Category Archives: Insurgency

DAVOS, a Chinese Summit, Take Caution President Trump

Posted on by

But we cant trust the Chinese….now or ever. Is this World Economic Forum a setup for world leaders? Just could be. So far, full reliance and trust with China regarding control of North Korea has been a fool’s errand.

A ‘fractured’ world, enhancing globalization and then the United States…where does she fit in? Hummm

Image result for one china policy photo

There is this stupid thing called the One China Policy. President Xi Jinping has exploited this agreement from 1972 and he is taking control of Asia and moving east to the cultural and economic and military expense of other nations. The One China Policy devours Taiwan completely. But there is more as defined in the China Constitution.

The latest trade bout is over President Trump’s moves against hardware—solar panels for now, with steel, aluminum and billions of dollars in machinery behind that in the “imbalance” that the U.S. administration resolves to rectify.  These accounts are subject to various distortions—the iphone being the classic case of misplaced export-import value—but arithmetic is what matters in Washington today. (Is the weakening dollar buying any quiet?)

In technology there is a welter of issues ranging from perceived security threats to the American state (Huawei blocked again) to perceived threats to the Chinese state (Internet social media).   Mixed into that are matters of piracy and intellectual property and barriers to trade (for example, the Great Firewall’s boost to China’s internal Web economy).  Perversely, a cyber age that ought to bring the world closer is aggravating tensions between the two greatest economies.

This second contentious area connects to worsening fears among Western intellectuals about freedom of dissent in China as repression under Xi Jinping is stepped up. Even more broadly, the U.S. establishment has grown wearily cynical about the fundamental hope underlying China’s accession to the WTO in 2000:  That, in granting Beijing a pass on massive disruption of American industry through lower-cost production, the West was winning a liberalization of China that would pay dividends for generations.  Only the die-hard Sinophiles believe that now. One upshot: A heightened guardedness about strategic industries on the American side, too.

Finally, there’s the military front.  Xi has made clear his intent to finish modernizing the Chinese force to project power for, he says, his country’s legitimate (and peaceful) ends.  Those clearly entail more presence, or dominance, of naval areas, including the South China Sea, as well as the trade routes extended vastly through the Belt and Road Initiative.  That inevitably leads to encirclement alarms in smaller rival nations and, oh yes, in the US Navy as well.  This is likely to result in a series of skirmishes and other rubs that the world can survive.  More here from Forbes.

Davos’ theme in sync with China’s policies: expert

China’s shared future ideal will benefit ‘fractured world’

This year’s theme of the World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos, Switzerland – Creating a Shared Future in a Fractured World – fits perfectly with China’s economic foreign policies and the Belt and Road initiative, say Chinese economists and experts.

Some 70 heads of state and government and 38 leaders of international organizations are heading for Davos and the annual WEF which runs from Tuesday to Friday.

This year China’s participation at the forum will focus on more specific areas and measures to boost the world economy and promote rulemaking to reform globalization, experts said.

China will be represented by Liu He, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and director of the General Office of the Central Leading Group for Financial and Economic Affairs, the Xinhua News Agency reported.

National leaders including French President Emmanuel Macron, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi will also attend the WEF.

Chinese President Xi Jinping told last year’s WEF that China was determined to safeguard free trade and globalization.

His ideas were well received and have encouraged leaders of other countries to use the WEF to expand their influence, Bai Ming, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation, told the Global Times on Monday.

“This year, Liu, as the senior official in charge of financial and economic areas, will bring more specific and targeted ideas to the forum,” said Bai.

With this year’s theme focused on a “Fractured World,” Klaus Schwab, founder and chief executive of the WEF, told the Xinhua News Agency that nations and economies are increasingly adopting competitive positions due to divergent interests, and fractures are also emerging within countries, as many societies continue to face instability.

“Regional integration, which has been encouraged globally in the past, has also caused fractures for globalization,” said Wang Yiwei, the Jean Monnet chair professor at Renmin University of China, while commenting on the competition between countries and coalitions from different regions.

