d]' useful information for PDB use," which sounds like the CIA's version of putting a shiny apple on the teacher's desk.
Saving some bits of information for the president's eyes only make sense sometimes, Lieberthal noted drily, but "withholding less sensitive information for hours or days so it appears first in the PDB is dangerous."

When Adm. Blair roots out behavior like all this, then we'll know the Director of National Intelligence is earning its money.

China urges U.S. to correct mistaken remarks in NIS report

(Analyst's note: I missed the point that China was on the distribution list for the NIS report issued Tuesday. The timeliness of their comment is "interesting" to say the least.)

Editor: Li Xianzhi

BEIJING, Sept. 16 (Xinhua) -- China on Wednesday urged the United States to correct its wrong opinions about China in its 2009 National Intelligence Strategy (NIS) report issued Tuesday.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu commented when answering a question about China's reaction to the report which listed China, Russia, Iran and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) as the four major countries challenging the U.S. interests.

Jiang said China has always been a strong force in safeguarding and promoting world peace and stability, and China's development does not pose a threat to any other countries.

"We urge the United States to discard its Cold War mindset and prejudice, correct the mistakes in the NIS report and stop publishing wrong opinions about China which may mislead the American people and undermine the mutual trust between China and the United States," she said.

The NIS, produced by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, is also a four-year blueprint for all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.

Not Top Secret: The National Intelligence Strategy



On its face, the National Intelligence Strategy document released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence this morning seems like a pro-forma exercise in accounting -- accounting for the dollars that Congress appropriates to the intelligence community, accounting for all the committees, processes, buzzwords and contracts. But in the hands of Adm. Dennis Blair, it is a document about priorities and about competing values. (Only in the United States does the intelligence community release its strategy -- albeit broadly -- and invite the media to ask questions.) Embargoed Document - 2009 NIS.pdf
There is a large classified annex to the NIS, but the public version tells us a lot about the Obama administration's national security strategy. There are six mission objectives. The first is to "combat violent extremism." Note the verbiage; the mission is not to combat "Islamic extremism" or "radical jihad." The change is critical -- it's been endorsed by everyone up to the president himself, who has been influenced heavily by the conviction of his chief counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, that the way we label our priorities has an enormous effect on how we fight them. Mission two: Counter WMD proliferation. Makes sense -- but note that it is a separate entry from the need to combat violent extremism. The separation makes sense from the administration's perspective, because the first objective is not simply about offensive or defensive intelligence capabilities -- it's about integrating intelligence with all the instruments of foreign policy. Mission three is the traditional mission of the IC, the one that the National Security Act of 1947 established: provide strategic intelligence and warning. Mission four is obscure to the general public but vital to intelligence professionals -- integrate counterintelligence capabilities. The classified annex probably discusses the need for more offensive counterintelligence operations -- that is, the need to trick the enemy -- and to do so using all means available and all parts of the government.

The U.S.'s counterintelligence capabilities are very weak and largely limited to trying to ferret out spies and figure out the intelligence capabilities of foreign governments. Point five: "enhance cybersecurity." A new cyber security coordinator at the White House would be nice...no? And point six: "Support Current Operations (ongoing U.S. diplomatic, military, and law enforcement operations)." Current Operations is a euphemism for what the Bush Administration used to call the "Global War Against Terrorism."

The document itself focuses on integrated threats. Alongside references to the challenges posed by proliferation, by rogue nations, and by insurgencies are mentions of economic change, climate change, migrations, technological change, pandemics and global health and lone hackers.

Functionally, the intelligence community can't achieve its objectives unless it figures out how to play nicely with each other. Though there's been a noticeable shift in culture after 9/11 -- from "need to know" to "need to share" -- and numerous experiments with cross-agency collaboration and social media, the congressionally mandated structure of the community remains an acute and open wound -- as illustrated by the dispute between the CIA and Adm. Blair over chain of command, and the DNI's general lack of operational control over the agencies under the patronage of the Department of Defense.

Fears of double-dip recession as credit shrinks at Depression rate


(Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, London Telegraph) "There has been nothing like this in the USA since the 1930s," he said. "The rapid destruction of money balances is madness" ...

