Category Archives: US Foreign Policy

Who Is The Real JV Team?

Posted on by
Reply
IMG_0543

President Obama Speaking to DHS Employees.

On 7 January, 2014 President Obama made his now infamous and grossly inaccurate remark about the Islamic terrorist organization ISIS:

The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a jayvee team puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant,

The Presidents JV team continues not only to expand its territory, recruiting, funding and brutality but also the length of its deadly reach. They blew up a Russian Airliner killing 244 people and just over a month later murdered 129 people in Paris. The President stated the day before the attack that his strategy had them contained. The problem here is two fold. First, no foreign policy expert from either party knows what President Obamas strategy is. Second, whatever the strategy is doing, it certainly isn’t containing ISIS.

Perhaps the Presidents foreign policy advisors are really the JV Team. In this case, to take from the President, they may be wearing Lakers uniforms, but that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant!

Does the President have his JV team scouring the internet for the reason ISIS attacked Paris. Im sure that if they scrub YouTube long enough the State Department can find the video responsible. If Obama can catch the disgusting video’s maker, and also put them in jail, maybe ISIS will live and let live…but of course they won’t!

What Does Iran Think of the Nuke Deal?

Posted on by
Reply

Iran’s chief negotiator, Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, says that Obama is lying about the details of the nuclear agreement.  Not surprising.  When you get in bed with snakes, don’t be surprised if you get bit!  If true, it proves how bad the deal is, that the White House is to embarrassed about its details to let them come out.  If Zarif is lying himself, it says all that we need to know about Iran’s intent to uphold their end of the agreement.  If they don’t agree as to the manner of the negotiations minutes after the meeting let out , imagine the confusion 2, 4 or 10 years from now!

Update:  More Iranians calling US Negotiators/Obama Liars

What’s Going On Between Obama and Iran?

Posted on by
Reply

Islam_symbolWhat’s going on with the Obama administration and Iran? On its face it makes absolutely no sense at all! Here we have Iranian leadership in Ayatollah Khomeini who’s promising death to America while at the same time the White House actively engages in talks that will ultimately lead to the loosening of all sanctions on Iran and its gaining of the nuclear bomb. According to the White House and the State Department, they don’t really mean it. “Death to America” and “erasing Israel off the map” is “nonnegotiable,”  are just hyperbole meant to appease the Iranian people. They are amazing statements and lead to only one of two possibilities; either the Administration is brazenly lying and they know that Iran intends to destroy the United States and Israel, or it actually believes that the Iranian leadership is only saying “Of course, yes, death to America” because their people want to hear it. So which is more likely?

The answer lies in domestic policy, not just of the White House, but also of Democrat politicians in general. Hardly a day goes by when some Democrat, whether it’s Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton or all the above accuse a conservative or Republican of being a racist, bigot, or homophobe for opposing a liberal progressive policy, in particular those coming from Pres. Obama. The level of rhetoric that progressive and liberal politicians in the far left Democrat party spew is nothing short of hyperbole as well. They cry racism so frequently now that the word itself has lost all impact. Like the boy who cried wolf, racism has been charged so many times that now when actual racism occurs many don’t pay attention. Most recently, the incident in Ferguson Missouri, the “hands up don’t shoot” mantra took on near legendary status. Cries of racism, bigotry and murder by a police officer were claimed for months, but the officer was completely vindicated by both the grand jury and the Eric Holder’s Justice Department. Could it be that these cries, which happen so frequently, these extreme and gross examples comparing Republicans to terrorists or any other of 1000 disgusting comparisons are done for show?

Could the Democratic political machine make extreme accusations just because they’re effective, and because they rile up the Democratic base and increase fundraising? Given the mounting examples, it’s likely so and under this reality, could President Obama and his leftist State Department supporters be projecting their behavior and their motivations onto the Iranian Ayatollah and his minions? The answer to this perplexing and dangerous foreign policy could be no more complex than Democrats are so used to exaggeration that they blindly assume the Iranians are to, when in a tragic irony, the Iranian’s really mean exactly what they’re saying…Death to America and death to Israel!

