AFGHANISTAN IS UN-WINNABLE

AFGHANISTAN IS UN-WINNABLE

 

By: Lawrence Sellin, Colonel United States Army Reserve

Carl von Clausewitz, 19th century military theorist, stressed the importance of knowing your enemy: “The first, the supreme, the most far-reaching act of judgment that the statesman and commander have to make is to establish … the kind of war on which they are embarking; neither mistaking it for, nor trying to turn it into, something that is alien to its nature.”

For 17 years, we wrongly applied counterinsurgency doctrine to a proxy war waged by Pakistan against the United States and Afghanistan. That approach was never a winning strategy as long as Pakistan controlled the supply of our troops in landlocked Afghanistan and regulated the operational tempo through its proxy army, the Taliban, who has maintained an extensive recruiting, training and financial support infrastructure inside Pakistan and immune to attack.

An American withdrawal will only be a humiliating defeat if the United States is forced into strategic retreat from South Asia because we do not have a plan in place to address the changing regional conditions in a post-U.S. Afghanistan.

I have written and spoken extensively about China orchestrating a strategic shift in South Asia working closely with Pakistan, Russia and Iran.

That geopolitical plan cannot succeed without the removal of the U.S. forces and influence from Afghanistan. China’s plan is for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to become the dominant economic driver in South Asia through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). The Shanghai Cooperation Organization will be the controlling regional alliance led by China.

Although not stated, Chinese militarization of the region will follow to ensure “security.” In many cases, expect that militarization to occur initially disguised as civilian construction projects.

Nowhere has Chinese ambitions been more clearly and publicly articulated than in a June 2018 China Daily article by former Pakistani diplomat, Zamir Ahmed Awan, who works for the Beijing-controlled Center for China and Globalization:

New [Chinese] initiatives for peace in Afghanistan are welcome, and may change the scenario in the whole region.

I believe American think tanks and leadership, especially military leadership, [have] already realized that this war cannot be won. The only option is withdrawal, the sooner the better.

Pakistan can play a vital role in a sustainable solution to the Afghan conflict [controlling Afghanistan as a client state]. Complete withdrawal and an Afghan-led [Taliban-led] solution is the only permanent way out. Pakistan can facilitate an honorable and safe passage for U.S. withdrawal.

Peace in Afghanistan will allow economic activity between Central Asia, Russia, China and the Arabian Sea…It can change the fate of the whole region. Chinese projects like the Belt and Road Initiative and the objectives of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization [SCO] … At the recent SCO summit, the Afghanistan president was invited as a guest and observer. Hopefully, the country will soon join SCO. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor may also be extended to benefit Afghanistan in the near future if there is peace.

Since that article was published, China has offered to extend CPEC to Afghanistan; China will build a military facility in and deploy Chinese troops to Afghanistan; Afghan military personnel will be trained in China; and members of the Afghan Parliament have recommended that the Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) between the U.S. and Afghanistan be cancelled, presumably to be replaced by China.

The only bargaining chip the United States has in peace negotiations is simply our presence in Afghanistan. According to the Voice of America, talks with the Taliban are stuck over the issue of the maintenance of U.S. military bases in the country. The United States wants to preserve two military facilities, Bagram Air Base and the Shorabak base in Helmand province.

The “presence” argument is tenuous at best. The United States should be identifying new forms of leverage, in the short term, to bolster our negotiating position, and, in the long term, as a basis of a new South Asian strategy.

The recently-announced effort to strengthen military ties with India is a step in that direction. The U.S. should also include measures to thwart Chinese plans for regional hegemony through BRI and its evitable military component. CPEC is the flagship of BRI, Balochistan is CPEC’s center of gravity and ethnic separatism is Pakistan’s major pain point. Both the Baloch and Pashtun resistance to Pakistani government oppression offer the opportunity to create greater leverage through the use of our own proxies.

The foundations of a new U.S. strategy in South Asia should be burden shifting and, when necessary, strategic disruption of our adversaries.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Article

Moving Healthcare and Hospitals/Clinics from the Veterans Administration to the Department of Defense Medical Services

Moving Healthcare and Hospitals/Clinics from the Veterans Administration to the Department of Defense Medical Services

 

 

by Paul Vallely, MG U.S. Army (ret.)

