The Syria Situation

Friends,

I do not question that Assad needs to go away. His regime is pure, well, Muslim. So, let’s look at what we (the world) get if we help the rebels get into power. First, we get a, well, Muslim regime; perhaps a different sect, but Muslim nonetheless. Remember, Islam is not strictly a religion, it is a religion, a governmental philosophy, a dictate on how you live, work, and punish transgressors. The difference between the Assad regime and any other Muslim regime is who is calling the shots and who their allies are.

Assad is allied with Iran and Iraq. The other guys are (maybe) allied with Saudi Arabia. I’m having a problem seeing the difference here. Taking a look at Saudi Arabia, what makes them the good guys? Saudi Christians are beheaded and foreign Christians are flogged and deported. Women are not even considered in the sphere of human existence and are only chattel.

On the other hand, there is a major Muslim Brotherhood presence in Syria. I don’t know of anyone who would look at these warm fuzzy people as friends.

I’m having a problem seeing the difference here (but I repeat myself). For the US to get involved in this situation is a serious lose-lose proposition. OK, so we put a new Muslim regime in power, where is the guarantee they will be our friends? Seems like we had the same crocodile tears from a despot in Cuba in 1959.

Now to get slightly off topic, people say that we should wait for the UN to finish their investigation into the gassing events. Well, these people have the credibility of that same crocodile from 1959. If the “O” thinks he will get any corroboration at the UN he is still smoking that stuff he wants to legalize. I would venture a guess that over 70% of the UN wants to blame us for every ill in the world and the Syria situation will be no different.

Do I have a solution for the Syria situation, no I don’t and neither does any other sane person. We look at Muslim extremist and lament how they want to kill non-Muslims but look at who they target the most, other Muslims. Muslim on Muslim attacks far outnumber Muslim on non-Muslim attacks. That is the way it has always been and always will be. People who know me know that I have an unfailing faith in the Word of God. In Genesis 16:11 – 12 it is recorded, “The angle of the Lord said to her (Hagar) ‘Behold, you are with child, and you will bear a son; and you shall call his name Ishmael, because the Lord has given heed to your affliction. He will be a wild donkey of a man, his hand will be against everyone, and everyone’s hand will be against him; and he will live to the east of all his brothers.’” Ishmael is the father of the Arabs and hence Muslims. Nothing has changed in the last 4000 years. The only change was that Mohammed (if he really existed) merely gave focus to their hatred. That focus was to hate everyone. They live for hate. It is difficult to know who they hate more, Muslims of a different sect, Jews, Christians, Hindus, or whoever happens to be handy.

No, there is no reasonable solution to the Syria situation and the sooner the “O” realizes that and shuts his mouth the better. He is just becoming more of an embarrassment than Joe Biden.

As always, questions and discussion are always welcome.

Dan

 

Eric Holder and “Stand Your Ground”

Friends,

If there was ever any question where Eric Holder stood on the issue of personal protection or personal rights, he removed that question a couple of days ago at the NAACP convention when he said “Separate and apart from the case [Zimmerman trial] that has drawn the nation’s attention, it’s time to question laws that senselessly expand the concept of self-defense and sow dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods.” Senselessly expand the concept of self-defense?? The concept of self-defense has been pretty well set since the beginning of civilization. To defend yourself you use the appropriate amount of force to stop the aggression. If you are being slapped with a popsicle stick, you use your hands or another popsicle stick. If you are having your head slammed repeatedly into the concrete and are in fear for your life you take the appropriate action to stop the threat, as George Zimmerman did.

I find Mr. Holder’s belief to be an interesting concept, especially when you couple it with the beliefs and statements from our “Beloved Leader, Barrack Obama.” During the Zimmerman trial, our “Beloved Leader” made his personal belief in Zimmerman’s guilt known in no uncertain terms. I especially find Mr. Holder’s statements puzzling given the venue of the speech, the NAACP convention. Is he saying that we all should run away when threatened or are in fear of our lives? I think it would be hard to convince all Americans, irrespective of color, to accept that course of action.