 

The Missing Question in the Hillary Email Scandal?

Posted on by
5
Example SECRET Coversheet Required for Every US Government SECRET Document

Example SECRET Coversheet Required for Every US Government SECRET Document

Washington is abuzz with stories involving Hillary Clinton and the private Chappaqua email server she used during her tenure as Secretary of State. Note that I did not write, as many mistakenly do, a “secret email server”. The definition of ‘SECRET’ is precise, and involves a server set up and cleared to handle up to the SECRET level of classified information.

Hillary’s server was “private”, not SECRET.

During her press conference Clinton stated that under absolutely no circumstance had she emailed classified information in fact arrogantly stating that she knew what classified was and there is no way that she would transmit classified data.

Hillary made several revealing statements at her 10 March 15 press conference.

CLINTON: “Well, the system we used was set up for President Clinton’s office. And it had numerous safeguards. It was on property guarded by the Secret Service. And there were no security breaches.”

CLINTON: “So, I think that the, the use of that server, which started with my husband, certainly proved to be effective and secure.”

Secure and certified to hold classified information are two very different things. Also, it may have been secure from a burglar stealing it, but secure from hacking, is not likely.

CLINTON: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”

Hillary Clinton’s statements appear specific to obviously classified documents. These are identified with cover sheets that mark them as:

CONFIDENTIAL: Unauthorized release of which would cause “Damage to National Security”

SECRET: Unauthorized release of which would cause “Serious Damage to National Security”

TOP-SECRET: Unauthorized release of which would cause “Exceptionally Grave Damage to National Security”

In addition to covers sheets, they contain stamps, headers and footers on every page and paragraph to clearly denote the existing classification level. One would expect that Hillary Clinton would know not to transmit that information or receive it on an unclassified server in her home, as that would be a violation of US law.

But there’s another type of classified that is not nearly so obvious as a document that has a stamp on it and a red or blue cover.

Information in an email or a document by itself may not be classified, but if that information is put together with other emails or documents in such a way that the whole of the information exposes/composes CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET or TOP-SECRET information then in aggregate those emails/documents themselves become classified. This USDA White Paper provides a clear discussion on the complexities of protecting classified information.

I challenge Hillary Clinton’s assertion that she in fact knows what classified information is. I spent most of my adult life holding a security clearance and having to deal with the rules, regulations, forms and training involving protection classified information and faced with the dangers and penalties of compromising classified information.

Considering that Hillary Clinton was forced to release over 50,000 emails to the State Department from her private server, was Secretary of State for over four years, and on a daily basis discussed and handled large amounts of CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET and TOP-SECRET information, it defies all rational belief that the sum total of those 30,000+ emails would not be in aggregate at least SECRET if not TOP-SECRET.

Given that fact, the classification of Hillary’s server itself would then become classified at the same SECRET or TOP-SECRET level, and every email or document that went in and every one that she sent from it would be tainted by that classification. You can bet that of those 30,000+ emails released to the State Department, some are going to be withheld from the general public because of their sensitive and or classified nature. For example, how many FOIA requests are made to Obama’s Government each year where the responses contain no redactions, or withheld documents declared protected by executive privilege?

What also remains to be seen is how many critical emails Hillary Clinton deleted, destroyed or erased before deciding upon the 30,000+ that she did send to the State Department. Congressman Trey Gowdey stated that there are significant gaps in the timelines of her emails that drives great doubt into her statement that she released all but her private emails. Those would certainly be high candidates for classification.

The bottom line is that in my professional opinion there’s a 100% probability that the sum total of information on that drive is actually SECRET or TOP-SECRET. Given that no claim has been made that it was a classified server set up by the federal government with the associated firewalls, protections, and backups required to protect such information, Hillary Clinton violated the classification requirements of her security clearance and the law.

