06/19/13

Must Read! “A Helpless Military: Just What Obama Ordered”

By: Trevor Loudon
New Zeal

Of all of Barack Obama‘s crimes against the American people this is the worst.

What Obama is doing to the U.S. military puts hundreds of millions of lives and the survival of the entire West at stake.

by Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady

As incompetence, deception, duplicity and dishonesty become the hall marks of the Obama administration, it is important that we not lose sight of the greatest danger posed beyond these serial scandals: the feminization, emasculation and dismantling of our military. The two most important elements of national survival are the media and the military; one keeps us free and the other keeps us secure. We know the media are failing – God help us if the military does also. We may be able to fix the government in 2014. Fixing the military is more problematic.

Let’s begin with Benghazi. It is incomprehensible that any commander, let alone the commander in chief, would go AWOL during a crisis such as Benghazi, but he was. In the midst of the massacre of our ambassador and three heroic Americans, President Obama was nowhere to be found. He did manage to surface, too late for the massacre, to meet a campaign commitment the next day. But, before retiring, we are told he turned the crisis over to his underlings, including the military. What we learned about our military leadership during that crisis should alarm all Americans.

The demise of our military of course begins with the commander in chief, but he can’t do it alone. He has to have willing sycophants and he has had them in the civilian and military leadership at the Department of Defense. The indiff
erence of the people and military inexperience in Congress are contributing factors. The military disasters are a form of gradualism. Look at the changes under Mr. Obama. We cannot focus on these changes enough.

Our military is suffering unprecedented rates of suicide and PTSD. Obama’s sequestration will cut benefits to veterans as well as damage readiness. (There has been a 2000 percent increase in backlog for veteran assistance in four years!) We now have a quad-sexual military with all the health, readiness and moral issues that come with exalting sodomy. Sexual assault is at an all-time high. Women will be tasked to lead bayonet charges. As a result of the sex scandals, Congress is now looking to curtail the military’s ability to discipline, another tribute to the lack of leadership in the military and lack of military understanding in Congress.

Billions of defense dollars are unaccounted for. Christianity is under military attack, and Bibles have been burned to appease Muslims. (References to God and Jesus are forbidden at Arlington, chaplains will be forced to perform homosexual “marriages,” and Bibles and religious item are forbidden to the wounded at Walter Reed, etc.)

We have a new doctrine for crisis: “Don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on.” Therefore, no Normandy or Inchon. In other words, don’t go until the crisis/massacre is over. Their default position is don’t go, period. The military leadership, after the terrorist massacre at Fort Hood, outrageously lamented the effect it would have on diversity – and equally outrageously labeled it workplace violence denying the victims and their families the benefits they deserve.

There have been unprecedented security leaks, and China is electronically in bed with us. They even lost the graves of our warriors at Arlington. I could go on, but it should be clear that all of the above is the result of a leader who knows not the difference between a corps and a corpse and is both indifferent to and unknowledgeable of military readiness. And as bad, the military leadership is complicit in these disasters. (As a further tribute to their ineptitude, they have actually considered combat-level medals for warriors not shooting and desk-bound computer operators, medals that were the laughingstock of veterans.)

But given that the president tasked the military to act in the Benghazi crisis, what did they do? Indefensibly, they did nothing, they did not even try! No obstacle, no doctrine, nothing can defend not trying, never mind the risk, to save fellow Americans. Were they under orders to sit on their a– and let their fellow Americans die? In my 34 years of military service involving many crises, I never knew of one without an after action report (AAR), in which each and every action was put under a microscope to identify those responsible for the results be they good or bad. Congress, the media, someone should demand the AAR on Benghazi. It must exist. Who ordered the stand down? Who said sit on your a–? Why no hearing on this?