The idea that the Attorney General of the United States would think that citizens do not have the right to stand on their own feet and defend themselves is absolutely unconscionable. In fact, he makes no apologies for his belief that citizens do not have the right to own and carry firearms for any reason. He has made repeated statements that Americans should be “brain washed” that guns are bad and that people owning them should be shunned.

Looking at the culture in Chicago, Detroit, and Washington DC, Mr. Holder’s attitude doesn’t make any sense at all. These cities have some of the strictest gun laws in the country and the highest violent crime rates. Do the citizens of these cities have the right of self-defense? Obviously, not. The truth of gun use in regards to crime is quite the opposite of what Mr. Holder and “Beloved Leader” would like to admit. Many thousands of times a year, Americans use guns to prevent or stop a crime. These two “gentlemen” don’t want you Americans to know that. They want you to believe that if you “retreat to the wall” as it is known, you will be safe from bad guys. FBI statistics show just the opposite. Giving in to the demands of bad guys will more likely get you hurt or killed.

It is in our nature as Americans to stand up for what we believe, whether it is the simple belief of our right to not be intimidated by cowardly criminals or to resist the overreach and oppression of the government of the “Beloved Leader.” If we as Americans give in to Mr. Holder’s wishes to cower instead of standing up for our lives and rights then he and the “Beloved Leader” have won. They will have caused us to lose our self-respect and our nation.

Looking further at Mr. Holder, this is the man who allowed thousands of guns to cross into Mexico just so the “Beloved Leader” could advance lie that most of the drug cartels’ guns came from the United States. Even with the guns that Mr. Holder allowed to go to the cartels, this was not the case, as has been proven.

Mr. Holder and the “Beloved Leader” trying to brain wash the citizens of this once-great country into becoming cowardly charity cases has got to stop. It is time that both of them go away. It is time for impeachment on a grand scale. It is time for the House of Representatives to stand up like the patriots of old to bring charges and time for the Senate to stand on their own collective hind legs and act like Americans. It is time for Congress to give us back our Constitution.

As always, your comments and discussion are welcome.

Dan

Ten Point Platform

Friends,

A group which I follow on LinkedIn put out an interesting question to the group a few weeks ago. The question was “If you were running for president, what would your 10 point platform be?” I have thought about this a lot over the past few years so it was fairly difficult to keep it down to 10 points. Of course, if you are running for anything, trying to concentrate on any number of points over four makes you look like you cannot settle on what is important. But since I’m not running for anything, I can put out my thoughts to my heart’s content. Besides, running for public office is a rich man’s game and I certainly do not fall into that category.

These are the points with which I responded. Those of you who have read my postings in the past will find that on most of them I am covering familiar ground.

1)   Eliminate all cabinet level departments except those enumerated in the Constitution; those being War (now Defense), Treasury, State, and Commerce. There could be a case for Interior. All others would go. I would appoint Cabinet Secretaries to the soon-to-be-disbanded agencies for the purpose of closing them down. It is hard to decide which should be shut down first.

2)   Eliminate all funding for foreign countries just to get their “support.” The only foreign aid I would agree to would be for no-kidding disaster relief on a loan basis. Along with this, I would stop funding insurgents of any flavor. Our experience in recent years is that they take our money and supplies and when the time is right they turn their weapons on us, getting us more deeply embroiled in whatever despotic conflict happens to be broiling at the time.

3)   Pull out of the UN and tell them to go home. Along with this I would demand all of their diplomats pay their parking and traffic tickets. We have been supporting the failed missions of the UN for 60 years and all we get for our money and effort is grief.

4)   I would tell Congress that there would be only ONE issue per bill submitted for presidential signature. Bills with riders and add-on measures would be automatically vetoed.

5)   I would tell Congress that any bill that is submitted for presidential signature that does not have a CLEAR constitutional linkage would be vetoed. This is supposed to be the case now but it isn’t working. Congresses and successive administrations have bent and twisted the Constitution into unrecognizable linkages, especially the commerce clause.

6)   I would send a message to Congress that in the first 100 days of my administration I would only sign bills cancelling spending programs, starting with unearned handouts to illegal aliens. Along with this I would strongly urge Congress to pass legislation that would carry heavy penalties against states that subvert the security of the United States. Examples of this would be sanctuary cities and giving benefits to illegals.