As one of the oldest and most expensive government agencies, the VA is constrained by unions, continuing lack of oversight and failed stewardship. It is time to change the course of the discussion, reportability, and accountability and move the Healthcare and hospital facilities/administration of the Veterans Administration to and under the Department of Defense. The current VA then should be one of sole administration of Veterans issues and benefits administration.

The justifications are endless to reposition the VA under the Department of Defense, those most notable and listed below.

  • The VA services process system was created during the FDR years and since has had an almost manual custom coded software upgrades where no cutting edge technology exists. The VA process and procedure platform is perhaps one level above a paper and pencil system. The hardware is up to date but the software systems are archaic. Making full use of more advanced computer structure would be a giant leap forward.
  • At the VA, there is no integrated database integrated system connecting the VA’s to each other, or to the Social Security Administration, or the Pentagon or to locations where vital service records are stored. At issue, when a vet seeks medical service from a different VA facility, he/she must have their own complete records with them, when burial services are requested, the VA does not recognize death notices/certificates from the SSA or the Pentagon. Under the Department of Defense, connectivity and approvals and sped-up considerably.
  • Vets today are allowed a 30-minute appointment with the doctor, 20 minutes of that the doctor is working the input process into the computer, paperwork too cumbersome. Having a feature like Dragon, voice to text is required, an inexpensive and forward-leaning solution managed by dedicated active military software personnel.
  • The VA personnel has no empathy, compassion or recognition of the veterans, there is no respect, no honor, no appreciation, hence no customer service. Brothers keeping watch over brothers will immediately cure this condition.
  • 30% of medical cases are for hearing loss, the veteran must prove military service where hearing loss was probable, 50 mm howitzers, cannons, artillery etc. Research and development under which the medical community as DoD contractors can address this condition on veteran case files while being assertive in curing and addressing hearing loss prognosis that would relieve medical case backlogs.
  • At the VA, there is no peer support staff, meaning VA ambassadors that promote and market the services offered by the VA, items like housing, education, loans, job searches benefits go unknown to those former active duty uniformed personnel. Incorporation of other current Department of Defense benefits for active personnel is prudent and pro-active.

Doctors at the Veterans Administration have no structure or set schedule or term. VA doctors see about 2-3 patients a day, in the civilian world, doctors see 6-10. If a doctor does not show up for a workday and veterans have scheduled appointments, there is no call made to the veteran and to reschedule appointments go out another 3-4 months. Using automated scheduling and an active outward call program is the solution and the DOD currently applies these technologies.

 

  • Veterans are forced to be self-advocates such that they have to navigate a labyrinth and bureaucracy that is not understood and leads to erroneous ratings and alters benefits. Words have meanings, where clarity and protocols within the Department of Defense offers an immediate change to the culture and attitude.
  • The VA is union heavy, where up to 5 unions exist in some locations, where the worst is SEIU, the most corrupt and felonious of all labor organizations, hence no one can be fired for dereliction of duty, altering paperwork, malfeasance, drug abuse, etc. Under the UCMJ, this behavior would be eliminated immediately.
  • Phone numbers for assistance to VA locations are voice mail and push #’s hell only to receive countless recordings, having the Department of Defense apply the existing telecom structure would eliminate this condition.
  • Veterans cannot seek simple medical procedures from civilian locations like a’ doc in the box’, dentist or even a closer military base for items like stitches, x-rays and even prescriptions like an antibiotic. The vets should have a choice card, demonstrating military service that is accepted at any local medical facility and could even have a modest co-pay. Under the Department of Defense, oversight of this process would be expedient.
  • The VA has no process to educate or seminars to aid in advancement for jobs for existing employees or for returning vets to gain an education and work at the VA in R&D, IT, the medical field, vets should work for vets due to the fraternity/sorority and military ethos. This issue is readily adaptable within existing programs at the DOD.
  • All VA locations should have random polygraphs or voice testing to determine honesty, work ethic (not selling narcotics or theft). These systems are currently in use at thousands of Defense and military posts domestically and globally.
  • Privatize a select group of existing VA hospitals by transferring them to the local communities and counties.