Just as the way forward for America is a return to the morality and values of the past, so too must the military return to the readiness standards and common sense of the past. We can survive in a relatively valueless society – but only with a strong and ready military. Sadly the military is mirroring society – the goal of Mr. Obama and progressives – and will soon be impotent. Once the progressives have a helpless military they no longer need to explain why they didn’t go; they can say we are unable to go. Progress is not the path we are on; true progress is the path to our past. The other scandals may be more glamorous and outrageous (such as lying about Benghazi before the coffins of those massacred by terrorists, enemies’ lists and assaults on the First Amendment) but what Mr. Obama is doing to our military is more grave.

Maj. Gen. Patrick Brady, retired from the U.S. Army, is a recipient of the United States military’s highest decoration, the Medal of Honor. He is the author of “Dead Men Flying: Victory in Viet Nam The Legend of Dust Off: America’s Battlefield Angels.”

Thanks to Shona.

06/19/13

The U.S. Support Apparatus Behind NSA Traitor Snowden

New Zeal
By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

If the NSA or the FBI wants to find fugitive Edward Snowden, who is apparently in hiding in Chinese Hong Kong, its analysts and agents might want to examine a controversial non-profit group, the Freedom of the Press Foundation, and its main financial sponsor, the San Francisco-based Foundation for National Progress.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation, which includes Snowden’s media mouthpiece and handler Glenn Greenwald on its board, acknowledges that the organization “is made possible by the fiscal sponsorship of the Foundation for National Progress.”

The Foundation for National Progress is best known as the publisher of Mother Jones magazine, and is backed by several prominent liberal foundations, including the Open Society Institute of billionaire George Soros, according to its 2010/2011 annual report.

Mother Jones journalists accepted an award this year named in honor of I.F. Stone, who postured as an “independent” journalist but was exposed as a Soviet agent of influence. Greenwald had previously received the award.

Snowden is their new hero. “At the heart of Edward Snowden’s decision to expose the NSA’s massive phone and Internet spying programs was a fundamental belief in the people’s right-to-know,” says actor John Cusack on the website of the Freedom of the Press Foundation. Cusack is also a member of its board.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation, which openly funnels money to WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, says it is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, and that the Foundation for National Progress “provides users a way to give tax-deductible donations.”

“We are pleased to receive anonymous donations in the mail,” it says.

One purpose of the arrangement is to make sure that WikiLeaks has a secure funding source, as “U.S. officials unofficially pressured payment processors to cut WikiLeaks off from funding in late 2010, despite the fact that the organization has never been charged with a crime,” the group claimed.

In fact, U.S. officials regarded WikiLeaks as hostile to the United States because it publicly released classified counter-terrorism information from Army analyst Bradley Manning, who is now on trial for espionage against the U.S. and aiding the enemy. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange went to work for Moscow-funded television.

Prosecutors say that WikiLeaks material was found in the possession of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda after a U.S. raid killed the terrorist leader.

Assange has called Snowden a “hero,” but NSA Director General Keith Alexander said at a hearing of the House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday that the leaks created “irreversible and significant damage” to national security. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), a member of the committee, said Snowden was clearly a “traitor.”

The title of the hearing was, “How Disclosed NSA Programs Protect Americans, and Why Disclosure Aids Our Adversaries.”

But the radical left, including members of Barack Obama’s “progressive” base, are rallying around Snowden, even as Obama himself gives lip service to what the NSA is doing.

One of the prominent directors of the Foundation for National Progress that is backing Snowden is Susan S. Pritzker, a member of one of the richest families in the United States, the Pritzker family, which is very close to Obama. The Pritzker family owns the Hyatt Hotel chain.

Another member of the family, Penny Pritzker, is a Chicago billionaire nominated by President Obama to lead the Commerce Department. Her nomination has been held up because of questions from Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) about income generated from an offshore account.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation board includes not only Glenn Greenwald of the British Guardian, but Laura Poitras, described by Alana Goodman of The Washington Free Beacon as a “long-time activist filmmaker who has railed against U.S. counterterrorism policies put into place after the Sept. 11 attacks.”

Poitras and Greenwald arranged the secret interview with Snowden in Hong Kong and authored the Guardian’s story about him. Poitras also shared the lead byline with former Post journalist Barton Gellman on the front-page NSA story in The Washington Post.

