The Curious Case of the Illusive Strategy

In a world where winning the war means winning hearts and minds, we have some of those troubling realities messing up the plan once again. An enemy that we still can't quite identify in the midst of a population whose hearts and minds we are buying...sorry... winning. Many questions arise from the piece that follows not the least of which is; how can these attacks continue to happen in the midst of a population of people whose hearts and minds have been won (spelled bought). Conflicting guidance and orders from upper echelon that borders on schizophrenia and a growing frustration among our men and women is taking its toll. In the midst of this insanity comes this little gem;

* * * * *

This note was written just before a recent attack where a number of CIA agents were murdered.

In paraphrase:

"Our Base is well inside hostile territory. All serious attacks here have been within a few hundred meters of us, including a successful attack on a UN 'Safe House.'

Everyone here is, however, completely unarmed! This is what they say to us, and I am quoting directly:

'... all personnel will have their weapons GREEN (we call it "Storage Mode") at all times. All weapons will be cleared immediately upon entering the compound... at no time are weapons to be loaded, nor is any weapon to have a magazine inserted'

When attacked, we've been directed to run and hide in bunkers, but still not load our weapons! I've tried, unsuccessfully, to get our allowable weapons status upgraded. I'm told, 'We'll have NDs, and that will generate too much paperwork,' another direct quotation! I've even confronted star-wearers, saying 'Why
do we have soldiers in an overseas combat zone, including officers and staff NCOs, under arms, who are apparently so poorly discipline and trained that they can't be trusted with loaded small arms?' With a sneer, the general replied, '... it's just too dangerous having people walking around with loaded guns.' (SOUNDS LIKE CHIEFs Of Police Depts)

After years of continuous lethal contact with an implacable enemy, most reasonable people would think we would have long-since weeded out such emasculate fools, sheep, and attaboys. No such luck. In fact, we've promoted them! As for me, and a number of others, we've long ago decided to ignore stupid rules that endanger our lives, about which no one apparently cares, except us. My pistol is always in "Carry Mode" (called "Red" here), no matter where I am. When stopped by someone who points out that I have a magazine inserted in my pistol. My response is as follows, depending upon the rank of the person who noticed:

(1) 'Go find something else do to, Sonny!'

(2) 'I've never been able to understand violence in any form. Have you? Actually Bud, that is not a magazine. It's a dust-cover. It renders then pistol completely useless. You should get one!"

(3) 'Sir, that regulation negates my ability to defend myself, which is my inalienable right, a right I claim, fearlessly and unapologetically. If you think you want to charge me, go for it!'

Most of the time, my pistols are concealed, and the issue never rears its ugly head. Like so many other capable and dedicated officers and NCOs, I'm getting out, leaving in disgust!" Comment: Although we've made some progress, particularly with the Marines, the foregoing nauseating catastrophe is still all too typical.

* * * * *

If this seems like a break-down in discipline and order, you are wrong. I would give up my nice quiet life to be back in the struggle in the midst of the Warrior community in a heartbeat! What has broken down is common sense, common decency, any sense of nationalism, the courage to call a spade a spade (in this case our enemy as Islam - self identified by the way), the ability to find truly qualified people to represent us in Washington DC, an educated electorate and General grade Officers with any sense of obligation to tell the truth regardless of ramifications for their careers. The Officer/NCO that sent this to the rear did so anonymously, knowing his career would be jettisoned and might in fact face charges under the UCMJ if identified with these remarks.

The two things I take away from this is first, the ability and willingness of our Warriors to adapt in an environment of insanity and second that they should have to simply to protect themselves - from the enemy. It should be duly noted that upper echelon leadership and their civilian counterparts rarely, if ever, subject themselves to the horrors they project on our Warriors. I wonder how willing our elected representatives would be to spend even one week in the conditions they subject our Warriors to? The answer is pitifully obvious after all, just 21 of the elected in DC have ever worn a uniform.

With the latest political broadside, coming out of Massachusetts, there is undoubtedly a movement afoot that we can only hope will affect foreign affairs and specifically as it affects our Warriors. 'Business as usual' is not being tolerated on the domestic front anymore. It is now clear that the country at large is incensed by the callous, self-centered ideology of the political elite and has effectively put all of DC on notice. Scott Brown does not represent what an election might have been in years past. His was not a 'masterful' sales pitch nor is his career any great study. What this election does represent is a super-charged electorate that is finished with politicians who think they deserve their 'jobs'. One can only hope that the population will be spending as much time reconsidering our non-strategy in handling our Islamic foes and 'throw the bums out' that are responsible for this great travesty.

In the meantime consider this last piece of depravity; Trijicon, which provides many of the scopes currently in use by all branches of our military, has been inscribing its scopes, discreetly, with Biblical references. Today; they announced they were conceding to demands from the DOD due to a 'complaint' from an unnamed person or group. The story is as follows:

* * *

Trijicon:

No more Bible references on

scopes

By Dan Lamothe - Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Jan 21, 2010 17:00:27 EST

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

A company under fire for etching biblical references on rifle scopes used by the U.S. military said Thursday it will stop the practice, and offered to provide modification kits to the Pentagon to enable their removal on existing optics.

Michigan-based Trijicon Inc. made the announcement in a statement released by Levick Strategic Communications, a Washington, D.C.-based firm that specializes in crisis management.

“Trijicon has proudly served the U.S. military for more than two decades, and our decision to offer to voluntarily remove these references is both prudent and appropriate,” Trijicon president Stephen Bindon said in a statement. “We want to thank the Department of Defense for the opportunity to work with them and will move as quickly as possible to provide the modification kits for deployment overseas.”

Trijicon also said it will remove the inscriptions from all products it has made for the military, but not yet shipped, and that it will provide foreign military services that purchased Trijicon products the same options.