UPDATE:

– It took 4 months, but I’ve been proven correct. Hillary DID Send classified information, hundreds of emails now under IG investigation.

Related articles

Hypocrisy, Obama and Israel

Posted on by
1

IMG_0552Barack Obama is well know for having returned the honored bust of Winston Churchill to England, which was proudly displayed in the White House when he took office. Obama returned it because he is also known for disdaining colonialism, and that starts with England. He does not respect America’s past either, believing that our prosperity was illegitimate, gained by taking from smaller countries, which could not resist our pillaging ways.

It’s fascinating then to look at the way that the President is treating Israel and Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. The President is using the very power that he despises from the colonial era to bully Israel into supporting Obama’s Iranian policy, and treaty negotiations. In this case, Israel’s very survival is at stake, where Obama is worried about padding his legacy.

Another ironic hypocrisy playing out involves President Obama’s Middle East philosophy. He would not allow American leadership in Libya, saying that it wasn’t our place in the world and that other countries should stand up. He insists that the Iraqis step forward and lead the defense of their country against ISIS, and yet when Israel tries to defend itself, he tells them to sit down and allow America to dictate the terms of Israel’s security.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Obama!

Obama: Why He’s Losing on the Global Stage

Posted on by
Reply
Capital Building, Washington D.C.

Capital Building, Washington D.C.

President Obama largely gets a pass on his domestic policy.  He receives near unlimited top cover from the American “Minion media” and pop culture who restate and reframe his mistakes, and distort legitimate policy and ideological criticism.  Why are things so different on the foreign policy stage?

First, the fawning adulation President Obama receives from the domestic media is largely missing in the rest of the world.  In fact it’s often the case that you’re better off following BBC reports to get accurate coverage of U.S. domestic news than reading the NY Times or watching CNNNBCCBSABC…

Second, President Obama and his foreign policy team are out classed.  President Obama learned his leadership skills at ACORN.  He’s up against people like Vladimir Putin who were schooled by the KGB, or the Iranian Ayatollahs. This is the equivalent of pitting a pop warner football team against the super bowl champions.  President Obama has a ruthless streak, but it only comes out when dealing with the GOP, conservatives, TEA Party Patriots, police or America’s allies. The latest embarrassing example is the President’s bullying attacks on Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu.  When it come’s to America’s enemies, his ruthless streak is Missing In Action.

Third, President Obama’s domestic adversaries play by the rules.  They obey the laws and adhere to basic rules of decorum.  Obama is more and more unilaterally re-writing laws, ignoring those that he doesn’t like and using executive orders and regulations to create laws when he can’t get them through Congress.  His latest power grabs include using the FCC to control the Internet, and ATF preparation to ban ammunition, in violation of the 2nd Amendment.  America’s international adversaries don’t play by the rules, and it seems that Obama can’t keep up, anticipate or deal effectively as a result.

Progressivism is a kindred ideology to communism that seeks a lesser degree of the same, authoritarian government.

Latest:

 

Related articles

Why Obama’s Policies Nearly Made ISIS Much Stronger

Posted on by
Reply
Twin Towers on 9-11

Twin Towers on 9-11

Much as been said about the Obama administration’s Middle Eastern foreign policy challenges. Each day brings new discussions of the brutal terrorist organization ISIS, the U.S. air campaign to destroy them, their assault on Baghdad and the town of Kobani and the ISIS induced instability across Syria and Iraq. What hasn’t been discussed is how much worse things might have been if the Obama administration’s Middle Eastern policy had played out as he and his faithful had intended.

Failed nation states are the greatest threat to Middle East stability. The impact that instability has on international oil markets sends shivers through the global economy. Not long ago, the Obama administration, then Secretary Clinton, and progressives across the U.S., were enamored with the Arab Spring. In an effort to advance that movement, President Obama undermined the Egyptian government of President Hosni Mubarak, enabling it to fall under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Mohammad Morsi. The Muslim brotherhood, a slightly less dark and evil cousin to Al Qaeda and ISIS, and Morsi granted themselves ever more dictatorial powers rapidly losing popularity. Morsi’s government, contrary to President Obama’s desires, did not last long, and the Egyptian military quickly retook control of Egypt, ousting the Muslim brotherhood from Egypt and declaring it illegal.