7)   I would direct the complete closure of the borders of the United States until such time as the Customs and Border Patrol could assure me that it could handle their area of responsibility (that would take a LOT of convincing). Our borders are there to keep the citizens of the US safe and secure. Farmers and ranchers along our southern border are not safe in their own homes. These folks should be given special dispensation to protect their families and property.

8)   I would disband the Department of Homeland Security and place those functions under the appropriate agencies. The list is too long for this venue but an example would be the military. DoD is tasked with keeping our country safe from invasion. I would advocate for a special branch of the military with arrest authority to patrol the borders. Having a civilian force such as is being built within the DHS subverts the role traditionally given to the military. This measure would NOT subvert Posse Comitatus. This act, passed in 1878 and updated in 1981, puts strict limits on the use of the US military to enforce laws. This is as it should be.

9)   I would inform all world governments that diplomacy with the United States would be much different from now on; the first government to be notified would be PRC. Cyber warfare is just that, war. It would be treated as such.

10)I would notify the government of Mexico that they would have three months to stop the flow of drugs and illegals into the US before we would consider it an invasion of our sovereign territory. I am sick and tired of Mexican officials blaming the US for their problems. With the rampant corruption within all levels of the Mexican government they have absolutely no justification to blame anyone, let alone the US.

These are just 10 of my hot buttons. Not covered is our debouched energy policy, the “pick-n-choose” attitude of which federal laws to enforce, and the “progressive” idea that you cannot execute a murderer but it is OK to butcher babies in and out of the womb. Those topics will have to wait for a future time.

As always, your comments and discussions are welcome.

Dan

 

Rand Paul, Conservative or Opportunistic?

Friends,

I have never been fortunate enough to be able to attend the Conservative Political Action Conference or CPAC but I have always enjoyed hearing about who said what and who was the winner of the Straw Poll. You know, the guy or gal the conservative insiders think was the most dynamic speaker with the most dynamic message (or that is the theory). This year Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky won the honors. Given his performance over the past couple of months he probably deserved it.

Just so you can get the proper lay of the land, I have a friend named Woody with whom I vie for the honor of who is farther to the right of Attila-the-Hun. Now, with that prerequisite established, I have to say that Rand Paul is a bit refreshing but seems to be somewhat confused as to his priorities. He is being hailed as a hero for conducting a 13 hour filibuster against the nomination of John Brennan for the post of Director of Central Intelligence. The purpose of the filibuster was to force Attorney General Holder to unequivocally declare that UAVs would not be used to bomb US citizens on American soil.

This is a truly laudable goal but I would question Senator Paul’s dedication to the protection of Americans and America in general. Two points in case took front page news just within the previous two months. Where was Senator Paul when the traitor John Kerry was considered and confirmed as Obama’s Secretary of State. Senator Paul was excruciatingly silent on the Senate floor during debate. I fear that the good senator was too young, having been born in 1963, to realize that John Kerry collaborated with the enemy during a time of war. Additionally, he apparently does not appreciate the insult to military veterans that Kerry falsified his war record as well as the awards he received. The only reason Kerry was even able to run for office was because of a general pardon issued by President Carter. How will our allies and our potential adversaries view negotiating with a Secretary of State who has worked diligently against the best interests of the country he is supposed to represent?

The other case in point took place only a couple of weeks after the Kerry debates and that was the nomination and confirmation of Chuck Hagel as Secretary of Defense. Secretary Hagel has a long history of criticism of the military. He is currently working to destroy the moral fabric of the military. The directive to allow homosexual members to openly serve is antithetical to the military way of life. Secretary Hagel has routinely criticized our only true ally in the Middle East, Israel. Where was Senator Paul during the floor debates for Secretary Hagel?

While Senator Paul has made a splash in recent months, his credentials as a Conservative seem a bit tarnished. It has always been my belief that one should stand up for their beliefs and be consistent in their advocacy. However, even with his spotty conservative advocacy, it seems that he has wowed the attendees at CPAC. What does that say about them? Are they of the same ilk as Senator Paul, or was he just the best they could find?