Company officials said Monday in a report on ABC News’ “Nightline” news program that it included coded references to Bible passages on its products, including optics used by U.S. troops currently in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. In a statement released Tuesday, the company said it adopted the practice “as part of our faith and our belief in service to country.”

The admission led to a maelstrom of media attention and criticism that the practice would allow Muslim extremists to claim that the U.S. is waging a holy war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Marine Corps officials said in a statement Tuesday they were “aware of the issue and concerned with how this may be perceived,” and said they planned to meet with Trijicon.

The inscriptions gained attention on the company’s Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight, which is mounted to M16A4 and M4 service rifles used by tens of thousands of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. In one example, an inscription included “JN8:12,” a reference to John 8:12, a Christian gospel passage: “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

The inscription on another optic includes “2COR4:6,” which refers to Second Corinthians 4:6 of the New Testament: “For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”

* * *

It will be interesting to watch and see how far the electorate comes this year and how successful we are in turning this vessel around we call a nation.

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

Traitors in Our Midst?

It has been well over 200 years since the great American patriot, Nathan Hale uttered his now immortal words, 'My only regret is that I have but one life to give for my country'. Although historians may quibble about the precision with which his words have been purveyed to us, the sheer force of those words never fail to strike awe in us; that a man would willingly forfeit his life that his family and friends might live in freedom. This is how we remember and define heroism and even martyrdom.

These concepts have been so obscured in recent years and by recent events that without a determined effort by us, our children might never fully understand the concept of self-sacrifice. These days we see endless examples of men, warped by evil ideology blowing themselves up in crowded bazaars and on crowded planes not to secure freedom for anyone but simply to strike fear in the hearts of free men. This evil ideology is as sinister a doctrine as ever contrived by men and has been offered to us in the guise of divine utterance. While there are many among us who choose to recognize this ideology as something given to a deranged man by a demon, there are still others who accept them as just another example of another way to 'God'. Anyone who was not well trained in any other religion might come to that conclusion and even those of us with a fair understanding of our own religion might fall victim to the belief that it is harmless, if it wasn't for history.

This evil ideology (spelled Islam) and the countless millions who have sold their souls to it are as determined today as they were in the 7th century to transform the entire world into a cesspool of service to their warped version of God. The thing is, they have never hidden their understanding of the mandates of their religion or their intent to carry them out. They have, however, made clever use of deception and omission when discussing it openly with unwitting adversaries (spelled infidels). Like a spider they have lured larger prey into their web and have caused them to do their will and even caused their prey to turn on their own. They are crafty, lying, deceitful murderers of men, rapists, thieves and deluded by the Devil himself. And they are among us.

Our own government has knowledge of these men and their ideology and rather than to identify them and hold them responsible for the atrocities they commit, they reward them by asking them to help us 'understand' them. They hire them to teach our intelligence community and our military a perverted version of the truth of their religion and send these same military personnel and intelligence agents out into hell to fight a war without fire support and with a corrupt knowledge of the culture and the enemy that is a lie. Our government tells our people, daily, that the enemy is a sub-set of a larger group and an anomaly and that the best way to handle it is to convince the larger population to help us. They have been telling us this for years and have not been able to produce ANY proof of what they are saying. They deny history and facts that are piling up by the hour like some kind of mentally traumatized and terminally ill patient refusing to come to terms with his own mortality.

If this sounds a little melodramatic, then you need to start paying attention to all that you are not being told; that means you now have to study, on your own, to determine if what you are being told is in fact so. We who are Christians know this admonition in the form of 1 John 4:1 -'Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.'. In the same way, there are many people in high office who harbor motivations that are not in keeping with their solemn oaths sworn to 'support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;' These men - and women are primarily interested in winning yet another seat in office. They have done, and will continue to do whatever it takes to convince an ever 'dumbed-down' constituency that they have made the country safer because of their due diligence and through their diplomatic prowess when dealing with cultures with these 'anomalous', 'extremist', 'radical' elements in our midst. They will tell you this while they continue to be lured by front groups for this perverse ideology and use them to further confuse the minds of men and women who have sworn their oaths to fight and die for your freedom.

The latest incidences in Afghanistan should at the very least cause even the most skeptical to take another look at the policies of our civilian leadership in Afghanistan and Iraq. In Gamsir, an area where the 'Winning Hearts and Minds' strategy (spelled counter-insurgency), is suppose to be a model of success, one bit of propaganda (presumably by the Taliban) was enough to spark riots with rioters screaming for the death of American and NATO troops. They were upset because they were told someone had damaged or desecrated the Quran. In Kabul where militants attacked several Afghan government buildings and injured and killed many and destroyed millions of dollars worth of property. In Iraq where rockets were fired in to Najaf, killing 15 and wounding 22 near a shrine. We were told that COIN doctrine would garner greater respect and trust among the people and that this would in turn help us eradicate the 'extremists' in their midst. It still hasn't occurred to most that the 'extremists' are simply those in a society of perversion who happen to have the courage to carry out what their ideology demands of them. AND THEY ARE AMONG US.

This year we have an opportunity to undo at least some of the damage caused by years of neglect. We can break the back of the 'world community organizers' that currently hold the power in this country and elect people who will remember that they are servants to us. We can elect men and women who understand that this nation is sovereign and that no people, ideology or influence can have us or our freedom. We can elect men and women who understand the gravity of taking an oath and who are willing to sacrifice whatever of themselves is necessary in carrying out the duties of that oath. We can elect men and women who are educated about this enemy and who are not afraid of demographics, an imagined power base, foreign pestilence, perverse ideologies, their proponents and are not afraid to name the enemies of this nation.