America needs to ask how much more instability would exist in the Middle East right now had President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s Egyptian policy carried through? Would Israel be facing a deadly enemy there instead of a peaceful neighbor? Would ISIS have spread beyond Iraq and Syrian and gained a foothold or perhaps more than a foothold in Egypt? Once in Egypt, it would be an easy transition into Libya, and from there?

At this point, ISIS’s stated purpose of creating a global caliphate would appear well on its way. Certainly from a recruiting standpoint, ISIS’s reach to motivate and recruit future terrorists from around the world would magnify the larger their territory. We’ve recently seen ISIS influenced evil in Canada and New York City and most undoubtedly will see more. Lets be thankful that the Obama/Clinton Middle East vision failed, or we would all be facing a much greater and darker threat from ISIS.

UPDATE:

– Muslim-Brotherhood Aligned leaders hosted at State Department. – “The State Department hosted a delegation of Muslim Brotherhood-aligned leaders this week for a meeting about their ongoing efforts to oppose the current government of President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi of Egypt”

– ISIS striving to make gains in Northern Africa. – “In its war to create a caliphate across Syria and Iraq, the Islamic State is opening a front in North Africa, where affiliated militants are wreaking havoc in eastern Libya and Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula”

The President’s March Madness Strategy

Posted on by
Reply
M50A1 Ontos - US Marine Corps Museum, Virginia

M50A1 Ontos – US Marine Corps Museum, Virginia

President Obama is well known for his love of filling out his “March Madness” brackets. His understanding of college basketball may in fact be outstanding, but that doesn’t mean he knows anything about military operations. The President’s simplistic comprehension of the United States military is evidenced by his continued use of sports metaphors in describing all things military. Much as been made recently about the president’s January 2014 description of ISIL as a JV team. He described them saying just because you wear Kobe Bryant’s jersey doesn’t make you Kobe Bryant. He told NBC’s Chuck Todd that his pending strategy would be characterized by going on offense. Sounds like a comment John Madden might make while broadcasting an NFL Game. He diminishes the seriousness of the force of arms and instills no confidence among our troops.

In an Interview with NPR’s Steve Inskeep, President Obama stated

“When it comes to foreign policy, that oftentimes the United States has made mistakes not by showing too much restraint but by underestimating how challenging the environment is out there, not thinking through consequences, that there is a lot of blocking and tackling to foreign policy, to change sports metaphors, or, if you want to stick to baseball, that a lot of what you want to do is to advance the ball on human rights, advance the ball on national security, advance the ball on energy independence, to put the ball in play.”

White House staff is equally prone to throw in the sports cliches. In the President’s Wednesday night ISIL strategy speech Obama was light on specifics. When questioned, an unnamed staff member mentioned they didn’t want to say too much because they didn’t want to telegraph America’s punches.

What makes the situation even more disturbing is the pattern that President Obama shows by ignoring the military advice of the true military experts. Obama ignored advice on leaving troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to maintain the long-term stability of those countries. He overruled his military commanders and provided only a fraction of the troops they requested for the surge in Afghanistan. He is once again ignoring them as they advise using ground troops in addition to airstrikes to destroy ISIL. If the president were military genius I would have no problem with this pattern but to steal from the president’s own metaphor; just because you wear a jersey that says Commander in Chief on it doesn’t make you Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Related articles

The “Obama Five”