Wang believes China’s Belt and Road initiative will turn competition into cooperation by establishing inter-connection between countries of different regions by boosting infrastructure cooperation, free trade and investment.

“China’s ambition to build ‘a community of a shared future for mankind’ has perfectly matched the theme of the WEF this year,” he said.

China can also push rulemaking in emerging fields like artificial intelligence and e-commerce, which could activate the next round of economic growth, with China as a leading country in these areas, Wang added.

Jack Ma and Liu Qiangdong, founders of China’s e-commerce giants Alibaba and JD.com, will also attend the forum.

China’s representative Liu has been an advocate of open and common interests with other countries.

Divided and uncertain West

However, the US will sell “America First” at the WEF, and Trump’s tax reforms are likely to directly impact the EU by attracting high-tech enterprises from Europe. This scenario could lead other major economies to back away from seeking common interests, and struggles of different interests could emerge at the WEF, Bai said.

“Western leaders are all impacted by their domestic politics, and in many cases, domestic pressure will impact their decision-making in the international arena. China is the most united and certain major economy, and it will continue to be the main engine of the global economic recovery,” Wang said.

“China is more reliable than others,” he added.

SECDEF Rumsfeld’s Thoughts on September 10, 2001

Posted on by

SecDef Said Biggest Threat on 9/10/2001: Pentagon Bureaucracy

Archive FOIA Lawsuit Wins Monthly Releases Thanks to Pro Bono Representation by Skadden Arps

Washington D.C., January 24, 2018 – On the day before September 11, 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld believed the gravest threat to American national security was Pentagon bureaucracy, according to “snowflakes” he wrote that were released by the Defense Department after a five-year Freedom of Information Act fight and lawsuit by the National Security Archive.

At 10:15 AM on September 10, Rumsfeld authored a snowflake – the term used to describe his usually one-page, often one-sentence, memos that he sent to his underlings to ask a question or issue an instruction – bemoaning the quantity of DOD agencies, surgeons general, inspectors general, judge advocates general, Congressional Relations functions, and Public Affairs functions.  He concluded the memo by asking, “Is this all really necessary?”  In a separate September 10 item, he pondered abolishing the Armed Forces Staff College.

The same day, Rumsfeld gave a speech warning, “This adversary is one of the world’s last bastions of central planning.  It governs by dictating five-year plans.  From a single capital, it attempts to impose its demands across time zones, continents, oceans, and beyond….You may think I’m describing one of the last decrepit dictators of the world [but] the adversary’s closer to home.  It’s the Pentagon Bureaucracy.”

The September 10 memo is one page out of an estimated 59,000 pages the Pentagon has begun to provide in segments to the Archive in response to its FOIA suit.

The next snowflake in the corpus is dated September 12, 2001.  In it, Rumsfeld instructs, “Someone ought to be thinking through what kind of an event we are going to have for the people who died here.”  In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Pentagon budget expanded from 325 billion in FY 2001 to 447 billion in FY 2006 and military personnel estimates rose from 76,888 to 111,286 during the same period, ending Rumsfeld’s war on bureaucracy.

Rumsfeld eschewed modern email communication and used paper and ink instead, because he believed it was much easier to keep paper on file and track the progress of his dictums and queries.   Though quick for Rumsfeld to dictate or type, these memos requesting actions, position papers, or research were a significant burden on Pentagon employees, growing, in Rumsfeld’s own words, “from mere flurries to a veritable blizzard.” According to Washington Post reporter Robin Wright, one of the first to disclose Rumsfeld’s use of snowflakes, it was not uncommon for him to send up to 60 snowflakes on a given day.

Rumsfeld began publishing a relatively small subset of these snowflakes to publicize his 2011 memoir Known and Unknown.  The DOD release of these documents to Rumsfeld caused a stir among researchers and historians whose FOIA requests for the same material, made years earlier, continued to languish in the DOD queue.  In June of 2011, the Archive filed a FOIA request for the entire body of snowflakes.  Six years later, not having received a single snowflake from that request, the Archive filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Defense.