The current seated caretakers of this nation are not created in the image of Nathan Hale, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, or Patrick Henry. They are of another ilk and they have done their best to sell the soul of this nation for a little personal aggrandizement. In the process, they have made us a lot less safe and have invited the enemy into our midst. It is time to take back this country and elect men and women of sound character, moral courage, noble, with a sound sense of service and patriotism because the 536 currently seated in the Dark City are not! Tomorrow, Massachusetts may send a signal that this country is not only disgusted with the self-serving, but ready to meet our enemies head to head. And most importantly, that we are no longer going to tolerate the likes of Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Murtha or their minions like Gates and McChrystal as they continue to spill the precious blood of the greatest members of this generation on a faulty vision of the world!

Semper Fidelis;

John Bernard

Where is Islamberg and Why is it a Ghost Town?

I know there are those who will never accept any 'anomaly' as evidence and this same segment of the population will never take the time to research this subject to see if what they have been indoctrinated with stands up to the scrutiny of history and sound academic research. For everyone else; here is yet another troubling evidence of the continuing and coming storm. The question we all have to ask is just how many times this 'anomaly' has repeated itself nationwide and for that matter, in Canada and western Europe? Do those in whom we have entrusted our security know the answer to that and what are they prepared to do about it? The events that have unfolded in Afghanistan concerning our 'strategy change' and related ROE have suggested that these decisions are based on a faulty understanding of the enemy and a left-wing agenda. I'm curious to know how many more 9/11's we will have to experience before our sworn Leaders and the Protectors of our Constitution, Land and People are going to be willing to re-visit their flawed perception of the enemy?

The latest revelation surrounding the latest Executive Order that affords diplomatic immunity to Interpol and by extension the ICC suggest much darker times ahead. It is no secret that the ICC and other international governing bodies see the campaigns in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan as 'illegal' by their own standards. Until the 17th of this month, that meant little. Now , our own President has laid the ground work necessary to subjugate an entire country which was entrusted to him by 53% of the population. This population which can no longer expect protection from their government from a foreign pestilence in the form of Interpol and the ICC. Our Warriors can no longer expect they will not be held liable for 'crimes against humanity' by a foreign agancy that has already expressed their disdain for America and declared the war we are embroiled in, illegal. It has been feared that they would eventually exploit any opportunity to hold any and all American Warriors liable. This President has given them that opportunity. Can you say Sedition?

Some will say that these things are not inter-related but that is an extremely naive and dangerous view. These things are all related! Applying a battle strategy that has failed historically, in a land of people that have no respect for their own central government and ideologically hate all outside of their ideology, where the human and physical terrain is unforgivable and murderous is insane. Placing our Warriors in this place without expectation of simple, timely, organic fire support from weapon systems like 60mm mortars is murderous - not naive and not unrelated to the bigger picture! It very clearly smacks of a government and government officials that no longer fear their constituency and no longer love or respect the men in uniform that they have placed in harm's way. One can only deduce that they have a new constituency and a new 'first love'. The question is, will this present constituency tolerate the current crop of traitors or will they show them the door in 2010? Will the new crop that replaces them be any different? Will they understand what the current crop has so obviously forgotten; that they have sworn an oath 'to support and defend the constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic;' or will they continue the same failing policies of their predecessors and continue to drive this, their country into the ground and into the shackles of some foreign pestilence?

A question was posed to me the other day; 'Power, money, and prestige are motivators toward evil. O for honest men and women to stand up and lead! Are there any out there? Can they possibly rise to the top without corruption?' To which I answer; I don't know. I honestly don't know.

John Bernard

www.newmediajournal.us/staff/p_williams/2009/1222209.htm

Dr. Paul L. Williams, PhD
Why Is Islamberg Now a Ghost Town?
December 22, 2009

The Wall Street Journal reports this week that U.S. investigators are discovering that more and more young Muslims are vanishing from mosques, madrassas, and Islamic centers.

The disappearances, the Journal notes, are raising grave concerns among FBI and Homeland Security officials who fear that an onset of jihadist activity will take place on American soil in the near future.

Hundreds of Muslim men are also missing from Islamberg and this is not a propitious omen.

The sentry post is gone and no guards are in sight at the entrance to the 70 acre Islamic settlement located in the dense forest between Deposit and Hancock in upper New York State.

Young men in Islamic garb no longer congregate before the makeshift mosque, and no students are in attendance at the one room shack that serves as Sheikh Gilani's “International Quranic Open University.”

Gunfire no longer can be heard from the firing ranges along the eastern parameter of the property – and no grunts come from new recruits at the obstacle course.

A new sign at the entranceway reads, “Welcome to Holy Islamberg: The International Quranic Open University.” Next to this sign, which features the image of a mosque emerging from the mountains, is a pot of plastic carnations. Another sign proclaims that the community is home to the “United Muslim – Christian Forum.”

Such statements of welcome are offset by the “No Trespassing” signs that have been nailed to trees throughout the compound.

On the opposite side of the road leading into the community is a rack of metal mailboxes bearing such names as Abdul-Haqq, Abdul Jalil, Mumim Roberts, Abdullah Simonds, and Salam Insan.

What has happened to this once bustling complex of radical Islamists – a place where the cries of muezzins were accompanied by the incessant rat-tat-tat of machine gunfire? Where are the Arab dignitaries that used to visit this remote community in chauffeur-driven limousines? Where are the armed sentries who warded away all intruders?

A handful of children play in the mud and muck before rows of rusty old trailers, and a few women in full burkas walk along the rutty dirt road that leads to the heart of the squalid Muslim compound.

The few residents who remain in the settlement are not environmentalists. Sewage seeps from septic tanks and outhouses into the creek that flows at the base of the settlement. Bags of rotting garbage remain stacked between the trailers. And the once pristine countryside is now littered with junk cars, moldy mattresses, empty tanks of propane, and old appliances.