As always, I welcome your comments and discussion.

Dan

Our Lives, Our Fortunes and Our Sacred Honor

Friends,

For those of you who don’t know me I work for a government contractor and work in an office with two other engineers. When I started with current employer and was assigned my desk the first thing I did was post a sign over my desk that says “Have you read our Declaration of Independence and Constitution? Free for the taking, one per person.” I then put a stack of Constitution/Declarations in the bin above my desk. There are only seven people in our office but five of them immediately took one. As a firearms and personal protection instructor, I give a copy of the Constitution/Declaration to each student. It is this document that enables me to hold these classes.

A friend and patriot sent a link to a piece by Paul Harvey from 1965. It takes about 10 minutes to watch and I urge you to watch it. It is a powerful discussion about the men who signed the Declaration of Independence.

http://youtu.be/3In5LZwG9Io

After watching the video I got to thinking about the pledge they took: “…we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.” How many of our current group of leaders loves our country enough to make that pledge? For that matter, how many Americans would be willing to take that pledge?

We are facing what I believe is a constitutional crisis.

  • Representative Pelosi said that they had to pass the Obamacare bill to know what is in it. It passed without anyone knowing to what we were obligated.
  • After the Newtown tragedy the anti-constitutionalists are trying to completely undo the Second Amendment.
  • A state representative in Missouri has proposed firearm confiscation. This sounds nuts but just the idea that someone thinks they can get this through is devastating.
  • In Colorado the anti-constitutionalists are trying to whittle away our right to keep and bear arms. They are trying to restrict magazine size, as well as restrictions on concealed carry.

The strategy is clear. The anti-constitutionalists know they cannot take away our rights all at once. Instead they whittle them away. A little bit here and a little bit there with the citizens thinking all the while that a little bit here and a little bit there is OK. It is all in the name of safety and helping our fellow man. I think Benjamin Franklin said it best: “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” That is what our legislators are trying to sell us.

I sent out a note this afternoon encouraging a number of my friends to write our Colorado State legislators to urge them to vote against those little bits of rights degradations. The result was that one former Colorado State Representative replied and asked that I take her off my email distribution. Another friend said that it will do no good and that the anti-constitutionalists have made up their minds. That is probably true but it is incumbent on Americans to make the effort and go on record to tell the anti-constitutionalists where we stand.

I believe that it is time for Americans to stand up and be counted.

As always, I welcome your comments and discussion.

Followup to an Open Letter

Friends,

Last week, in response to my “Open Letter” a wise and learned reader of these pages (but, as Mark Twain said, then I repeat myself) observed “Laws (and other government actions) that are quickly passed in the heat of the moment, when emotions run high are rarely just or smart or effectively accomplish the stated goal and often have many unintended and detrimental consequences. “ He goes on to point out that extreme emotions are a prime cause of mob action. There are a number of examples of this in our country; the Watts Riots, the Los Angeles riots around the Rodney King affair, and numerous others.

The rush to remove guns from law abiding Americans leaves one agape in amazement. Let’s take a quick look at one of the most gun unfriendly cities in the US, Chicago, Illinois. Just looking at one day, 28 Jan 2013, the headlines noted that Saturday, 26 Jan 2013 was the deadliest since November, 2011. By that day in January, the city had had 41 homicides. That day, Chicago recorded seven homicides. The city recorded over 500 homicides during 2012. This is a city that makes it very difficult for a citizen to own, much less carry a gun. If I was going to go into the Bad Guy trade, I would make a bee line to Chicago. I’m sure the Bad Guys of Chicago enjoy a stress-free environment. Three weeks ago here in Colorado Springs a would-be home invader tried to ply his trade on a home in an upscale part of north east section of the city. He was met at the door by the homeowner who had a gun in his hand. The miscreant wisely took off like he had a coyote on his tail. That would not have been the situation in Chicago.