Represented pro bono by the firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, the Archive filed its complaint on March 17, 2017.  Skadden attorneys Melissa Smith, Cliff Sloan, and Gregory Craig of Skadden Arps, had the pleasure of hearing the Department of Defense attorney Mark Harrington confess at an August 7, 2017, hearing, “As far as the delay in the initial response to the request, all I can do is fall on our sword; that was too long.”  Judge Tanya S. Chutkan agreed, calling the DOD six-year delay “unconscionably long.”

The Department of Defense is now releasing the snowflakes on a rolling monthly basis.  In addition to highlighting particular items, the Archive is posting them in their entirety online as they become available to us on a special section of our website named “Rumsfeld’s Snowflakes.”

The full corpus of snowflakes is a critical historical resource.  The snowflakes serve as a sort of ultimate Pentagon chronology, touching on such diverse DOD issues as staffing, Rumsfeld’s personal requests, advice from such notables as Frank Gaffney and Newt Gingrich, communications from Rumsfeld to President George W. Bush, relations with Russia, China, and other nations, and the DOD’s strategy and conduct in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

On this page, peruse a selection of snowflakes the Archive found notable, then explore the first full release, with more to come!  Finally, tweet other notable releases using the hashtag #rummysnowflakes.

 

snowflakes-13.jpg
snowflakes-51.jpg
snowflakes-54.jpg

 

Over 500 criminal ‘dreamers’ ordered deported are still in U.S.

Posted on by

WE: In the latest blow to the pure image portrayed by their supporters in Congress, newly released statistics show that over 500 illegals stripped of their “dreamer” status due to crime and gang charges remain on the streets.

A new analysis of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services statistics found that 2,127 individuals had their amnesty status terminated for criminal activity and/or gang activity as of November 22, 2017.

Of those booted from the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival amnesty program, 562 were deported.

But, said the analysis from the Center for Immigration Studies, a near equal amount — 535 — were released by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“While it is reassuring that USCIS is revoking DACA benefits for criminal gang members it identifies, it is concerning that almost as many criminal alien DACA beneficiaries have been released as have been removed to their home country,” said the report’s author and CIS Policy Studies Director Jessica M. Vaughan.

Her report reviewed USCIS data provided to Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley.

While a tiny portion of the overall DACA population of nearly 700,000, the report and other portraying the illegals as more prone to crime and low-pay employment challenge that painted by liberals that most are high-achievers.

The fate of DACA is at the center of the current budget crisis. Democrats want a deal to preserve their amnesty as part of a budget deal, while Republicans want them included in a larger immigration bill that would grant a path to citizenship in exchange for President Trump’s key demands, including funding to build a southern border wall.

Her numbers:

  • Removed from the United States: 562
  • In ICE Custody: 90
  • Released from ICE Custody: 535
  • No Record of Removal, Detention or Release by ICE: 940
  • Total: 2,127

Trump has put a focus on deporting gang members and Vaughan highlighted what USCIS had to say about those criminal organizations. She wrote:

USCIS also provided a list of more than 45 gang affiliations of the ex-DACA criminals. It includes some of the most violent and dangerous gangs in the United States, such as MS-13, 18th Street, the Latin Kings, and the Trinitarios. It includes some lesser-known gangs as well, with names like Last Generation Korean Killers and Maniac Latin Disciples.

USCIS has not released information on where these gang members were living, but the gang names sometimes identify their location: Oakland 30 Nortenos, Orange County, Angelino Heights Surenos, East San Diego, Inland Empire, Pacoima Van Nuys Boys, and West Merced Nortenos, all of which are presumably in California.

*** Dreamers versus DACA

Image result for daca photo

Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act or the Dream Act was originally introduced in 2001 by Dick Durbin and Orin Hatch. The proposed bill failed several times. Members of Congress have introduced several forms of this bill in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Members in the House passed one such bill on December 8, 2010 by a vote of 216–198;[13] Senators debated a version of the DREAM Act on September 21, 2010. A previous version of the bill, S. 2205, which required 60 votes to gain cloture, failed on a 52–44 vote in 2007, eight votes short of overcoming a filibuster by senators opposed to the bill.