Where are the men?

What has happened to this bustling center of jihadi training?

Why has Islamberg become a ghost town?

The same phenomenon of vanishing Muslim men is taking place at mosques, madrassas, and other Islamic communities throughout the country and at other Jamaat ul-Fuqra paramilitary compounds, including one in Red House, Virginia.

U.S. investigators have now discovered that many of the missing Muslims are showing up in the killing fields of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Somalia.

Five American Muslims recently were arrested in Pakistan following a raid at the home of a member of the Jaish-e-Muhammad, a Pakistani movement designated as a terrorist group by the U.S. Treasury Department in 2001.

The five American Muslims – identified as Ahmed Abdullah, Waqar Hassan Khan, Eman Hassan, Yasir and Rami Zamzam – were planning to join forces with the Taliban to fight the U.S.-led coalition forces in Afghanistan.

Zamzam is a graduate dental student at Howard University, where he served as president of the Muslim Student Association.

David Coleman Headley, another Muslim who disappeared, is a native of Chicago who attended Lashkar-e-Toiba-operated terrorism training camps in Pakistan and helped Lashker-e-Toiba members and others plan and execute the attacks in Denmark against the newspaper which published cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed, which Muslims found offensive, as well as the violent attack in Mumbai, in about 170 people died.

At the same time Headley was taken into custody, U.S. investigators discovered that 20 Somali immigrants, who were reported missing from a mosque in Minnesota, had joined the Islamist insurgent group, al Shabaab, and were engaged in fighting Somalia's U.S.-backed government.

And there is the case of Najibullah Zazi, a 24-year-old resident of Denver, who made a trip to Peshawar, Pakistan, in 2008 for the stated purpose of visiting his wife only to show up at an al Qaeda training camp where he received instruction in making and detonating explosives. In September, Zazi was collared by federal officials as he made his way to New York City to carry out attacks with the same back-pack bombs that were used to blow up a train station in Madrid and several subway stations in London.

Where are the Muslim men from Islamberg?

The answer comes from a heavy-set woman in a long black burka who stops to check her mail box. “The men – all gone,” she says in halting English. “All – in Pakistan.”

Islamberg was established in 1980 by Sheikh Mubarak Ali Gilani, a Pakistani cleric who served as the imam of the Yasin Masjid in Brooklyn. A quack practitioner of something called “Koranic psychiatry,” Sheikh Gilani presented himself to the Brooklyn congregation as "the sixth Sultan ul Faqr,” with a lineage that dates back to the prophet Mohammed. He claimed to have supernatural powers that came from his regular reception of visits by jinn and “non-human beings.”

Sporting ammunition belts, Gilani called upon members of a Black Muslim street gang known as Dar al-Islam (DAR) to take part in the holy war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Hundreds answered the call and headed off to training camps in Pakistan, which had been established by Osama bin Laden, and other members of the mujahadeen.

Under Gilani’s direction, the DAR transformed into Jamaat ul-Fuqra (“the community of the impoverished”) and continued its prison ministry under Muslims of the Americas, a new, non-profit corporation. The sheikh soon came to realize that it would be financially advantageous to train new recruits for the holy war on American soil rather than shelling out the freight of sending them to Lahore and Peshawar. He purchased a 70-acre parcel of land near Green Haven, set up a firing range and an obstacle course, purchased a slew of old single-wide trailers and created a paramilitary compound called Islamberg.

When released from the federal prison, former convicts now received not only the customary $10 and a suit of clothes but also a one-way ticket to Gilani’s compound.

What took place at Islamberg and the International Quranic Open University?

The answers came from Sheikh Gilani in his recruitment videos: “We give [students] specialized training in guerilla warfare. We are at present establishing training camps. You can easily reach us at Open Quranic offices in upstate New York or in Canada or in South Carolina or in Pakistan.”

Similarly, in a handbook, published by the university, Gilani wrote that the foremost duty of all students is to wage war against “the oppressors of Muslims.” The students are expected to sign an oath that reads: “I shall always hear and obey, and whenever given the command, I shall readily fight for Allah’s sake.”

Now that the recruits at Islamberg have been trained in the basics of guerilla warfare, they have been deployed to Pakistan for advanced courses in explosives and weapons of mass destruction.

They will be returning home soon.

The Real Rules Of War

Another great perspective on the Rules of Engagement, Civilization, the cruelty of war and an argument for reason.

By Warren Kozak

Five years ago, a particularly gruesome image made its way to our television

screens from the war in Iraq. Four U.S. civilian contractors working in

Fallujah were ambushed and killed by al Qaeda. Their bodies were burned,

then dragged through the streets. Two of the charred bodies were hung from

the Euphrates Bridge and left dangling.

This barbaric act left an impression that our military did not forget: In a

special operation earlier this year, Navy SEALs captured the mastermind of

that attack, Ahmed Hashim Abed. But after he was taken into custody in

September, Abed claimed he was punched by his captors. He showed a fat lip

to prove it. Three of the SEALS are now awaiting a courts-martial on charges

ranging from assault to dereliction of duty and making false statements.

This incident and its twisted irony takes me back to an oddly serene setting

many years ago. When I was in college, I joined my parents on a trip to

retrace my father's wartime experience in Europe. We drove from France,

through Holland and Belgium and on to Germany-the same route he had taken

with the U.S. Army in 1944-45. At a field outside the Belgian town of

Malmedy, we got out of our rented car where my father described something I

had never heard before.

During the Battle of the Bulge, in the bleak December of 1944, the Germans

had quickly overrun the American lines. They took thousands of prisoners as

they pushed through in a last chance gamble to turn the war around. One

unit, part of the First SS Panzer Division, had captured over a hundred GIs.

They were moving fast, and they didn't care to be burdened by prisoners. So

the SS troops put the American soldiers in that field and mowed them down

with machine guns.