And now the Obama/Biden administration wants to turn the entire United States into one large clone of Chicago. Biden has been called the “Curley” (as in the Three Stooges) of the administration. I look upon him as the willing dupe of the Obama machine. Make no mistake, Obama is not stupid, lazy, but not stupid. He and his handlers have been planning the eventual disarming of America for years. He realizes that there are some things he has to accomplish via Congress, at least until he and his handlers figure out how to circumvent the law. Rest assured they will not try to do everything at once. They will do their conversion to the United States of Europe slowly, taking measured steps.

The first step will be to require what the gun-grabbers are calling universal background checks. This means the even sales of firearms between private parties will require a background check. The mainstream media (MSM) is claiming that 80% – 90% of Americans are in favor of universal background checks. If this is the case, I wonder if the average American knows what that means. If you leave your gun collection to your son or daughter they will have to undergo a background check before they could take possession of them. Does that mean the authorities will come to the house of the deceased and do a search as soon as the death is known just to see if there are any guns? Are they going to confiscate them until the background checks are accomplished? Will they keep them until the will is probated? Are they going to decide which guns the heirs will be able to keep?

This is a very good and efficient way to start a gun ownership database. Remember who did that back in the 1930s? Hitler forced registration of all firearms owned by Jews. Well, we all know what happened to them. They had no way to defend themselves and six million of them died in the camps. Other “Benevolent Rulers” like Stalin and Mao did the same. I wonder how many civilians own guns in North Korea.

It is past time that we stand up to the gun-grabbers and tell them “Enough.” Our Second Amendment Rights are not guaranteed so we can enjoy punching holes in paper or hunting for sport or food. Our Founding Fathers included the Second Amendment so that we will be able to protect ourselves against an oppressive government. I urge all of my readers to contact their state shooting association and join. If you live in Colorado you can go to www.cssa.org/ and join. Additionally, I strongly urge you to go to http://home.nra.org/#/nra.org and join. The NRA is the strongest national voice for our Second Amendment rights. It is only through a unified effort will we be able to defeat this plan by the Obama/Biden administration and friends.

My learned reader ends his comments with “A large number of our elected officials are acting like panicked children or cynical despots.  We are heirs of the American Revolution, not the French revolution.  We deserve better.”

As always, your comments and discussions are welcome.

Dan

An Open Letter to Law Makers

Senators, Congressmen, State Legislators, County Commissioners, City Councilmen:

Once again I would like to address the issue of gun control. There are many pieces of gun legislation on your table that need to be addressed. I would like to address them in total. We currently have thousands of gun laws (I have seen the figure 22,000) around the country that have been passed primarily for the purpose of reducing crime. To date few if any have made a credible dent toward that goal. Now, with the tragedy in Newtown, there is yet another knee-jerk reaction to enact more gun laws.

When you look at these laws it is constructive to consider who obeys these laws. It is, by definition, law abiding citizens. However, those who perpetrate the horrendous acts such as Newtown neither read nor follow the laws that you and your colleagues pass. This is one of two common characteristics that these mass murderers share. The other common characteristic they share is their use of drugs, either illegal or prescribed. While I have not checked all of the state laws, I am sure that we would find that it is illegal for anyone on or using these drugs to be in possession of or using a firearm. That would make them, by definition, non-law-abiding.

That brings us back to my main point. The only people who are affected by the laws that you pass are the law-abiding of this country. Passing more laws will only harm those of us who have never done anything like what you are trying to prevent.

Have you every stopped to think about where these drugged-up cowards strike? They strike at people and places that are unarmed. Where else could they be assured of unchallenged success? There are now numerous school districts in several states advocating arming teachers and administrators. What do you think is more effective, a sign that says “No Guns Allowed,” or “Staff and Teachers Responsibly Armed”? What is the likelihood of one of these cowards attacking a school with the latter sign?

Now, in addition to addressing our legislators, I would like to address our citizens. There is a concern, and I think a credible concern, that President Obama will try to use the mechanism of Executive Order to severely restrict citizens’ access to guns. Some (those infamous people who are always nameless) have even gone so far as to speculate that the One will try to institute a gun confiscation program using Executive Orders. I have also heard (unsubstantiated) that there is a growing concern among agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) about this possibility. They are concerned about their safety if they are ordered to execute (pun intended) these directives.