In 2011, California passed their own version of the Dream Act. Continued edits and iterations of the Dream Act have been introduced in both houses of Congress, yet no version has advanced. So, Barack Obama used his executive authority to declare the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals, DACA.

Both issues must be debated in together and they have been for at least 17 years. What is rarely discussed is those under DACA protections do drop off monthly for various reasons. So we are still challenged with what the real numbers include.

Trump has urged Congress to pass legislation by March 2018 that would give legal status to unauthorized immigrants enrolled in DACA, and some members of Congress have said they plan to propose legislation along those lines. (DACA enrollees whose benefits expire after March 5, 2018, will be the first to be dropped from the program.)

Although roughly 800,000 unauthorized immigrants have ever received benefits through DACA, about 110,000 of this group are no longer enrolled in the program. About 70,000 former DACA participants did not renew their benefits or had their renewal applications denied. Another 40,000 have adjusted their legal status and obtained green cards, which grant lawful permanent residence. (Some unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. can obtain legal status by marrying an American citizen or lawful permanent resident, obtaining asylum, or receiving certain types of visas such as those given to victims of a crime, among other ways.)

To qualify for DACA, enrollees must meet certain conditions, such as being enrolled in high school or having a high school diploma or GED equivalent, and not being convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor, or three or more other misdemeanors. For more key facts and details, go here.

There are some real unanswered questions which include monthly costs to the taxpayer, enforcement of those conditions, reporting of crimes versus those protected under DACA and most of all, how long does ‘deferred’ last?

Image result for daca photo

The Obama White House stated:

Today, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will begin accepting requests for consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals. Deferred action is a discretionary determination to defer removal action of an individual as an act of prosecutorial discretion. Under this process, USCIS will consider requests on a case-by-case basis. While this process does not provide lawful status or a pathway to permanent residence or citizenship, individuals whose cases are deferred will not be removed from the United States for a two year period, subject to renewal, and may also receive employment authorization. 

There are key words in that text. They include: accept, requests, consideration, discretionary, defer, case by case, subject to renewal. None of the actions under DACA is rubber-stamped with approval something all the Democrats and many Republicans have overlooked as well as the media.

12 Strong the Movie

Posted on by

Image result for task force dagger photo

DoD: Those of us who are old enough to remember the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, have vivid memories of that day. But the military mission launched in retaliation isn’t one most of us heard anything about until years later. Now, it’s being depicted on the big screen.

“12 Strong” comes out this weekend and is based on what happened when a 12-man U.S. Special Forces team was inserted into Afghanistan just weeks after the attacks on 9/11. The team, which was one of the first boots on the ground, worked with feuding local warlords and resistance fighters to take down the Taliban regime that was harboring al-Qaida.

The operation, dubbed Task Force Dagger, is still considered one of the most successful unconventional warfare mission in U.S. history.

The soldiers depicted in the movie were Green Berets assigned to the 5th Special Forces Group. They became famous not just because of their success against the Taliban but also because many of them did so on horseback – the first to ride to war that way since World War II – and they did it with only small weapons, while the Taliban enemy had tanks armed with artillery, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades.

The Americans also had key air power from the Air Force backing them up … but still.

Forever after that, the Green Berets became known as the “horse soldiers.”

How the Movie Matches Up

“12 Strong” is based on the 2009 book “Horse Soldiers” by Doug Stanton. But how does it fare in telling the real-life story?

“We were impressed with what they did,” said Army Lt. Col. Tim Hyde, the deputy director of the Los Angeles Office of the Chief of Public Affairs, which provided advice on the project.  “What they did do very well is they got across the experiences that these soldiers went through.”

He said although producers did still take some “creative license” with it and added a few “obvious dramatizations,” they told an accurate story, in part, thanks to the Defense Department working with the crew on the production.

The DoD’s Contribution

The movie was shot from November 2016 to February 2017 in the Albuquerque, New Mexico, area, with a few weeks spent shooting at White Sands Missile Range, which provided a lot of the enemy vehicles you see in the movie.