Around 90 Americans were killed in that barrage. The Germans then walked

through the tangle of bodies, shooting those who were still alive in the

back of the head. The few that survived were brought to where my father was

located in the nearby town of Liege where word of the massacre quickly

spread.

My father was never a talker. And in spite of the fact that we were on a

trip to look at his past, he didn't open up much, or couldn't. When I asked

him what the reaction was among the U.S. troops, he answered without

emotion: "We didn't take prisoners for two weeks." I immediately understood

what he meant, and had the sense not to press the issue any further. I just

looked out at the field, now green and peaceful on a beautiful summer day,

and realized he was looking at the same field and seeing something quite

different.

In the weeks following the Malmedy massacre, U.S. troops clearly broke the

rules of the Geneva Conventions. Justified or not, they were technically

guilty of war crimes.

My guess is that the American correspondents imbedded with those troops knew

all about this and chose not to report it. So did their officers. They

understood the gravity of the war, as well as the absolute importance of its

outcome. And they understood that disclosing this information might

ultimately help the enemy. In other words, they used common sense. Was the

U.S. a lesser country because these GIs weren't arrested? Was the

Constitution jeopardized? Somehow it survived.

You don't have to dig too deep to understand that war brings out behavior in

people that they would never demonstrate in normal life. In Paul Fussell's

moving memoir, "The Boys' Crusade," the former infantryman relates a story

about the liberation of Dachau. There were about 120 SS guards who had been

captured by the Americans. Even though the Germans were being held at

gunpoint, they still had the arrogance-or epic stupidity-to continue to heap

verbal abuse and threats on the inmates. Their American guards, thoroughly

disgusted by what they had already witnessed in the camp, had seen enough

and opened fire on the SS. Some of the remaining SS guards were handed over

to the inmates who tore them limb from limb. Another war crime? No doubt.

Justified? It depends on your point of view. But before you weigh in,

realize that you didn't walk through the camp. You didn't smell it. You

didn't witness the obscene horror of the Nazis.

Rules of war are important. They are something to strive for as they

separate us from our distant ancestors. But when only one side follows these

rules, they no longer elevate us. They create a very unlevel field and more

than a little frustration. It is equally bizarre for any of us to judge

someone's behavior in war by the rules we follow in our very peaceful

universe. We sit in homes that are air-conditioned in the summer and warmed

in the winter. We have more than enough food in our bellies and we get

enough sleep. The stress in our lives won't ever match the stress of battle.

Can we honestly begin to decide if a soldier acted in compliance with rules

that work perfectly well on Main Street but not, say, in Malmedy or

Fallujah?

In his book, Mr. Fussell probably sums up the feelings of many soldiers when

he quotes a British captain, John Tonkin, who experienced a great deal of

the war. "I have always felt," Capt. Tonkin said, "that the Geneva

Convention is a dangerous piece of stupidity, because it leads people to

believe that war can be civilized. It can't."

Mr. Kozak is the author of "LeMay: The Life and Wars of General Curtis

LeMay" (Regnery, 2009).

Wither Sovereignty

This is probably the single most troubling piece of information to come up in the past year. With this amended Executive Order, Interpol now has authorization to 'Operate' on American soil and for all practical purposes, has control of sovereign US citizens. With the stroke of the pen, the President has perpetrated an act of sedition against the sovereignty of the United States of America and our citizens; and everyone just watches....

Executive Order Amended to Immunize INTERPOL In America - Is The ICC Next?

By Steve Schippert, Clyde Middleton December 23, 2009

Last Thursday, December 17, 2009, The White House released an Executive Order "Amending Executive Order 12425." It grants INTERPOL (International Criminal Police Organization) a new level of full diplomatic immunity afforded to foreign embassies and select other "International Organizations" as set forth in the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945.

By removing language from President Reagan's 1983 Executive Order 12425, this international law enforcement body now operates - now operates - on American soil beyond the reach of our own top law enforcement arm, the FBI, and is immune from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

For Immediate Release December 17, 2009
Executive Order -- Amending Executive Order 12425

EXECUTIVE ORDER
- - - - - - -
AMENDING EXECUTIVE ORDER 12425 DESIGNATING INTERPOL
AS A PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION ENTITLED TO
ENJOY CERTAIN PRIVILEGES, EXEMPTIONS, AND IMMUNITIES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words "except those provided by Section 2©, Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act" and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 16, 2009.

After initial review and discussions between the writers of this analysis, the context was spelled out plainly.

Through EO 12425, President Reagan extended to INTERPOL recognition as an "International Organization." In short, the privileges and immunities afforded foreign diplomats was extended to INTERPOL. Two sets of important privileges and immunities were withheld: Section 2© and the remaining sections cited (all of which deal with differing taxes).

And then comes December 17, 2009, and President Obama. The exemptions in EO 12425 were removed.

Section 2c of the United States International Organizations Immunities Act is the crucial piece.

Property and assets of international organizations, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, unless such immunity be expressly waived, and from confiscation. The archives of international organizations shall be inviolable. (Emphasis added.)

Inviolable archives means INTERPOL records are beyond US citizens' Freedom of Information Act requests and from American legal or investigative discovery ("unless such immunity be expressly waived.")

Property and assets being immune from search and confiscation means precisely that. Wherever they may be in the United States. This could conceivably include human assets - Americans arrested on our soil by INTERPOL officers.

Context: International Criminal Court

The importance of this last crucial point cannot be understated, because this immunity and protection - and elevation above the US Constitution - afforded INTERPOL is likely a precursor to the White House subjecting the United States under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). INTERPOL provides a significant enforcement function for the ICC, just as our FBI provides a significant function for our Department of Justice.