What is going to happen if they are told to go to someone’s house to confiscate their guns? I see three possibilities. First is the possibility that the law-abiding citizen will turn over their guns. I give this one about a 60% chance for the first couple of days, and then the odds go down drastically. The second is that the law-abiding citizen will see this as an illegal search and seizure and resist. Since the BATFE agent/s are there to collect guns, there is a strong possibility that they will be met at the door with the very gun they are there to collect. This puts the BATFE agent/s in a bit of a quandary. Do they try to arrest the constitution-abiding citizen, or to they become constitution-abiding themselves? The third possibility is becoming more likely in states like Wyoming. A number of states are contemplating legislation that would make it illegal for federal agents of any department to attempt to confiscate legally owned firearms and those agents who do so would be liable for criminal prosecution.

Nation states declare to the world where their “Red Line” lies. Any other country that crosses that line is opening itself up to retaliation. We are no different. We have to decide where our “Red Line” lies; we have to decide RIGHT NOW what our actions will be if that line is crossed. Remember, the Founders were not protecting our hunting rights when they penned the Second Amendment; they were protecting us from an oppressive government of the future. Well, the future is now. When are we going to stand up to the anti-constitutionalists and say enough is enough? We elected these people and whether they like it or not they work for and represent us. It is time to send them a joint message that they need to read the Constitution and live up to their oath of office. I took that oath to defend our Constitution over 40 years ago and it is in force today just as it was then.

As always, your comments and discussions are welcome.

In Honor of the 40th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

Friends,

Tomorrow is the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision, 7 to 2, in favor of murdering the unborn of our country. The logic was that it was the right of the woman to terminate her pregnancy throughout the entire nine months. That means that up until the actual moment of birth the doctor can kill the child. Notice I refer to the “child” because that is what it is. It is not an embryo; it is a child, a person. It was a person at the moment of conception and remains one until its life is ended, whether it is nine months later or 95 years later. Besides the 50 million plus lives lost to this tragic practice, I have a couple of problems with the “celebration” of this anniversary.

First, we look upon it as just another day, and “oh, by the way, the Supreme Court passed on Roe v. Wade today.” Abortion has become such a normal and natural event in our society that it almost doesn’t rate a footnote at the bottom of the news broadcast. Sad doesn’t even come close to expressing this tragic apathy. The fact that the most defenseless of our population have no protection is gut wrenching. The general acceptance by the American people has turned the concept of abortion into just another life choice.

The second concern I have is that our churches have, for the most part, faded into the background on the issue of abortion. Where are the cries and lamentations from the pulpit about this most un-Christian of actions? Have our houses of worship become so afraid of the IRS that they will bury their beliefs to prevent scrutiny from the Revenue Gestapo? The issue of abortion is only one of a myriad of issues from which the church has run.

Another area the church has sidetracked is that of homosexuality. I understand this one as easily as the abortion issue. Pastors across Christendom have absolutely no excuse to duck this one. Just a cursory scan brings up four prominent passages in the Old Testament and five in the New Testament. If you care to look them up they are:

Leviticus 20:13

Deuteronomy 23:17

2 Samuel 1:26

1 Kings 14:24

Matthew 19:12

Romans 1:25 – 27

1 Corinthians 6:9

1 Timothy 1:9 – 10

Jude 7

Our country was founded on the principles found in our Lord’s book. The church was the moral compass and that is where our leaders got their direction. Even Thomas Jefferson, who was only a marginal believer, recognized the importance of Christian teaching and education. This has been lost over the past 200 years. I believe that it is time for the church to stop bowing to Satan’s minion’s and stand up for our Lord’s Word. What happened to the time when a legislator or member of Congress or the president was held accountable for his actions?

Did you know that for at least a couple of decades after the Capital was built regular church services were held in the Rotunda? Several of our first presidents attended services there every Sunday. However, today, our nation’s leaders look upon the church as a hindrance to thought as opposed to a moral compass. Sadly, our pastors foster that mindset by staying in the background and “not making waves.” Where is the courage of their convictions? Where is their faith in our Lord Jesus Christ?