Poitras, who is emerging as perhaps the central figure in the NSA leaks controversy, even more important than Greenwald, says she “has been detained and interrogated about her work at the U.S. border over 40 times.” Greenwald himself has written that the Department of Homeland Security has been behind her detentions and interrogations.

In a New York Times interview, she said she had been placed on a “Watch List” by the U.S. Government since 2006, and claims she has been trying to find out why, with the assistance of the ACLU.

John McCormack, a staff writer for The Weekly Standard, may have the answer. He reports evidence that Poitras, who has been covering the wars in the Middle East, “had foreknowledge of a November 20, 2004 ambush of U.S. troops [in Iraq] but did nothing to warn them.” He says a Joint Terrorism Task Force investigation was launched about the attack, but that no charges were filed against Poitras, and she did not respond to requests for comment.

Nevertheless, the Soros-funded blog Think Progress hailed Poitras for making “a series of powerful documentaries about the impact of the War on Terror.” Think Progress is part of the Center for American Progress, one of the major Soros-funded groups in Washington, D.C.

The Freedom of the Press Foundation promotes Snowden as a whistleblower, rather than a traitor, as do “journalism and transparency organizations” such as WikiLeaks, the Center for Public Integrity, and the National Security Archive, the latter two of which are funded by Soros.

Another member of the Freedom of the Press Foundation’s board is Josh Stearns, the Journalism and Public Media Campaign Director at Free Press, a Soros-funded group started by Marxist Professor Robert. W. McChesney.

Free Press has launched a petition campaign demanding that Congress investigate the National Security Agency’s terrorist surveillance activities, labeled “spying programs.”

“Stand up for privacy and push Congress to dig up the truth about the NSA’s surveillance schemes,” the left-wing group says. “Millions of Americans have woken to the threat the NSA’s programs pose to our civil liberties.”

Similar claims have been echoed on the right by some personalities in the conservative media, such as radio host Michael Savage.

A “Stop Spying on Us” website has been launched, featuring “A Network of Groups Across the Political Spectrum, Organizing against Surveillance Abuse, Government Repression, and Political Witch Hunts; and Working to Expand Civil Liberties, Free Speech, and the Right to Dissent for All.”

The National Lawyers Guild, once identified as a Communist front, is playing a key role in the effort.

Another coalition, “Stop Watching Us,” includes conservative groups such as Freedom Works and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, in addition to MoveOn.org, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Greenwald’s Freedom of the Press Foundation.

Coming to the defense of Greenwald, the Soros-funded Free Press has attacked Rep. Peter King of New York for saying that “journalists who report NSA surveillance leaks should be arrested.”

This is not what King said, however. Appearing on Fox News, King had said, “Greenwald, not only did he disclose this information, he has said that he has names of CIA agents and assets around the world, and they’re threatening to disclose that. The last time that was done in this country, we saw a CIA station chief murdered in Greece… I think it should be very targeted, very selective and certainly a very rare exception. But, in this case, when you have someone who discloses secrets like this and threatens to release more, yes, there has to be—legal action taken against him.”

King was referring to Snowden’s comments, in the interview arranged by Greenwald and Poitras, that he possessed the “full rosters of everyone working at the NSA, the entire intelligence community and undercover assets all around the world, the locations of every station we have, what their missions are and so forth.”

Since Greenwald presumably has access to Snowden’s classified information on U.S. intelligence activities, including the names of agents around the world, King’s concern may be valid.

Greenwald promised “significant revelations that have not yet been heard over the next several weeks and months,” but denies he had threatened to name U.S. covert agents.

However, since Greenwald has a history of anti-American rhetoric and is a fixture at international Communist conferences, as documented by Accuracy in Media, disclosures of this classified information to individuals and groups hostile to the United States cannot be ruled out.

06/19/13

Obama Administration Attempts to Intimidate State Department Whistleblower

By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media

President Obama doesn’t like leaks and he doesn’t like scandals. In recent weeks he’s had plenty of both. We should not be surprised, then, that the Administration is once again using its government apparatus the “Chicago way” to stifle whistleblowers. It’s most recent victim: Aurelia Fedenisn.