 

Supporting Articles:

Article

Article

Article

Article

Article

Article

Article

Article

Article

 

Freedom of Navigation Doctrine Challenged by James A. Lyons, Adm. USN (ret.)

 

Freedom of Navigation Doctrine Challenged

By: James A. Lyons, Admiral, United States Navy (ret.)

With all the media focus on President Trump’s recent meeting with Russia’s Vladimir Putin, a major event took place last week in the strategic Bab al-Mandab Strait, which received little notice.  The Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen have acknowledged that they fired a missile supplied by Iran from the vicinity of the port city of Hodeida that hit a Saudi Aramco tanker.  In response, even though there was little damage, Saudi Arabia has suspended all its shipping from transiting the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

Clearly, the Houthi rebels have seriously challenged the internationally-recognized “Freedom of Navigation” doctrine.  The concept is that the internationally-recognized open waters of the world, including all strategic straits, should remain open and free for all commercial shipping.  By extension, this includes the peaceful transit of naval forces as well.

The Bab al-Mandab Strait, which connects the Indian Ocean/Gulf of Aden with the Red Sea, is one of the world’s key strategic straits.  Others include the Strait of Hormuz, which controls the flow of all oil and gas shipborne traffic in and out of the Persian Gulf.  Next are the Suez Canal and the Strait of Gibraltar, which connect the flow of all shipping in and out of the Mediterranean Sea.  The Strait of Malacca connects the Indian Ocean with the South China Sea.

“Freedom of Navigation” is under attack in the South China Sea, however, because China claims that almost all of the South China Sea is its territorial waters despite a ruling by an international tribunal in The Hague that China’s claim is illegal.  Of course there is also the Panama Canal, which we used to control until President Carter gave it away to Panama.  Today, it is actually under the control of China.  These key strategic choke points must remain open and free to the world’s commercial shipping traffic.

With the current war of words between the Iranian theocracy and the Trump administration, plus Iran’s recent threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, much larger issues are at stake in enforcing the “freedom of navigation” doctrine.  Iran’s role in supporting the Houthi rebels is very transparent.  It is all part of a plan to expand the Iranian Shi’ite crescent to where it becomes the dominant force in the Middle East.

Iran’s clear strategy is to physically surround the Arabian Peninsula with proxy forces supported with its own forces and materiel.  This classic Iranian ploy extends its geo-strategic reach and positions it to attack its arch-enemy, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, indirectly, with the ultimate objective of seizing control of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.  Further, by backing the Houthi rebels in Yemen, it gives Iran the means to gain control of the strategic Bab al-Mandab Strait and threaten not just Saudi shipping but all international shipping.  It cannot be overlooked that more than one-third of the world’s oil in transit passes through this Strait on a daily basis.  Success would give Iran direct control of two of the world’s strategic straits and de facto control of a third, the Suez Canal.  This cannot be allowed to happen.

We cannot forget President Trump’s historic visit to Riyadh in May 2017, nor the links he forged with Sunni partners during that visit.  As a result, we have a Saudi Arabia-led coalition consisting of Egypt, Bahrain, Kuwait, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), with US assistance, confronting the Houthi rebels and Iran.  With this impressive alliance, the question becomes, why is it taking so long for the alliance to take back control of the port city of Hodeida?  Such action would isolate the Houthi rebels in the south, and keep them from their bases in the Yemeni highlands.  It would also facilitate the recapture of the capital Sanaa and its airport.  Further, it would be a tremendous psychological blow to the rebels and Iran, and a major step in cutting off a key access point for Iranian support to the rebels.