Posted on by
Reply
Twin Towers on 9-11

Twin Towers on 9-11

History has a tragic way of repeating itself. President Barack Obama just released five of the most dangerous cunning and ruthless terrorist ever caged in Guantánamo Bay, the “Obama Five”. They were captured and held at bay for over 10 years in response to Osama bin Laden’s planned and executed treacherous attacks on 9/11. Sadly, years earlier, Osama bin Laden was also effectively released by a US President, only that time it was Bill Clinton. Had Clinton acted appropriately 9/11 would never of happened. Following that terrible event, pundits, experts and politicians across the country discussed the probability of when, not if, the United States would be attacked again. We certainly had multiple attempts, thankfully some unsuccessful like the underwear bomber and the shoe bomber, and tragically some like Nidal Hasan the Fort Hood shooter were successful. What are the chances that one or more of these five killers will be linked to the next 9/11, God forbid it should happen?  Whether they play bin Laden’s role directly, plan the attack, or train someone else who does, it’s nearly certain that history will show the “Obama Five” release was even more grossly miscalculated than Clinton’s mishandling of bin Laden.

I spent the first 14 years of my military career as a pilot, and professional instructor in three different United States Air Force aircraft. In that time I trained and passed on my knowledge, skills and experience to many less experienced pilots. The lessons that I taught them were in turn passed onto pilots that they flew with when they later became instructors. As a T-37 instructor pilot alone I trained eight classes, flying with at least five students per class. Those 40 pilots, should each of them fly and pass their skills on to 40 more, would equal 1600 trained Air Force pilots. That’s representative of just one aircraft in four years as an IP.

Applying that same template to these five terrorists, each of whom returns to the Taliban fold as heroes and with great stature, will certainly result in a similar multiplying effect. It’s not hard to imagine that in the nearly 10 years these men spent in captivity, they had an inordinate amount of time to think about, and plan, how they would exact their revenge should they ever get free. It’s conceivable, that each of the “Obama Five” already has one or more plans developed, that will soon get transferred into the minds and hands of other extremists. I pray that neither the United States nor any of its allies is ever hit as we were on that terrible morning. Will President Obama be held accountable should that day come, whether in one, ten or twenty years, and these terrorists or their underlings are involved?

How could such a clear and present danger be set free?  Perhaps we should hold him accountable now!

Latest:

– President Obama released, without expectation of imprisonment, 4 more terrorists from Gitmo.  23 total releases so far in 2014.

Obama’s Foreign Policy Challenge

Posted on by
Reply
Capital Building, Washington D.C.

Capital Building, Washington D.C.

President Obama largely gets a pass on his domestic policy. He receives near unlimited top cover from the American “Minion media” and pop culture who restate and reframe his mistakes, and distort legitimate policy and ideological criticism. Why are things so different on the foreign policy stage?

First, the fawning adulation President Obama receives from the domestic media is largely missing in the rest of the world. In fact it’s often the case that you’re better off following BBC reports to get accurate coverage of U.S. domestic news than reading the NY Times or watching CNN-NBC-CBS-ABC!

Second, President Obama and his foreign policy team are out classed. President Obama learned his leadership skills at ACORN. He’s up against people like Vladimir Putin who were schooled by the KGB, or the Iranian Ayatollahs. This is the equivalent of pitting a pop warner football team against the super bowl champions. President Obama has a ruthless streak, but it only comes out when dealing with the GOP, conservatives, TEA Party Patriots, police or Americas allies. The latest embarrassing example is the President’s bullying attacks on Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. When it come’s to America’s enemies, his ruthless streak is Missing In Action.

Third, President Obamas domestic adversaries play by the rules. They obey the laws and adhere to basic rules of decorum. Obama is more and more unilaterally re-writing laws, ignoring those that he doesn’t like and using executive orders and regulations to create laws when he can’t get them through Congress. His latest power grabs include using the FCC to control the Internet, and ATF preparation to ban ammunition, in violation of the 2nd Amendment. America’s international adversaries don’t play by the rules, and it seems that Obama can’t keep up, anticipate or deal effectively as a result.

Progressivism is a kindred ideology to communism that seeks a lesser degree of the same, authoritarian government.

Related articles