Archive for the ‘Military’ Category

AMAZON’S CEO OWNS A TERROR-LINKED PAPER

Tuesday, August 20th, 2019

 

AMAZON’S CEO OWNS A TERROR-LINKED PAPER
The Washington Post’s ties to Islamic terrorists are a national security risk.
August 16, 2019   Daniel Greenfield  Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism

Millions of Americans brought Alexa into their homes only to learn, belatedly, that not only software, but human beings, were listening in on them. Amazon employees and contractors from Costa Rica to India were caught reviewing thousands of recordings, of casual requests, private conversations and intimate moments, and sharing clips that they thought were funny in chat sessions with each other.

The Amazon product is always listening and maintains recordings of your conversations indefinitely.

But now there’s something bigger at stake than privacy violations. Amazon expects a $10 billion cloud contract for the military. The $10 billion contract was a sweetheart deal for a politically influential company that seemed unstoppable until President Trump suddenly slammed the brakes on JEDI.

The deal had always been dubious and many critics had questioned how or why a single company could expect to have a monopoly on the JEDI cloud for the United States military. Amazon’s cloud business is huge, but the Capital One breach of 100 million credit card applications by a former Amazon employee highlighted the company’s security and workforce issues. Capital One kept its data in the cloud through AWS or Amazon Web Services and the hacker was a former AWS employee with specialized knowledge.

In the Obama era, Amazon had received a $600 million cloud contract that covers all 17 intelligence agencies. The secret deal was met with protests especially since Amazon’s wasn’t even the lowest bid.

Just as with JEDI, all the national security eggs were being put into one very fragile basket.

Amazon’s federal cloud contracts took off in the Obama era. Many of the biggest contracts are classified making it difficult to measure how much taxpayer money is being sucked into the Bezos business. But Amazon is winning contracts in the usual Washington D.C. way, by spending millions a year on lobbying.

The dot com titan began lobbying the Pentagon in 2016. That was the year Amazon’s lobbying expenditures hit a whopping $11 million, up from $1.62 million during the Bush administration. Amazon’s PAC, which the company strongly encourages employees to donate to, accounted for $515,200 in donations to members of Congress.

Amazon was the fourth biggest contributor to Senator Mark Warner. And when President Trump put Amazon’s JEDI deal on hold, Warner was among the first to protest the move. In his letter, Warner urged the Secretary of Defense to “resist political pressures” that might scuttle $10 billion for Amazon.

Senator Warner, who was applying political pressure to the Secretary of Defense, to protect a contract that would benefit his contributors, appeared to be unaware of the irony of his message.

But Amazon’s lobbying millions were only the tip of the iceberg of its dubious political influence.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO JOHNNY CASH THE RAGGED OLD FLAG

Sunday, August 18th, 2019

 

VIDEO   Johnny Cash    The Ragged Old Flag
Share

BRITISH NAVY – TRUMP TO THE RESCUE !

Saturday, August 17th, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Uncle Trump to the Naval Rescue

Europe claims it can’t rely on the U.S., but look who’s protecting ships.

By the Editorial Board   August 9, 2019
Well, well, look who’s coming to the rescue of the British and shipping in the Middle East. None other than the Trump Administration that is supposed to be an unreliable ally. The Brits now say they’re joining a U.S.-led coalition to protect merchant shipping after they failed to get help from the rest of Europe.

The Royal Navy will join the effort organized by the U.S. Central Command after Iran seized a third ship this week. On July 19 the HMS Montrose frigate was patrolling near the Strait of Hormuz but was too far away to stop Iranian forces from taking a British-flagged tanker and crew that Tehran still hasn’t released.

Britain needs help because nearly half of its frigates and destroyers are undergoing major repairs or upgrades. The Royal Navy has around 80 ships, down from more than 130 during the 1982 Falklands War. The country is without a deployable aircraft carrier, though it has plans for two. London spent more than 2% of gross domestic product on defense in 2018, fulfilling its NATO requirement. But former Defence Minister Tobias Ellwood admitted after the tanker seizure that “our Royal Navy is too small to manage our interests across the globe.”