“The U.S. Army aircraft that you see in that film are actual 160th [Special Operations Aviation Regiment] aircraft that they brought in from Joint Base Lewis-McChord [in Washington state],” Hyde said.

Active-duty personnel were used in the movie – but you don’t actually see them. They were the people flying those aircraft.

None of the men who were depicted in the film played a role, but two of them – including real-life Capt. Mark Nutsch (portrayed by actor Chris Hemsworth) and Chief Warrant Officer Bob Pennington (portrayed by Michael Shannon) – watched the filming for a few days to get a sense of how producers were portraying their story.

“This is a fictional portrayal – don’t lose sight of that,” Nutsch told the Tampa Bay Times in a recent interview.

A few more tidbits about their incredible real-life mission:

  • Each Green Beret carried about 100 pounds of equipment on his back, including GPS, food and U.S. currency.
  • The Afghan horses were feisty stallions who would fight each other, even when the soldiers were riding.
  • They hoofed it over some scary terrain, at times riding on foot-wide trails by cliffs at night anywhere from 6 to 18 miles a day.
  • The soldiers were operating so deep in Afghanistan that additional supplies often had to be air-dropped to them.
  • In two months, three 12-man teams like the troops in the movie, as well as more than a dozen support personnel and Afghan militia, accomplished more than any other force in Afghanistan at the time. The enemy was driven out of its safe havens in what al-Qaida still considers its largest, most destructive defeat.

Soldiers Magazine put together a great story about these horse soldiers. If you want to know more about their courageous journey, I suggest you read it!

***

Throughout the campaign, Army Special Forces, assisted by AFSOC Combat Controllers (CCTs) called in bombing runs from B-52, B-1 bombers as well as Navy F14 and F18 attack aircraft. AFSOC AC-130 Gunships, operating exclusively at night and coordinated by CCTs, provided close air support. On several occasions, MC-130E/H aircraft dropped 15,000lb BLU-28 ‘Daisy Cutter’ bombs on Taliban troop positions with devastating effect.

The combination of SOF-coordinated air power and indigenous anti-Taliban forces characterized the opening rounds of Operation Enduring Freedom.

ODA 595 & ODA 534 – Mazar-e-Sharif and Dari-a-Souf Valley

The 2nd TF-Dagger team to insert was ODA 595, which was flown across the Hindu Kush mountains by SOAR MH-47s on the 20th of October. The team was inserted in the Dari-a-Souf Valley, south of Mazar-e-Sharif, linking up with the CIA and General Dostum, commander of the largest and most powerful Northern Alliance Faction.

ODA 595 on horseback ODA 595, CIA SAD operatives and attached AFSOC CCTs found themselves required to ride on horseback alongside General Dostum’s troops. In scenes reminiscent of Lawrence Of Arabia, US SOF and Northern Alliance swept across the Afghanistan countryside towards Taliban positions in classic cavalry charges.

Few of the US SOF were accomplished riders and none were comfortable with the traditional wooden saddles common in Afghanistan. Following an urgent request, leather saddles was air dropped to the grateful men on the ground.

ODA 595 split into two units, Alpha and Bravo. Alpha accompanied Dostrum as his force pushed towards the city of Mazar-e-Sharif, calling in strikes from US warplanes against a series of Taliban positions, whilst Bravo called in strikes against Taliban positions across the Dari-a-Souf Valley.

A further Special Forces team, ODA 534, inserted by SOAR helos on the night of November 2nd were tasked with supported General Mohammad Atta, a Northern Alliance militia leader. ODA 534, along with CIA officers, eventually linked up with ODA 595 and Gen Dostrum outside Mazar-e-Sharif.

As the 2 SF ODAs and attached AFSOC personnel called down air strikes, Northern Alliance foot soldiers, cavalry and armored units took the city. More here.