When the apostle Paul was urged by his followers not to go to Jerusalem because of the prophesy that he would be taken prisoner by the Jews who were offended by his teaching, he went anyway. Paul knew that his life was in danger but his faith was in Christ. Paul had been told by Christ that he must go. There was no question in Paul’s mind as to what he should do. Where is that conviction today? Sadly, I fear that it is lacking.

As always, your thoughts and comments are welcome.

Dan

God and the Intelligence Community

Friends,
I am a member of a blog group of current and former Naval Intelligence personnel. We may receive anywhere from five to 20 emails a day concerning open source intelligence information from around the world. While it is very tempting to slide from intelligence issues into religious or political arenas, the moderator is very diligent in keeping everyone on track. However, tonight I received an email about the new head of the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA), Lt. General Ronnie Hawkins, USAF.

In a brief that he gave to agency employees that he titled “Ronnie’s Rules,” he gave an outline of his 18 priorities. His lead-off slide stated, “Always put God first, and stay within His will.” The last slide stated, “Always remember God is good – all the time!” To say that some of his employees were “concerned” would be an understatement. For many decades now it has been taboo for commanders, or anyone other than official military chaplains to speak of God. Some person who, I believe, has no regard for America took an obscure passage from a Thomas Jefferson letter and blew it up into the creed of separation of church and state.

The moderator of the Naval Intelligence blog group sent out a note that this type of posting was not appropriate for this forum. Normally I agree with this type of decision when members get into political or religious discussions but in this case I cannot agree.

One of our learned and well-reasoned members has made an outstanding argument that we as intelligence professionals should be very concerned about the religious nature of our country and military. He made the point from the view of infiltration of subversive elements. These elements have taken place over the life of our country but have increased over the past 60 or so years. Of particular concern is the infiltration of anti-American thought which has seeped into our education system to the point that now very little if any American thought is taught in our schools. Even our sitting president has called the US “a Muslim nation.” At this point in time that is only wishful thinking; but wait another 10 years and that may not be the case.

We as intelligence professionals should be very concerned with this infiltration. Of course, most of us are retired or no longer on active duty so we can look at and study any open source material on any arena we wish. Unfortunately, those on active duty cannot do this due to Executive Order 12333. This E.O. prohibits national level intelligence agencies from looking within the borders of the US. But those of us on the “gray beard” side of the line can look at these issues as they concern us.

But somebody in the Intelligence Community (IC) had better be doing it with the view of the Muslims striving to force Sharia law on us. At this time in our history, the main stream media will only identify the bad guys by name and/or nationality. For instance, an illegal Moroccan immigrant was caught just a few days ago in a plot to bomb the US Capitol. Does anyone want to bet he was Muslim and was planning on this deed as a way to further his religion?

When we look at our own history we need to go back to the Founders. Those of you who have read these pages over the years know that I love referring back to the Founders. In the late 1700s and early 1800s no man was more revered in the United States than George Washington. He led our country to freedom and brought this new nation through the harsh transition from war to an effective new type of government; one that had never been tried. It has been reported that he spent at least one hour each morning in prayerful contemplation of the Bible. In his farewell address published on 19 September 1796, he wrote:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

Would Washington approve of the chastisement military leaders such as Lt. Gen Hawkins are sure to receive? We should be looking at this issue from two points of view. First and foremost is the moral character of our country. God has been taken out of our schools. The primary reading primer of the 1800s was the Bible. I contend the morality of our country was on a much higher plane than it is today. When you look at the debauchery that is depicted in the entertainment industry I can only imagine what the Founders would think if they were to see it.

The other point of view that is equally important is that of examining those forces seeking to destroy the very core of our country; Muslims who are striving to institute Sharia law within our country. A number of states have already passed laws stating that no foreign laws are to be considered when cases are brought before the bench. When these laws are passed, the Muslims scream. They say it is a violation of the First Amendment and therefore unconstitutional.

Really? Is it unconstitutional to uphold the laws of the United States? Is it really wrong for a commander to tell his employees where he stands on the issue of his faith? Just remember, there is NO language in the Constitution dictating a separation of church and state.