Germany refused to help, perhaps because it doesn’t want to offend Iran and might lose a naval engagement. While the Deutsche Marine has helped fight piracy in East Africa, it struggles to meet basic NATO commitments. At one point in 2018 its entire U-Boat fleet—six submarines—was stuck in dry dock. The surface fleet has held up better, though it’s aging fast.

Berlin spent only 1.2% of GDP on defense in 2018. Chancellor Angela Merkel ’s heir apparent, Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, called for Germany to meet its 2% commitment during her recent swearing-in ceremony. Her fellow lawmakers responded with boos.

The French would have had a limited benefit to a patrol mission, perhaps because La Royale has only a single aircraft carrier after cancelling plans for a second years ago.

(more…)

Share

JOE BIDEN’S IRAQ MEMORIES

Monday, August 5th, 2019

 

I have always thought of Biden as one of those people who waits to see which way the wind is blowing before taking  a position on any subject.  Nancy

Joe Biden’s Iraq Memories

The former Vice President omits a few details about his strategic misjudgments.

August 3, 2019

Joe Biden speaks during the Senate Foreign Relations hearing, July 31, 2002. PHOTO: CQ-ROLL CALL|,INC.

Foreign policy was barely discussed at the Democratic presidential debates this week, and not in a good way when it was. The main point seemed to be to stop “endless war,” which sounds like Donald Trump as a candidate in 2016.

That includes Joe Biden, who as a former Vice President and veteran of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee should know better. Yet when criticized about his 2002 vote for the Iraq war, Mr. Biden had a memory lapse.

“I did make a bad judgment, trusting the President [George W. Bush] saying he was only doing this to get inspectors in and get the U.N. to agree to put inspectors in,” Mr. Biden said. “From the moment ‘shock and awe’ started, from that moment I was opposed to the effort, and I was outspoken as much as anyone at all in the Congress and the Administration.”

Mr. Biden forgets that he was also a loud critic of Saddam Hussein, had been so for many years, and also worried that the dictator might have weapons of mass destruction. Everyone knew that the vote in 2002 was about authorizing a potential military intervention.

But Mr. Biden didn’t stop there this week. “Secondly,” he added, “I was asked by the President [Barack Obama] in the first meeting we had on Iraq, he turned and said, ‘Joe, get our combat troops out,’ in front of the entire national-security team. One of the proudest moments of my life was to stand there in Al-Faw Palace and tell everyone that we’re coming—all our combat troops are coming home.”

Mr. Biden is trying to make a virtue out of a tragic strategic blunder. The total withdrawal of U.S. troops in 2011 set the stage for the rise of Islamic State, and the takeover of Mosul and much of Iraq by the “caliphate.” By 2014 U.S. forces were fighting again in Iraq, and it took five years to defeat the caliphate after the premature Obama-Biden withdrawal.

Mr. Biden will run on his foreign-policy chops, but on Iraq he supported the war, then turned against it when the going got tough, then opposed the 2007 Bush surge that finally won the war, then supported a withdrawal that let the enemy regroup. That isn’t a record to boast about.

 

Share

XI JINPING VERSUS TRUMP – A UNIFIED WORLD RULED BY THE CHINESE

Monday, July 29th, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Xi Changed My Mind About Trump

The president defends not only U.S. sovereignty but the entire world order.

By Gordon G. Chang   Mr. Chang is author of “The Coming Collapse of China” and is frequently seen on Fox News giving his analysis of China’s latest actions
July 25, 2019
Chinese President XI Jinping proposes a toast in Beijing, April 26
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE: As the Hudson Institute’s Charles Horner told me by email last week, many world leaders are nationalistic, but Mr. Xi is the only one whose “officially propounded nationalism takes the form of a global imperial vision.” That is consistent with his lawless behavior: treating neighbors as vassals, taking territory, closing off the global commons and intimidating leaders around the world.