DoJ Official Explains the Terror and Immigration Report

Posted on by

Politico published an item regarding the White House press briefing on 1/17/2018 where a Justice Department official, Ed O’Callaghan explained several terror cases inside the United States had connective tissue to chain migration as well as illegal immigration in an effort to give rise to the whole debate on Capital Hill as it relates to DACA, funding the border wall and shutting down the Federal government if no deal is reached. The only paragraph that did not have some bias slant to it is:

The report’s release, part of an executive order signed by President Donald Trump last year, comes as the White House is pushing for changes in the U.S. immigration system that would end the diversity visa lottery program — through which a terrorist who killed eight people with a rented truck entered the U.S. — and chain migration, the practice of legal immigrants sponsoring family members’ entry into the country.

So, what is in this report?

 

Executive Order 13780 Section 11 Report – Final by zerohedge on Scribd

Most of the critical national security enhancements implemented and effectuated as a result of Executive Order 13780 are classified in nature, and will remain so to prevent malicious actors from  
exploiting our immigration system.
However, to “be more transparent with the American  people and to implement more effectively policies and practices that serve the national interest,” Section 11 of Executive Order 13780 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Attorney General, to collect and make publicly available the following information:
(i) Information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been charged with terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; convicted of terrorism-related offenses while in the United States; or removed from the United States based on terrorism-related activity, affiliation with or provision of material support to a terrorism-related organization, or any other national-security-related reasons;
(ii) Information regarding the number of foreign nationals in the United States who have been radicalized after entry into the United States and who have engaged in terrorism-related acts, or who have provided material support to terrorism-related organizations in countries that pose a threat to the United States;
(iii) Information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including so-called “honor killings,” in the United States by foreign nationals; and, (iv) Any other information relevant to public safety and security as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Attorney General, including information on the immigration status of foreign nationals charged with major offenses.
According to a list maintained by DOJ’s National Security Division, at least 549 individuals were convicted of international terrorism-related charges in U.S. federal courts  between September 11, 2001, and December 31, 2016. An analysis conducted by DHS determined that approximately 73 percent (402 of these 549 individuals) were foreign-born. Breaking down the 549 individuals by citizenship status at the time of their respective convictions reveals that:
1. 254 were not U.S. citizens;
2. 148 were foreign-born, naturalized and received U.S. citizenship; and,  
3. 147 were U.S. citizens by birth.
 8 specific cases were listed in the report with a summary of each case. The Boston bombers were not listed in this report. They went from a tourist visa, to asylum status, to green card and one got citizenship. We also have the San Bernardino killers that arrived on a marriage visa and a cultural visa. Both of those have stay limits. The argument here in both cases they are in the spirit of chain migration.
Diplomatic favors? How about that Christmas Day bomber? How was he granted a visa?

The Christmas Day bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, had initially had his visa denied in 2004, four years prior to his 2008 application. In 2004, he applied again, and the initial denial was overturned because a supervisory consular officer decided Abdulmuttalab’s father was too prominent in Nigerian politics and finance to upset the U.S. diplomatic applecart in that country and deny his son a visa. Ironically, this was the same father who four years later visited the U.S. embassy in Nigeria and sought to help the U.S. keep his son out of the U.S., only subsequently to have the U.S. decide he was not important enough to listen to.

The legal kicker in this visa story is that on Abdulmuttalab’s 2008 application, he lied and said he had never received a prior denial, enough to deny him a visa under law and keep him out of the country. As the matter was “considered resolved,” State Department did not look again at the 2004 denial when the young Al Qaeda operative sought another visa in 2008. Instead, he was granted the multi-year visa he used to attend an Islamic convention in Houston in 2008 and again for airline check-in on Christmas Eve.

This is incredibly embarrassing to the State Department. Despite State’s spin on this “new” fact, what this makes clear is that: (1) the intelligence community was not primarily to blame after all for failure to revoke the visa, as it should never have been issued in the first place; but (2) raises – once more – a larger issue of the State Department’s policies regarding visa issuance; and (3) whether State should continue to be responsible for the visa process. More here.

The Democrats are in a pre 9/11 mentality. After the 9/11 Commission Report, recommendations and solutions were drafted of which the congressional leaders all approved. In particular, go to page 24 of the summary as it relates to immigration.