As always, I welcome your comments and discussion,

Dan

War and the National Will

Friends,

This morning a coworker and I were discussing the increased use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) or as the mass media lumps them, drones. UAVs are used for a wide variety of tasks today that just 10 years ago were the purview of manned aircraft, requiring a human in the cockpit to execute the mission. That mission could be anything from taking reconnaissance pictures to bombing the bad guys who are shooting at the good guys.

The conversation twisted around to the ever encroaching sterility of war as seen by our populace. I won’t address the rest of the people in the world. When we look back on the wars of the last 150 years this country has been involved in we see that they were much different in the area of casualties. Probably the most horrific war this country has seen was the Civil War. Hundreds of thousands of young men were killed in individual battles. There was scarcely a family in the United States that wasn’t affected by the war. Those that survived often were scarred mentally and physically.

Looking ahead to World War I and World War II, while the loss of American lives was not as heavy, they were still national efforts because we, the citizens of this great country knew that losing those wars would have irreparably change our way of life and our way of government, not to mention our national language.

In the Korean and Vietnamese wars, there was no chance of a direct attack on the US mainland from our foes; there was still a national effort, no matter how unpopular. The American people sent their young to fight and die for our national interests. Many scars came out of those conflicts, both on the warriors and the families.

Now, let’s fast-forward to Iraq and Afghanistan. When you look at the magnificent young men and women fighting and supporting those efforts, they are almost viewed as being in a vacuum. Looking around today life goes on much the way it did before September 11, 2001. We are in our second president’s term and everyone is concerned about the next shoe to drop out of Congress or the administration but there is very little talk of progress, or lack thereof, being made in Kandahar, or the increased bombing in Iraq.

In short, the country is either completely ignorant of what is going on in the Middle East or they have become so calloused as to be unaffected. Please don’t misunderstand me, massive numbers of soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen, and their families are deeply affected by these conflicts. But how affected is the general public? In World War II we had campaigns for scrap metal, war bonds, and rationing. Now our forces are much smaller and more high tech and the bad guy they are fighting is 8,000 miles away. Why should we care back here? I won’t go into the possibility of success or failure in Afghanistan, which is another issue. My concern is the concern felt by the American public; what used to be called National Will.

A few days ago I read a story about Hezbollah developing relationships with the Mexican drug cartels. This is a terrorist group that is supported directly by Iran. Unfortunately, Iran is the Big Daddy Rabbit in the terrorist game. Their only major rival in that contest is the Muslim Brotherhood. I consider al Qaida as a subsidiary of the Brotherhood.

The Mexican cartels already have almost unfettered access across our southern border and with the developing partnerships with Hezbollah they will have the same access.

Now the military is leaning heavily on the use of UAVs to do those tasks we used to send young men into harm’s way for. Personally, I would much rather see an unmanned piece of machinery shot at than one of my shipmates. But this further sterilizes the conflicts in which we are engaged. The average citizen has not been made aware of what is at stake if the forces of evil are allowed to have their way anywhere at any time. The reason for “The War on Terror” has not been fully explained to the American public sufficiently to get the message across.

The unfortunate side effect of this sterility is that Americans will be extremely surprised when large numbers of coordinated attacks take place right here at home, in our own neighborhoods, churches, malls, and schools. Those attacks will be perpetrated by those same Muslim terrorists crossing the border with the aid of the cartels.

I can’t help but wonder if anyone at the Department of Homeland Defense has any clue what-so-ever as to how many Muslim terrorists have crossed our southern border. We are already aware of numerous Muslim terrorist training camps located within our borders. Couple the graduates of those training camps with the Muslim terrorists crossing our borders and you have a recipe for disaster on a grand scale. I am not talking about another 9-11, I am talking about a massive number of coordinated incidents, whether suicide bombers, snipers, or improvised explosive devices.

Our military is fielding many marvelous implements to aid our troops but are utterly failing at telling the American public why they are doing it. It is my belief that this administration is charging full speed ahead while wearing blinders. They don’t have a clue how to address the situation with the American public and we will be caught flat-footed.

As always, I welcome your comments and questions.

Dan