We direct the American public to paragraph 28 of the ICC's Proposed Programme Budget for 2010 (PDF).

29. Additionally, the Court will continue to seek the cooperation of States not party to the Rome Statute and to develop its relationships with regional organizations such as the Organization of American States (OAS), the Arab League (AL), the African Union (AU), the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), ASEAN and CARICOM. We will also continue to engage with subregional and thematic organizations, such as SADC and ECOWAS, and the Commonwealth Secretariat and the OIF. This will be done through high level visits, briefings and, as appropriate, relationship agreements. Work will also be carried out with sectoral organizations such as IDLO and INTERPOL, to increase efficiency.

The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute - the UN treaty that established the International Criminal Court. (See: Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court)

President George W. Bush rejected subjecting the United States to the jurisdiction of the ICC and removed the United States as a signatory. President Bill Clinton had previously signed the Rome Statute during his presidency. Two critical matters are at play. One is an overall matter of sovereignty and the concept of the primacy of American law above those of the rest of the world. But more recently a more over-riding concern principally has been the potential - if not likely - specter of subjecting our Armed Forces to a hostile international body seeking war crimes prosecutions during the execution of an unpopular war.

President Bush in fact went so far as to gain agreement from nations that they would expressly not detain or hand over to the ICC members of the United States armed forces. The fear of a symbolic ICC circus trial as a form of international political protest to American military actions in Iraq and elsewhere was real and palpable.

President Obama's words have been carefully chosen when directly regarding the ICC. While President Bush outright rejected subjugating American armed forces to any international court as a matter of policy, President Obama said in his 2008 presidential campaign that it is merely "premature to commit" to signing America on.

However, in a Foreign Policy in Focus round-table in 2008, the host group cited his former foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power. She essentially laid down what can be viewed as now-President Obama's roadmap to America rejoining the ICC. His principal objections are not explained as those of sovereignty, but rather of image and perception.

Obama's former foreign policy advisor, Samantha Power, said in an early March (2008) interview with The Irish Times that many things need to happen before Obama could think about signing the Rome Treaty.

"Until we've closed Guantánamo, gotten out of Iraq responsibly, renounced torture and rendition, shown a different face for America, American membership of the ICC is going to make countries around the world think the ICC is a tool of American hegemony.

The detention center at Guantánamo Bay is nearing its closure and an alternate continental American site for terrorist detention has been selected in Illinois. The time line for Iraq withdrawal has been set. And President Obama has given an abundance of international speeches intended to "show a different face for America." He has in fact been roundly criticized domestically for the routinely apologetic and critical nature of these speeches.

President Obama has not rejected the concept of ICC jurisdiction over US citizens and service members. He has avoided any direct reference to this while offering praise for the ICC for conducting its trials so far "in America's interests." The door thus remains wide open to the skeptical observer.

CONCLUSIONS

In light of what we know and can observe, it is our logical conclusion that President Obama's Executive Order amending President Ronald Reagans' 1983 EO 12425 and placing INTERPOL above the United States Constitution and beyond the legal reach of our own top law enforcement is a precursor to more damaging moves.

The pre-requisite conditions regarding the Iraq withdrawal and the Guantanamo Bay terrorist detention facility closure will continue their course. meanwhile, the next move from President Obama is likely an attempt to dissolve the agreements made between President Bush and other states preventing them from turning over American military forces to the ICC (via INTERPOL) for war crimes or any other prosecutions.

When the paths on the road map converge - Iraq withdrawal, Guantánamo closure, perceived American image improved internationally, and an empowered INTERPOL in the United States - it is probable that President Barack Obama will once again make America a signatory to the International Criminal Court. It will be a move that surrenders American sovereignty to an international body who's INTERPOL enforcement arm has already been elevated above the Constitution and American domestic law enforcement.

For an added and disturbing wrinkle, INTERPOL's central operations office in the United States is within our own Justice Department offices. They are American law enforcement officers working under the aegis of INTERPOL within our own Justice Department. That they now operate with full diplomatic immunity and with "inviolable archives" from within our own buildings should send red flags soaring into the clouds.

This is the disturbing context for President Obama's quiet release of an amended Executive Order 12425. American sovereignty hangs in the balance if these actions are not prevented through public outcry and political pressure. Some Americans are paying attention, as can be seen from some of the earliest recognitions of this troubling development here, here and here. But the discussion must extend well beyond the Internet and social media.

Ultimately, a detailed verbal explanation is due the American public from the President of the United States detailing why an international law enforcement arm assisting a court we are not a signatory to has been elevated above our Constitution upon our soil.

America's Survival Is At Stake

This piece is from TownHall.com and the content dovetails with the problems with COIN and ROE that we have been discussing on this Blog.

Never before in our history has an American president, deliberately and by design, risked our very survival to a maniacal enemy power sworn to remove America from the world. Yet from all appearances, this is exactly what Obama is doing by failing to vigorously oppose Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. But in spite of the fact that over 60% of the public favors militarily destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities, there’s nary a word of protest from the Republicans in opposition. They’re so paranoid about being labeled warmongers, they have shamefully abdicated their own national security responsibilities, just as John McCain did during his presidential run.

Obama is weakening rather than strengthening our missile defenses. That’s how seriously this Administration takes the Iranian threat.

The reality is that the fanatical, messianically driven radical Iranian zealots will pay any price, including Iran’s virtual obliteration, in order to render the U.S. and its major allies non-players on the world scene. The mullahs expect to emerge from the ruins no longer hindered by the “Great Satan,” free to use their huge oil and gas reserves to fund the imposition of their tyranny throughout the Middle East and beyond.