Preventing Iran’s hegemonic objectives throughout the Middle East and beyond, which include encircling the entire Arabian Peninsula with its oil and gas resources, as well as the ultimate seizure of Islam’s two most holy cities, Mecca and Medina, must be a top Trump administration objective.  It appears that the administration has initiated a staged take-down of the Iranian regime.  Our withdrawal from the nuclear weapons agreement with Iran, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was the first step.  Re-imposing economic sanctions is having a drastic effect on the Iranian regime’s ability to operate.  The Iranian currency, the rial, is in total free fall—even a full week before even more stringent sanctions are scheduled to take hold.  Revamping our Voice of America Farsi language broadcast would be another positive signal to the Iranian freedom fighters.   We must continue other covert support to the Iranian people who are taking to the streets day after day.  And to further complicate matters for the criminal Iranian theocracy we should support an independent Kurdistan.

If, as increasingly seems apparent, the Trump administration has decided on a gradual ratcheting up of measures intended to bring maximum pressure to bear on the Tehran regime, then such steps are necessary parts of the mix.  But even above and beyond these coercive means aimed at collapsing the mullahs’ rule, with the most powerful blue water navy in the world, the U.S. has a unique responsibility to ensure freedom of the seas when threatened by Iran or any other hostile actor.  The de facto threat to shipping through the Bab al-Mandab must not be allowed to stand.

Article

 

James A. Lyons, a retired U.S. Navy admiral, was commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.

 


 

Iran deploys 50 small boats to Strait of Hormuz for large-scale ‘swarming’ exercise

Article

a

THE LOST OPPORTUNITY FOR REGIME CHANGE IN IRAN: AN ADMIRAL’S LAMENT

 

 

 

THE LOST OPPORTUNITY FOR REGIME CHANGE IN IRAN: AN ADMIRAL’S LAMENT

By: John Pruder

November 3, 2017

Adm. (Ret.) James “Ace” Lyons recalls the military plan that could have changed the course of history — and who sabotaged it.

 

The debate on the future of the Iran nuclear deal has had two overriding views, that of President Trump who is inclined to scrap it, and that of his close advisors who caution against it.  Admiral James “Ace” Lyons, Jr. has an altogether different approach:  “a regime change in Iran.”

Admiral James “Ace” Lyons Jr. was the keynote speaker at a memorial service held at the Bergen County Court House in Hackensack, NJ, for the 241 U.S. Marine peacekeepers, killed in Beirut, Lebanon on October 23, 1983 by terrorists, on orders from the Ayatollahs regime in Tehran.  Beirut native Joseph Hakim, President of the International Christian Union, is the founder of the annual memorial service.

Adm. (Ret.) Lyons, the 90-year old naval hero, though frail in body, used his booming voice to enumerate the opportunities and failures of various U.S. administrations to depose the radical Islamist regime that was responsible for the death of numerous U.S. Marines and other U.S. servicemen in Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere throughout the world.  He also reminded the audience of 200, mostly U.S. Marine veterans, of his personal plans of action to eliminate the oppressive Iranian regime.

As an officer of the U.S. Navy for thirty-six years, most recently as Commander in Chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, the largest single military command in the world, his initiatives contributed directly to the economic stability and humanitarian understanding in the Pacific and Indian Ocean regions, and brought the U.S. Navy Fleet back to China.  He also served as Senior U.S. Military Representative to the United Nations.  As deputy Chief of Naval Operations from 1983-1985, he was principal advisor on all Joint Chiefs of Staff matters, and was the father of the Navy Red Cell, an anti-terrorism group comprised of Navy Seals. He established this in response to the Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut.

Admiral Lyons was also Commander of the U.S. Second Fleet and Commander of the NATO Striking Fleet, which were the principle fleets for implementing of the U.S. Maritime Strategy.  Admiral Lyons has represented U.S. interests with the military and civilian leadership worldwide – including China, Japan and other Pacific Rim countries, the European continent and Russia.  As Fleet Commander, he managed a budget of over $5 billion and controlled a force of 250,000 personnel.  Key assignments preceding Flag rank included Chief of Staff, Commander Carrier Group Four, Commanding Officer, USS Richmond K, Turner (CG-20), and Commanding Officer, USS Charles S. Sperry (DD697).