“Tianxia,” Fei-Ling Wang notes, “inevitably and even necessarily makes the People’s Republic view and treat its neighbors and eventually all other states as essentially nonequals and lesser entities, to be influenced, controlled and subjugated with force, money, favor, ruse and fear.”

China is not, as some believe, a “trivial state” that seeks nothing more than to preserve its regime and defend its territory. With Mr. Xi pursuing tianxia ambitions, the world could use more of Mr. Trump’s defense of sovereignty, and even a little more “America First.” These concepts are not, as I once thought, unnecessarily provocative. They are a necessary defense of the centuries-old international order against an existential threat.

At first I had no idea why President Trump talked so much about sovereignty. I’ve changed my mind. To be more precise, Xi Jinping changed it. Mr. Trump is the only thing that stands between us and a world dominated by China.

“We do not expect diverse countries to share the same cultures, traditions, or even systems of government,” Mr. Trump told the United Nations General Assembly in September 2017. “But we do expect all nations to uphold these two core sovereign duties: to respect the interests of their own people and the rights of every other sovereign nation.”

Mr. Trump mentioned sovereignty 21 times in that speech. Why? Everyone knew America was a sovereign state, one of nearly 200 in the world. The idea of sovereignty has been firmly established for more than three centuries. Mr. Trump’s defense of it seemed unnecessary.

Yet for more than a decade, President Xi has been dropping audacious hints that China is the world’s only sovereign state. As a result, I have come to believe that Mr. Trump’s defense of sovereignty is essential to maintaining international peace and stability.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO D-DAY PRAGER U

Tuesday, June 4th, 2019

 

VIDEO – D-DAY   PRAGER U

D-Day

May 27, 2019

2.6m

On June 6, 1944, Allied forces stormed the beaches of Normandy in northern France. Their goal: to liberate Western Europe from Nazi tyranny. From a distance, it might seem that victory was pre-ordained, but no one felt that way at the time. British military historian Peter Caddick-Adams tells the incredible story of what happened on that monumental day.

Share

VIDEO PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN’S MEMORIAL DAY SPEECH 1986

Tuesday, May 28th, 2019

 

VIDEO   PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN   MEMORIAL DAY SPEECH  1986 

Share

REMEMBERING MIKE SPANN ON MEMORIAL DAY

Monday, May 27th, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
REMEMBERING MIKE SPANN

An American worth recalling far more than the ‘American Taliban.’

May 26, 2019  The Editorial Board
The body of CIA officer Johnny “Mike” Spann is carried by Marine honor guards at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland, Dec. 2, 2001. PHOTO: JOE MARQUETTE/AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Many Americans were shocked to learn that John Walker Lindh stepped out of an Indiana prison a free man on Thursday, after 17 years behind bars. Dubbed the “American Taliban,” Lindh spent his teenage years in California’s Marin County but ended up captured in Afghanistan as an enemy combatant in the early months after 9/11. In 2002 he accepted a deal in which he pleaded guilty to providing support for the Taliban.

But as understandable as outrage might be, this is Memorial Day weekend, and we do well not to let Lindh overshadow the story about the other American inside that Afghan prison at the same time. He was Johnny “Mike” Spann, a CIA officer who deployed to Afghanistan early in the war. He was killed on November 25, 2001, shortly after interviewing Lindh, when Taliban prisoners rioted. He was 32 years old.

Spann was the first American killed in combat in Afghanistan. Before joining the CIA, Spann was a Marine, leaving with the rank of captain. He is buried in Arlington National Cemetery alongside other American men and women who have served their nation in war. He is further honored with a black star on the CIA’s Memorial Wall at its Virginia headquarters, along with 132 other fallen agency colleagues.

So this weekend, as we enjoy our barbecues and kick off the summer, let us not forget how extraordinarily blessed we are to have men and women such as Mike Spann, who willingly placed themselves in harm’s way to preserve our freedom—and paid the ultimate price.