Not only does Obama’s psyche make him incapable of understanding the radical’s mentality but he chooses to totally dismiss their own pronouncements spelling out their sinister intentions. Obama’s determination to make the United States subservient to an international body of nations is now driving him to systematically reduce our nation to a mere shadow of its former power and influence. He seeks to leave us virtually undefended against a missile attack, dramatically weaken our military, leave Iraq on its own, deny us the ability to win in Afghanistan and relinquish our unpopular but all-important role as world policeman. The practical consequences of Obama’s extreme radical left agenda can only be to put our nation at the mercy of a new world order dominated by ruthless tyrants, thugs and spineless states who sell their souls for commercial gain. His first allegiance is to such an international order – not to the United States.

Obama is not only unfit to serve as commander-in-chief in a time of war, he is a menace to our national security. His obvious intent to allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, perhaps under the guise of what would undoubtedly be a totally meaningless agreement not to do so, presents a risk so grave to our survival that it can only be rationally viewed as tantamount to national suicide. Under no circumstances can the mullahs be trusted to honor any agreement, as they’ve proven time and again.

Obama has an agenda that in my view is un-American, for it is absolutely contrary to the most fundamental and essential interests of our nation. Obama seems too willing to ignore internal strife of other nations, characterized by his refusal to lend encouragement and assistance to freedom-seeking Iranian protestors is a moral outrage.

Given the President’s extreme core beliefs and actions, every effort should be made to rally all Americans against him and his policies. How else can we shake our apathetic citizenry out of its blind disengagement with our national security? Tragically, we are sleep walking in a political wilderness in which too few people are willing to wake up to the unfortunate appeasement and equivocating of President Barack Obama.

No president has had a higher constitutional duty than to protect our nation against foreign attack. By almost any standard, Obama is flagrantly guilty of dereliction of duty. It cannot be overemphasized how extraordinarily perilous a situation we are in, especially at a time when virtually the entire Republican Party is AWOL on bombing Iran and strengthening national security. There is no counterweight to Obama’s disastrous policies. Obama himself recently acknowledged that if terrorists get nuclear weapons “we have every reason to believe they will use them.” Despite this admission, he refuses to take the only action that will stop them from acquiring such weapons.

If we citizenry will not take the bull by the horns and demand a total reversal of our nation’s suicidal course, we could very soon experience the apocalyptic end of the America we love and all western civilization. Let us understand that the maniacal, radical Islamic enemies confronting us are irreversibly committed to making such a cataclysmic event happen – no matter how horrific the cost to them. To think that an olive branch of brotherly love could change their goals is sheer madness.

Take heed America, Obama’s policies may be paving the way for a nuclear doomsday.

Roger Chapin
Monday, December 21, 2009

With Corrupt Vision; Warriors Perish

Eight years after terrorists flew four jetliners toward targets in the United States, we find ourselves embroiled in a war with two fronts. The first is the actual battle on the ground and the second is a battle over philosophy, strategy and a fundamental difference in understanding the enemy we are fighting. The one thing that ties this war with every other war ever fought is the presence of two protagonists on the battlefield. As in all other wars, each side is striving to understand his enemy so he can exploit any found weaknesses in order to gain a foothold and ultimately victory over the other. At least, that is what is suppose to be happening. What we have been watching defies explanation. On the one hand we have an enemy that has made clear his intention to destroy us while on the other we continue to seek ways to placate him in an effort to 'win him over'. We have been and are in the process of using every unconventional method toward that end. In the past several weeks we have been told we are paying them to stop fighting and/or switch sides and we are paying to provide jobs for those who choose to do so. We have also been told that the actual number of 'radicalized' Islamics number in the thousands. That should mean the war is actually over for we have certainly killed many times that in the past 8 years of combat both in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We are also told that the 'insurgency' is not home grown but from other countries. While there are most likely members of the Taliban that are from somewhere other than Afghanistan, it certainly doesn't prove to be true to our Warriors on the ground. In any case, trying to separate the enemy from his ideology fails to understand the enemy and his motivation. Yes they are actively involved in the drug trade. Yes they 'tax' local farmers who grow poppy plants (who grow it because the money is better than for convention crops). Yes they occasionally abuse villagers in various ways but no, there is no fundamental difference between them, the villagers, the ANA and AP and the government. At their core they all ascribe to the same ideology and that is where understanding needs to begin. A failure to understand the religious underpinnings of this culture guarantees a failed strategy because the strategy is based on a false understanding of the enemy.

What follows this failed strategy is what we are all talking about. Counter-Insurgency (COIN) doctrine assumes many things about all elements on the battlefield that in this case are far from reality. It assumes there is a majority of the population that is sympathetic to our cause. It also assumes that the Insurgency is an foreign, unwanted cancer that the 'friendly' population wants excised and that we are the holy warriors that will be greeted by throngs of chanting followers. In an effort to insure the worshipful tone does not subside, we show 'restraint'. This restraint is manifested in an incredibly tight ROE that seeks to eliminate civilian casualties (to garner support from the 'friendly' populace) while artificially increasing casualties for our Warriors. To further show our beneficent restraint, we then glean After Action Reports (AAR) looking for opportunities to prosecute and convict our own Warriors for 'crimes' against the friendly populace. The fact that none of this has ever, nor will ever prove to be successful in transforming the minds of the civilian population from their ideological hatred of us to one of genuine love and respect for us is disregarded. It is disregarded because of the narcissistic personalities that are making the decisions at this time in our history. Make no mistake about it; a failure to understand history and the truth of Islam is a core problem for the strategists but personal ego and personal interest are what drives this inexplicable strategy. No longer are greedy men satisfied to be powerful in their own back yard. We now have the internet and international conglomerates. There are seats of power waiting to be filled by 'men of vision'. The fact that these men of vision are spewing orders that are causing unnecessary casualties for their own countrymen is, apparently, a price they are willing to pay. The fact that honorable men are being prosecuted and personally destroyed for appearance sake is a small thing. You have to keep your eye on the ball you know.