Admiral Lyons has been recognized for his distinguished service by the United States, and several foreign governments.  He is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, and has received post graduate degrees from the U.S. Naval War College, and U.S. National Defense University.  Currently Admiral Lyons is President/CEO of LION Associates LLC, a premier global consultancy providing technical expertise in the areas of international marketing and trade, enterprise risk including anti-terrorism, site and port security, foreign policy and security affairs along with defense and commercial procurement.

This reporter used the occasion to interview Admiral Lyons, nicknamed “Ace”.

Joseph Puder (JP): You had a plan of action in 1979 that would have done away with the Ayatollahs regime in Tehran. Please describe how it was derailed and by whom?

Admiral James Lyons, Jr. (JLJ): When the Ayatollah goons took over our Tehran embassy in November, 1979, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) called me up (I was the Director of political Military Affairs for the JCS at the time) and asked me what options do we have.  I said our only good option was to take Kharg Island, Iran’s main exporting oil depot up in the Persian Gulf.  I was probably the only senior officer that had been there and I knew what we could do.  My plan involved taking control of the main control facilities building with a detachment of U.S. Navy Seals.  I was going to give the Iranians 24 hours to get out of our embassy and release our diplomats or they were going to have the biggest ashtray in the Middle East.  President Carter rejected the plan when I was told National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski brought it up to him.  I attributed this to the influence of the powerful Washington Iran lobby group.

One of the members of the Iran lobby group, Gary Sick, was the Iranian desk officer at the National Security Council (NSC).  According to reports, Sick leaked a story to the Boston Globe that there would be no military response to the atrocious action taken against our U.S. Embassy in Tehran, which is sovereign U.S. territory.  Unbelievable!

JP: What was the role of Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger in thwarting your plan of retaliation against the Iranian directed Shiite Amal terrorist bombing of the U.S. Marine Barracks in Beirut?

JLJ: We had proof positive the orders for the bombing came from Tehran based on a National Security Agency intercept of the Iranian Ambassador in Damascus reporting back to the Foreign Ministry in Tehran.  The orders he gave to the terrorists’ leadership (which he previously received from Tehran) were to concentrate the attack on the Multi-National Force, and specifically to take “spectacular action” against the U.S. Marines.  That intercept was dated September 27, 1983, almost 4 weeks before the bombing.  At the time, I was the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, and did not see that message until two days after the bombing, on October 25, 1983.  I had the GAO do an investigation on where was that message.  I never got a satisfactory answer.  I personally talked to Colonel Gerrity, the Commanding Officer of the U.S. Marines Peacekeeping Force, and he said he never saw it either, nor did the Carrier Task Group Commander of the U.S. Sixth Fleet.

Once the terrorists were located at the Sheik Abdullah Barracks above Baalbek, we made up a four plane A-6 attack aircraft strike plan (to be modified by the Carrier Task Group Commander as necessary) that was going to make the Lebanese Sheik Abdullah Barracks look like a plowed cornfield in Kansas.  I personally briefed the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Vessey, and then the entire Joint Chiefs of Staff, who all approved.  I then briefed Secretary Weinberger in his office.  The day of the NSC meeting with President Reagan, John McMann, Deputy CIA Director called me and said, “Casey is back from his trip and insists on taking the meeting.”  I asked if it was going to get screwed up.  He said there is nothing he could do about it.  I was not invited to the meeting.

At the meeting, Secretary Weinberger told the President that he thought there were Lebanese army troops in those barracks.  The President turned to Bill Casey and asked, “What about it?” Casey, just back from a trip, couldn’t answer. President Reagan told both of them to sort it out.  Earlier, I had called the Sixth Fleet Commander, and had him load the planes because it was going to be a first light strike.

At the next meeting with the President, it was ascertained that there were no Lebanese Army troops in the barracks.  Bud McFarlane, National Security Advisor, told me that Weinberger said that if we go ahead with the strike, we are going to lose all our Arab friends.  He threw enough “dust” in the air to confuse the President so that we couldn’t get an “execute order.”  In short, he sabotaged the strike.  We could have changed the course of history.  We are now living with that failed decision.

JP: What is your opinion of the Iran Nuclear Deal, and how should the Trump administration deal with it?