 

Share

SUPPORT COLONEL FRANCIS DE LUCA (USMC RET) FOR CONGRESS

Thursday, April 4th, 2019

Many of you personally know or have heard of Colonel Francis De Luca (USMC Ret)  as he was the President of Civitas and headed up the   North Carolina Chapter of Americans For Prosperity that are two very conservative action groups in North Carolina.
Colonel Francis DeLuca is now running for Congress in the 3rd District of North Carolina which is along the coast in the Wilmington area. The primary election is April 30 so  it is essential to donate to his campaign as quickly as possible.  I have known Colonel DeLuca   for a number of years and know him to be an outstanding conservative that we can depend on to support our values in congress.
It would be greatly appreciated if you would forward this information regarding Colonel  De Luca’s campaign on to your contacts.  Time is of the essence and we must make sure that the right people are representing us in congress.   
Please scroll down to see an excerpt from his bio of his very impressive and committed conservative man.  Please be as generous as you can if you choose to donate to his campaign.  We all know how difficult it is to find really dedicated conservative candidates.     Nancy

Here are information links on my campaign:

coldelucaforcongress.com/donate.html    Donate Link

coldelucaforcongress.com/index.html  Website information

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag4RTaijZag&feature=youtu.be Link to radio ad running across district  The easiest way to learn more about my campaign for congress is to go to the following links. They are my campaign website, a donation page and the current radio ad I am running.

Your sending information on to others will make a huge difference. Having someone like you vouch for me will have impact!

The maximum contribution is $2,800 per person and that is what I am asking people for.

We must make sure that the next person in congress from this district is a committed conservative!

With the election on 30 April and the size of the district, advertising is the only way I will reach all the voters I need.

 

(more…)

Share

NAVY, INDUSTRY PARTNERS ARE ‘UNDER CYBER SIEGE’ BY CHINESE HACKERS

Tuesday, March 12th, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Navy, Industry Partners Are ‘Under Cyber Siege’ by Chinese Hackers, Review Asserts

Hacking threatens U.S.’s standing as world’s leading military power, study says

Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer testified before the Senate Committee on Armed Services last week.
Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer testified before the Senate Committee on Armed Services last week. PHOTO: RON SACHS/ZUMA PRESS

March 12, 2019 2:32 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON—The Navy and its industry partners are “under cyber siege” by Chinese hackers and others who have stolen tranches of national security secrets in recent years, exploiting critical weaknesses that threaten the U.S.’s standing as the world’s top military power, an internal Navy review has concluded.

The assessment, delivered to Navy Secretary Richard Spencer last week and reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, depicts a branch of the armed forces under relentless cyberattack by foreign adversaries and struggling in its response to the scale and sophistication of the problem.

Drawing from extensive research and interviews with senior officials across the Trump administration, the tone of the review is urgent and at times dire, offering a rare, unfiltered look at the military’s cybersecurity liabilities.

KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM THE NAVY REVIEW

The Navy report’s authors conducted 31 site visits and interviewed 85 current senior military officers and civilians across both the Navy and wider Defense Department, as well as senior officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Homeland Security and White House National Security Council, among others. Here are their main conclusions:

  • The Navy and its industry partners are facing relentless cyber attacks that seek to steal sensitive national security data by a wide range of foes, with China and Russia the most adept and strategic.
  • The U.S. is at risk of losing global military and economic advantages due to cyberthefts of secrets and intellectual property.
  • Despite efforts to address the problem, the defense industrial base has suffered “a flood of breaches of significant data” and “continues to hemorrhage critical data.”
  • The Navy and Defense Department have only a limited understanding of the totality of losses they and their partners are suffering.
  • The Navy is focused on “preparing to win some future kinetic battle, while it is losing the current global, counter-force, counter-value, cyber war,” the review’s authors conclude.

The 57-page document is especially scathing in its assessment of how the Navy has addressed cybersecurity challenges facing its contractors and subcontractors, faulting naval officials for not anticipating that adversaries would attack the defense industrial base and for not adequately informing those partners of the cyber threat. It also acknowledges a lack of full understanding about the extent of the damage.

(more…)

Share
Search All Posts
Categories