With permission I am including a piece written by three senior Officers which speaks to this and the immoral handling of this nation's finest Warriors. This piece nor this Blog entry or the myriad of other written examples of how horribly we have treated our Warriors is going to change any of this. What we are expecting is for the readers of these things to take action:

1. Get educated on the subject
2. Make sure to educate your family, friends and co-workers
3. Let your elected officials know their collective butts are on the line
4. Support our Warriors

Semper FIdelis;

John Bernard

Stand by our Warriors in Battle

By
Colonel Andy O’Meara (US Army, Ret)
LTG Thomas McInerney (US Air Force, Ret)
MG Paul Vallely (US Army, Ret)
Standupamerica1@gmail.com

Men have fought wars throughout the annals of history. Americans have known wars since the birth of the nation with aspirations that set our people apart from all others. These lofty aspirations have tested our people in wars to preserve our freedom with decades of domestic strife to make good our claims to the cause of human freedom. Within the brief span of two centuries, Americans have fought wars to fulfill a destiny defined by our Founding Fathers. Each conflict has tested our courage while shaping our identity which stands apart from the Western Civilization that is our heritage. The struggle to endure and preserve our ideals – the love of freedom and the dedication to self-government – has made us unique and has made America an example that inspires mankind.

Today, we find ourselves in a difficult and new kind of war. It is a war that we did not start nor can we end without destroying those who have declared war upon us. Unique to our experience, we find ourselves attacked by assailants who wear no uniform and claim allegiance to no sovereign state and follow a barbaric ideology that takes no prisoners. Our assailants aspire to world domination and wage war to destroy the very aspirations of freedom and democracy. The terrorists conceal themselves within civil populations that provide human shields to these radical zealots that follow a barbaric ideology that takes no prisoners. Their mode of conflict strikes at the values we hold sacred, while they use our aspirations and self-restraint to conceal and protect their assassins. It is a war that tests our men and women in combat more severely than any conflict we have waged before. We have attempted to keep the faith and honor our traditions as well as our noble culture of freedom. In this time of bitter war, the Armed Forces impose strict rules of engagement upon our soldiers as they confront the barbarism of the radical Islamists who exercise absolutely no restraint. No crime is too heinous and no act of treachery too despicable to deter their quest of victory and ultimately world conquest.

In former times, our soldiers have fought on even terms against foes who in many ways shared our commitment to international law and the Geneva Conventions. Such conflict recognized basic human rights and sought to punish those who violated the “Law of Land Warfare”. Such conflicts saw humane treatment of prisoners as the rule and atrocities were the exception. Yet in the bitterest struggles of World War II, the “greatest generation” resorted to retaliation for unprovoked air attacks upon British civilians that resulted in massive bombing attacks of civilian targets in the Third Reich.

Were we to use such tactics today to obliterate the sanctuaries of the enemies, as we did in World War II, the cry of the international media and the United Nations would be filled with outrage at the American combatants? And the United Nations, which we formed at the end of World War II to preserve peace, would side with our enemies openly declaring the American combatants as war criminals. It is fair to say that we live with double standards today that are ignored by the international media and nation-states that support international terrorism. Americans are trained and expected to conduct themselves with the utmost restraint complying with the most humane rules of engagement, standards of conduct that are simply ignored by our enemies. We are asking a lot of our people. They must fight the enemy with great restraint and even the appearances of transgression of the rules of engagement by Americans are punished most severely by our own military courts.

A recent case of apparent transgression of the rules of engagement occurred in Afghanistan that has resulted in the courts martial of one of our finest young warriors who discovered that their Afghan comrades were enemy agents providing valuable intelligence to the enemy. The results of the enemy agents sequestered in the base of an American company resulted in a series of ambushes that killed and wounded numerous soldiers of the 101st Air Assault Division. The Company Commander, Captain Roger Hill, detained the suspected agents and requested they be evacuated by his higher headquarters which request was denied. Given the limited time detainees are allowed to be held without charges and the lack of support from his superiors, Captain Hill and his subordinates interrogated the detainees. While no detainee was physically injured during the interrogations, Captain Hill was charged with violation of the rules of engagement for making verbal threats during his interrogations. He was called before the equivalent of a grand jury and criminal charges were pressed against him, which could have resulted in the loss of his commission, a dishonorable discharge and a prison sentence. His defense attorney was advised that if he pleaded guilty to the charges that no courts martial would be conducted and Captain Hill agreed to accept the plea bargain. He was fined by his commander and ordered to be “discharged” from the Army under other than honorable conditions – a harsh sentence for a fine professional officer operating under duress in a harsh environment the enemy had successfully infiltrated. Our hope is that the Secretary of the Army will authorize an honorable discharge for Captain Roger Hill or keep his career in tack as a professional Army Officer. This is not too much to ask since they decided to downgrade everything to an Article 15 and allowed him to resign his commission (a way to subtly oust him from the Army). He deserves all Veteran benefits after 4 years at West Point and nine years of honorable service, including two wars. His highest personal decoration is the Bronze Star.

Given the uneven playing field upon which our combatants are waging war and the barbaric attacks our soldiers are subjected to, it is time for a public debate regarding the double standards that bind our hands in battle, but impose absolutely no restraint upon the enemy.

The bottom line is we must support our valiant American fighting men and women. They are fighting under the most difficult conditions and they are being second guessed by military lawyers (JAGs) and bureaucrats holding down desk jobs secure in the rear areas. Our generation will never succeed in protecting our sacred freedoms unless we are prepared to back our men and women on the battlefield. Stand behind our men in battle or kiss our democracy and freedoms goodbye. We must do all we can as to restore the honorable status of Captain Hill and others like him. Our Armed Forces deserve better.