JLJ: The first thing you have to know is that it is an “unsigned” agreement.  It should be immediately cancelled.  The agreement, in my view, borders on treason.  Further, the total Iranian infrastructure must be dismantled or destroyed. There can be no negotiating with the apocalyptic mindset of the Khamenei regime.  There will be no sense of stability in the Middle East until there is a regime change in Iran.

Article

 

a

 

Our Counter-Intelligence System Is Broken by James A. Lyons, Jr. Admiral USN (ret.)

 


There is no national level CI effort left. Immediate corrective action must be taken. This cannot be left to the agencies with their known political bias and questionable agents seeded during John Brennan’s term as CIA Director

Our Counter-Intelligence System Is Broken

by James A. Lyons, Jr. Admiral USN (ret.)

There is no question that the United States is the number one target of every potential enemy hostile intelligence service in the world.  Yet, as recently exposed, there is no national-level effort to counter this threat.  Our free and open society is a spy’s paradise, and actually facilitates our enemies’ penetration.  Michael Waller of the Center For Security Policy stated this about our lead counter-intelligence organization: “with few exceptions, the FBI has very little to show that it has the strategy and leadership to cut off much more than low-hanging fruit.”  A perfect example of this is Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s recent indictment of 12 Russian intelligence agents who are safely tucked away in Russia and will never be brought to trial.

Handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation

The FBI is the United States’ lead counterintelligence (CI) organization.  The CIA also has a key role but is not focused on domestic CI issues, but rather on our hostile enemies.  The National Security Agency (NSA) also has an important role to play, focusing on our potential enemies.  However, it was recently learned that while NSA is not supposed to be spying on Americans, they recently deleted two-thirds of a “trillion” intercepts on American citizens using the lame excuse of “technical irregularities.”  It is not a stretch to imagine that among those trillion intercepts are Hillary Clinton’s emails from her unsecured server, which not only contained Top Secret but “special access” material that should have set off alarm bells at Fort Meade.  However, due to political bias, it was ignored.  The same situation most likely occurred with the discovery of several hundred thousand of Hillary’s emails found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. Weiner was the husband of Clinton’s top aide, Huma Abedin.

Due to the tenacity of House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Devin Nunes, astounding revelations have been uncovered and verified in the report by Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz on the handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation.  The text messages between the FBI’s leading CI agent Peter Strzok and his paramour, Lisa Page, showing that he was willing to use his official CI position to stop candidate Trump from becoming President, is more than a dereliction of duty, it borders on criminal activity.

China had gained access to Hillary Clinton’s unsecured server

According to recent testimony by Lisa Page before the House Judiciary Committee, it has been reported that she revealed that a foreign entity, China, had gained access to Hillary Clinton’s unsecured server. That information was reportedly presented to the FBI’s leading CI agent, Peter Strzok, but he chose to ignore it!  Unbelievable if proven to be accurate!

The case of the Awan brothers alleged spy ring on Capitol Hill and their IT work for the 44 Democratic Congressional Representatives is another prime example of a failed CI effort.  According to many articles by Luke Rosiak of the Daily Caller News Foundation (DCNF), the House Office of the Inspector General (IG) claimed in 2016 that the Awan family logged into members’ servers that they had no business accessing, in some cases even after they had been fired.  The IG report, from September 2016, indicates that they logged into servers of offices they did not work for thousands of times, even after the House was warned that the server was being used for nefarious purposes.

Awan’s Pakistani connections

With the Awan’s Pakistani connections, it is not a stretch to connect the information flow to the Pakistani intelligence service and then on to China.  This activity should have been fully investigated by the FBI’s CI division.  Amazingly, the DOJ/FBI prosecutors could find no such evidence.  Clearly, our CI system is broken.

The inability of our national CI organization to handle these basic cases brings into sharp focus the success of sophisticated cyber-war penetration by both China and Russia.  While Russia is getting all the current CI attention, FBI Director Christopher Wray recently declared that Chinese espionage is the most significant spy threat facing the United States.  One former CIA analyst put it bluntly: Beijing agents in this country aim “to turn Americans against their own government interests and their society’s interests.”  Russia has the same objectives.