Both bank credit and the M3 money supply in the United States have been contracting at rates comparable to the onset of the Great Depression since early summer, raising fears of a double-dip recession in 2010 and a slide into debt-deflation. .... the Federal Reserve and other central banks will be forced to engage in outright monetisation of government debt by next year, whatever they say now.

(Analyst's note: This is very troubling)

Homeland Security Sharing Tool Helps Fusion Centers Fight Terror

from National Terror Alert Center

The Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and Defense (DoD) today announced an initiative to grant select state and major urban area fusion center personnel access to classified terrorism-related information residing in DoD’s classified network.

Under this initiative, select fusion center personnel with a federal security clearance will be able to access specific terrorism-related information resident on the DoD Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet)—a secure network used to send classified data. This classified data will be accessed via DHS’ Homeland Security Data Network (HSDN). DHS will be responsible for ensuring that proper security procedures are followed.

This initiative reflects the federal government’s strong commitment to improve information sharing with our state, local, and tribal partners,” said DHS Acting Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis Bart R. Johnson. “Fusion centers are a critical part of our national security enterprise, and this new tool enables federal agencies to share information with these partners while utilizing our advanced technical capabilities for secure information sharing.”

“With this action, DoD continues its work in supporting states and localities who are leading our efforts to secure the nation from domestic terrorism attacks, said Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs Paul N. Stockton. “We look forward to exploring other opportunities where DoD can help our state and local partners effectively defeat terrorism.”

This joint initiative will promote collaboration between DHS, DoD and other federal departments and agencies, enabling the trusted and secure exchange of terrorism-related information in order to detect, deter, prevent and respond to homeland security threats.

State and major urban area fusion centers provide critical links for information sharing between and across all levels of government, and help fulfill key recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. This initiative will serve as a valuable resource to enhance situational awaeness and support more timely and complete analysis of national security threats.

Increasing the breadth of law enforcement that have access to terrorism-related data will further improve the ability of fusion centers to prevent, detect, deter, and respond to terrorist attacks, and advance the combined missions of DHS and DoD to protect the nation’s security.

DHS and DoD remain committed to protecting privacy and civil liberties as well as data and networks in an increasingly vulnerable cyber environment.

First Observer – Truckers Learn To Watch Out For Terrorists

first_observer_truckers

By Rachel Raskin-Zrihen

A local truck driving school became the first on the West Coast to be trained for a new federal anti-terrorism program, the school’s owner and the instructor said. Robert Hertan, an instructor from Maryland-based Total Security Services International, Inc., led the three-hour class at Vallejo’s Falcon Truck School recently. He said the federal Transportation Security Administration hired his firm to train transportation professionals for the “First Observer” program.

This is a Department of Homeland Security program, funded by FEMA and administered by the TSA,” Hertan said.

The heart of the training is to use truckers to keep an eye out for — and report — suspicious behavior that could be part of a terrorist operation or some other attack like that on the state capitol eight years ago. ....

Airborne Laser Could Save Us From Terrorist Nightmare Scenario

(Analyst's note: This is absolutely must read item. Our on-going national security is significantly impacted by this technology.)

by W. Thomas Smith Jr.

Perhaps one of the most frightening terrorist-attack scenarios is one wherein a nuclear-tipped missile is launched by terrorists from a seemingly harmless cargo ship somewhere off the coast of the United States.

In such an attack, the missile could be hurtling skyward almost before our current missile-defense system had time to blink. The missile’s warhead could then be remotely detonated somewhere 20 to 60-plus miles above the visual horizon, and -- in addition to killing everyone in the blast and radiation radius -- trigger an electromagnetic pulse (EMP), which would basically fry every single electrical circuit in the blast’s line-of-sight for hundreds of miles in every direction. An EMP would effectively knock out all electrical grids, aircraft, trains, ships, automobiles, computers, medical equipment, ATM machines, cooling and heating systems, TVs, radios, telephones, blackberries, flashlights, electric toothbrushes, and children’s toys in an instant.

In less time than that required to take a breath, a huge section of North America would be catapulted back to the 18th century. Yet because we are so completely dependent upon 21st century technology, the ensuing chaos, crime, starvation, and disease would be something unimaginable.

A single enemy missile could do this to us.