As Accuracy in Media recently reported, Fedenisn broke the story that high-level State Department employees stifled eight inquiries into alleged illegal behavior by its employees, including an ambassador who has been accused of pedophilia and picking up prostitutes. The investigations that were covered up also include allegations of sexual assault and drug purchases. In addition, they showed a long-time Clinton loyalist Cheryl Mills interceding in Obama’s nominee for Iraq ambassadorship, Brett McGurk. These revelations could have a dire effect on Hillary Clinton’s presidential chances. Clinton’s reputation has already been hurt by the Benghazi scandal, according to a Bloomberg News poll.

What happens when you threaten the reputation of the Obama Administration and its subordinates? Strong-arm tactics emerge quickly. After all, the State Department found it difficult to give security clearances to attorneys who wanted to represent the Benghazi whistleblowers when they went before Congress. “Former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova said today that the State Department is denying clearances to attorneys who want to represent Benghazi whistleblowers—even though one of the attorneys already has a current Top Secret security clearance,” reported CNS News in April.

“At least four State Department and CIA employees are being intimidated and blocked from cooperating with a congressional investigation into the deadly terror attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, last year, according to an attorney for one of the officials,” reported CNN that month. “The officials consider themselves whistleblowers and feel threatened with career damage if they decide to give testimony to Congress, according to Victoria Toensing, an attorney for one of the State Department officials.”

Given how the Administration has pursued national security leaks, this is unsurprising. After all, this is the same government whose Justice Department subpoenaed two months of Associated Press call records in response to a leak, and the same DOJ that named James Rosen as a “co-conspirator” and a “flight risk” for reporting classified information about North Korea. The DOJ even went to three different judges until it found one willing to give them the search warrant without requiring that they notify Rosen about it.

It seems par for the course, then, that Fedenisn is being treated like a criminal by the State Department after revealing its misdeeds under Clinton’s leadership. Her attorney, Cary Schulman, told The Cable, a blog on the Foreign Policy magazine website, that “Fedenisn has paid a steep price” for her watchdog revelations. “They had law enforcement officers camp out in front of her house, harass her children and attempt to incriminate herself,” Schulman told John Hudson.

“After the CBS News made inquiries to the State Department about the charges, Schulman says investigators from the State Department’s Inspector General promptly arrived at Fedenisn’s door.” They “talked to both kids and never identified themselves,” says Schulman.

The officials even tried to get her to sign a document that says she stole the material. “Schulman says the purpose of the visit was to get Fedenisn to sign a document admitting that she stole State Department materials, such as the memos leaked to CBS,” reports Hudson. “Schulman says it was crucial that she didn’t sign the document because her separation agreement with the State Department includes a provision allowing disclosures of misconduct” (emphasis added). None of the documents released were classified; they were drafts of a report that in later iterations had been scrubbed of all references to the eight investigations.

CBS News has a video of the visit, where an unnamed official holding a bunch of papers asks for the “recording device” to be switched off so he can talk to her. “Ma’am, I can’t discuss it with you with the recording device on,” said the unnamed man on camera. Just “Two hours after CBS News made inquiries to the State Department about these charges, investigators from the State Department’s Inspector General showed up at her door,” reported CBS News at the time.

Hudson quotes Kel McClanahan, “a D.C. attorney who has represented several agency whistleblowers,” as saying that “This type of intimidation technique is all too common when an agency wants something from you that it is not entirely confident it can get without your cooperation, and more often than not people who don’t know any better fall for it.”

The threats don’t stop there. Schulman, Fedenisn’s attorney, “also said that officials from the Inspector General’s Office told him they’d be having a ‘no kidding get together with the [Department of Justice],’ implying to him that they would push criminal charges if his client didn’t cooperate.”

Apparently, the Administration would rather go after the whistleblowers rather than those who have committed real crimes.

Roger Aronoff is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and can be contacted at [email protected].

06/19/13