China has a state-sponsored program to obtain advanced technologies with both military and commercial applications

China has a state-sponsored program to obtain advanced technologies with both military and commercial applications.  China uses many points of entry into our open society to achieve their objectives.  Beijing is infiltrating our universities by funding language and cultural centers called “Confucius Institutes.”  They are being used as a cover for technology theft.  China is also using 350,000 Chinese students in the U.S. for intelligence activity.  Beijing pursues a program to buy small cutting edge technology companies that remain under the radar.  This hemorrhaging of our technology must be stopped.

In an article by Bill Gertz, 12 April, 2018, he reports that Michelle Van Cleave, a former national CI executive, stated that after the creation of the office of Director of National Intelligence in 2004, a national counterspy program against foreign spies was restricted under the George W. Bush administration.  Unfortunately, it continued under President Obama.  Van Cleave stated that a directive issued by then-DNI James Clapper in 2013, and still in force, reduced the national CI program authority by directing all counterspy programs to be run by individual departments and agencies.  The net result was the end of “any dedicated strategic CI program while elite pockets of proactive capabilities died of neglect.”

In short, there is no national level CI effort left.  Immediate corrective action must be taken.  This cannot be left to the agencies with their known political bias and questionable agents seeded during John Brennan’s term as CIA Director.  Therefore, President Trump should appoint a 9/11-type commission to identify the corrective actions necessary to fix our broken CI organization on an expedited basis.

  • James A. Lyons, a retired U.S. Navy admiral, was commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet and senior U.S. military representative to the United Nations.

Article

CIA director John Brennan apologizes for search of Senate committee’s computers

Article

A Brief History of the CIA’s Unpunished Spying on the Senate

“Late last week, that internal “accountability board” announced the results of its review. If you’ve followed the impunity with which the CIA has broken U.S. laws throughout its history, you’ll be unsurprised to learn that no one is going to be “dealt with very harshly” after all. “A panel investigating the Central Intelligence Agency’s search of a computer network used by staff members of the Senate Intelligence Committee who were looking into the C.I.A.’s use of torture will recommend against punishing anyone involved in the episode,” The New York Times reports. “The panel will make that recommendation after the five C.I.A. officials who were singled out by the agency’s inspector general this year for improperly ordering and carrying out the computer searches staunchly defended their actions, saying that they were lawful and in some cases done at the behest of John O. Brennan.”

Done at the behest of Brennan, who once feigned ignorance about the actions in question, going so far as to declare them beyond the scope of reason! ”

Article

 

Latest scandal revelations raise questions on Obama agencies’ roles

“In its place, Brennan initiated a new construct that, in view of unfolding events, looks like it could have been exploited for potential political abuses: In lieu of heavy reliance on U.S. spies, Brennan’s CIA filled the gaps with foreign intelligence sources, which provided their own spies and the intelligence they gathered.”

Article

Yet another way Obama’s spies apparently exploited the Trump “dosier”

Under oath, Brennan has denied knowing the Clinton campaign commissioned the dossier. He also told the House intelligence panel the CIA didn’t rely on the dossier “in any way” for its reports on Russian interference. Committee staff are taking a second look at his May 2017 testimony.

Article


A very important article from Andy McCarthy:

FISA Applications Confirm: The FBI Relied on the Unverified Steele Dossier

“This sensational allegation came from Christopher Steele, the former British spy. The FISA court was not told that the Clinton campaign was behind Steele’s work. Nor did the FBI and Justice Department inform the court that Steele’s allegations had never been verified. To the contrary, each FISA application — the original one in October 2016, and the three renewals at 90-day intervals — is labeled “VERIFIED APPLICATION” (bold caps in original). And each one makes this breathtaking representation”

Article

 

The Light Bulbs that are on at NSA show the path to the DOJ and FBI and Control

 

Article

 

Breaking News!

Our Counter-Intelligence System IS broken because it was sabotaged. SUA has primary source intel showing how America and our Intelligence Apparatus have been hijacked, held hostage and extorted by the Deep State for years.

a