The U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency, however, have an answer to this threat in the Airborne Laser (ABL) program, essentially a high-energy laser-beam system housed in a Boeing 747-400 aircraft. (Boeing is the primary ABL contractor. Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman are partners developing the laser-weapon system.)

The ABL system is designed to kill enemy ballistic-missiles -- short, medium, and long-range -- during the boost-phase portion of the missile’s flight, shortly after the missile has been launched. And being that the system is airborne, ABL is capable of patrolling the U.S. coastline as well as near-and-above “potential enemy ballistic-missile hotspots,” worldwide.

Amazingly, a plan to go forward with ABL was killed by the Obama administration in defense cuts this year (see Obama’s Pentagon Cuts). Yes, I know, developing the ABL is not cheap, and fielding these missile-zapping aircraft would run into the $ tens-of-billions. But writing in 1776, Adam Smith said that the first duty of government is national defense. Clearly, today the nation is involved in an asymmetrical war. The missile-threat dynamic (including the proliferation of missile and nuclear weapons technology) is clearly a part of that asymmetrical war. ABL is needed to counter the threat. Meanwhile, government-spending on modern public entitlement programs -- which have nothing to do with government’s “first duty” -- has run into the hundreds-of-billions of dollars for years.

At any rate, despite having “lost favor in Washington” -- which almost always favors entitlement programs over its “first duty” -- the ABL program is “still going strong at Edwards Air Force Base,” according to an article in CNET, with recent testing of “the beam’s power.”

So what does the ABL system look like and how does it work?

Basically, the forward half of the ABL aircraft contains the beam-control/fire-control system, “which [Boeing says] compares in size and sophistication to the Hubble Space Telescope,” Michael Rinn, a Boeing vice president and the program director for the ABL, tells HUMAN EVENTS.

The rear half of the aircraft contains -- what is billed as “the world’s largest mobile laser” -- a megawatt-class directed-energy weapon (Keep in mind, a megawatt is a million watts of energy) known as a “chemical iodine oxygen laser” or COIL.

In action, the ABL’s attack sequence is fourfold:

• Detect target
• Acquire and track target
• Compensate for atmospheric problems
• Kill missile

According to the Missile Defense Agency, the ABL initiates the attack by first, detecting -- with six infrared sensors -- “the exhaust plume of a boosting missile.

Once the missile is detected, a kilowatt-class (1,000 watts of energy) solid-state laser known as “a track illuminator” begins tracking the missile and determining a precise aiming point.

Then “a beacon illuminator” (also a 1,000-watt laser) begins measuring -- and correcting for -- atmospheric disturbances: The corrections are accomplished with the use of “adaptive optics,” which basically “point and focus” the big million-watt COIL at the intended target.

Finally, using a powerful telescope positioned in the 747’s nose turret, the system focuses the COIL beam onto the enemy missile and destroys it. The rotating turret enables the laser to attack the missile without the aircraft altering its course.

No other country has this directed-energy capability,” says Rinn, “The potential of megawatt-class, mobile, directed-energy airborne-platforms is enormous. Future potential multi-mission capabilities could change the way we fight wars and defend our friends and allies. Boeing is using internal investments to examine directed energy's potential to address several other critical missions, including defending against aircraft, cruise missiles and surface-to-air missiles.

So, would an operational ABL system actually be sufficient to knock down a sea-launched missile (a terrorist missile launched from a freighter close to our shores) in the EMP attack-scenario?

“Yes,” says Rinn. “Based on all tests performed by our prototype, an operational ABL would be able to track, acquire, and destroy an incoming ballistic missile. This weapon system is able to intercept ballistic missiles when they are most vulnerable and before they deploy decoys.

Additionally, ABL is capable of gathering intelligence on launch sites, and -- during ballistic-missile combat -- relay missile-trajectory information to other elements of America’s missile defense system.

ABL is described by Defense officials and military analysts as “unique” and “revolutionary.” Even its political detractors agree, ABL is unlike any weapon system ever deployed.

ABL is the pathfinder for directed energy weapons,” says Rinn, who adds the real warfighting game-changer in all of this lies in our “ability to defend ourselves -- and our friends and allies -- at the speed of light.