H.R.5741 — Universal National Service Act (Introduced in House – IH)
HR 5741 IH
111th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 5741
To require all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
July 15, 2010

Read the bill in its entirety: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.5741:

A brief background: This bill has been introduced twice before. Rep. Charles Rangel (D) introduced it in 2003, expanding the draft to females, with the age parameters set at 18-26. With a Republican Congressional majority, it went nowhere; actually, not nowhere, but back in Rangel’s desk drawer. Rangel, with newly minted Senator Hillary Clinton singing its praises, and Democrats back in control, pulled it out in February 2006, as HR 4752, with a greatly expanded age range of 18-42, to encompass far more of the adult American population. But, the Democratic majority wasn’t quite major enough to pass it. It went back into Rangel’s top desk drawer.

Rangel evidently sees a new opportunity. He reintroduced it a few days ago, as the Universal National Service Act: HR 5741.

With Obama urging a “National Civilian Corps” and the Democrats firmly in control of both the Congress and Senate, and the leadership of Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who thinks nothing of hiding the contents of the power-grabbing bills she promotes from the public, “We’ll have to pass it before you find out what’s in it,” Rangel’s HR 5741, in this session, has the best chance ever of being passed and signed into law. It should have had a wooden stake driven through it and burned.

Behind the façade of “National Service,” which sounds okay enough and has a sly suggestive appeal of getting idle youth off the streets, and ‘push-up’ them into a discipline their parents were too lazy to instill in their progeny, and seems to ignore that the National Guard is already tasked with “the furtherance of the national defense and homeland security,” the Democrats are proposing a sweeping and devastating crushing of our individual liberties, of our fundamental unalienable rights as stated in the Constitution of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

The military does NOT want a draft. They are on record as opposing one. It’s doing just fine with an all-volunteer military. They like the self-selecting aspect of it; that those who don’t want to be in the military don’t apply, saving the military endless headaches from dealing with sullen and recalcitrant inductees. The military can achieve more with a smaller, but better trained and more motivated force comprised of men and women who have a natural inclination for military work. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

But this isn’t about making the military better, but WORSE. Rangel’s motivation was to make military service onerous and unwanted, to discourage American military activity.

   “Ironically, in previous discussion leading up the bill, Rangel’s initiative to restore the draft was described as “an anti-war tactic” … “Rangel opposes war with Iraq and seeks to make the point that many soldiers are volunteers from low-income and minority families. Political leaders, his reasoning goes, would think twice about sending into war the sons and daughters of a more complete cross-section of America.” http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=2535

It’s a toxic inspiration for a truly vile piece of legislation, based on what has been proven to be no more than a phony urban, class warfare legend. The majority of our current all-volunteer military is not derived from poor and minority volunteers, but from the “white,” middle and upper middle class. The bill proposes seizing control of the lives of all males and females 18-42 for one of three demands of government:

1) National Service: ‘uniformed services’ or ‘civilian service’
2) Universal male-female Draft in time of war
3) For other purposes

    “The bill applies to both US citizens and non-citizens, to men and women. There does not appear to be a provision which would exempt women who are pregnant and/or caring for infants/children in a young age… The bill also supports Big Brother. Those who are not sent overseas to the war theater would… be inducted into the civilian homeland defense corps and other civilian duties, including the Citizens Corps, the “Neighborhood Watch Teams” and the “Volunteer Police Service …” http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=2535

Evidently, these two categories are not quite enough, so the third provision, “for other purposes” is the lock on the shackles. This trifecta would establish a modern form of slavery, engineered by the Democratic Party, the same political party that was responsible for plunging the nation into civil war rather than give up slave labor, and jacks the executive branch power of Commander-in-Chief of the military, to Totalitarian in Chief of all the people. We can expect that Obama, being human, would be warm to this, in a self-promoting way, since he would be the first POTUS in American history to be able to exploit absolute power.

The consequences will be devastating. If anyone between the ages of 18-42, the most productive segment of our society can be yanked out of their professions, training or schooling to perform busywork for the government, then it’s the death of private enterprise in America. The societal hardships will be enormous. The government will be able to redirect work to favored partisan priorities and away from out of favor production and services. The burden on families would be worse than for singles as BOTH parents could be ordered away from their children, punishing marriage and child-raising with uncertainty, disruption and enormous emotional stress, businesses will be in a constant state of artificial disarray, dealing with unexpected employee absences, training staff only to suddenly lose them.

This “Universal National Service Act” isn’t about warfare needs, but about government totally controlling people; no one will be able to predict when they would be called up. And from what money tree is financing supposed to come for this? Taking people away from producing work to forcibly perform non-producing activities destroys personal and national wealth-creation.  People working long hours will suddenly have “volunteering” work or as it is becoming known as: “volun-TOLD,” to add to their work load.

Rangel’s perverse vision for this bill is that it is to undermine our fighting capabilities. With that as its fundamental premise, it will be easy to engineer infuriating and shocking outcomes for maximum public outrage – by cynically sending women to war, while men are sent to clean toilets at public schools.

The decision to assign a draftee to one of the three named services will be made by politically-appointed draft boards, and there the potential for great mischief will manifest itself. Political enemies get sent to military service, or harassed with random forms of “deployment,” political favorites to picking flowers in national parks, or to nice urban offices to drink coffee and roam the hallways or snoop on neighbors, reporting them for “un-patriotic” activities, a system developed by the Communists to control every single person in the society.

The undefined, “any other purpose” leaves citizens totally at the mercy of the whims of political hacks. Bribery will be rampant and blatant as people bargain the price out of hardship. Prison will be the punishment for “National-Service-Dodging.”

Where is the media? They are AWOL. Perhaps they are confident their political connections will allow them exemptions that lesser mortals will not get. Because of their failure to alert the public, most Americans are not aware that this bill even exists, much less that it’s been re-introduced in the House.

It’s hard to conceive of the duplicity of the many minds, all Democrats, which produced and support such a monstrosity, but the PEOPLE of the United States will be made chattel in their own country if this Universal National Slavery Act is allowed to pass.

Contact ALL your elected representatives to oppose this hideous bill, HR 5741, and to make sure it never is seen in any form, again, ever. Do not vote for ANY politician who does not in word and deed reject completely not just this piece of abusive legislation, but also this abusive legislative mindset.

Spread the word, show people the bill. Demand the Democratic Party explain this travesty, it is being sheltered and promoted by Democrats. Our elected officials should be publicizing this outrage to the American People to expose the despicable quality and devious goals of those in the Democratic Party who are misusing their majorities to establish not governance of the People, but lordship over us.

Start in November 2010. If a candidate has DEMOCRAT by his or her name, consider what the Democrats have in store for all of us if they retain any semblance of a majority and consider the corrosive enabling effects of any candidate (I) or (R) who colludes in any way with these exploitative and totalitarian aspirations.

By: Judge Gerald A. Williams

North Valley Justice of the Peace

Many people know that I am also in the United States Air Force Reserve and that I perform my Reserve duty at Luke Air Force Base. Some people view military duty as some type of paid vacation because I’m temporarily away from my regular civilian job. Others confuse it with the National Guard. However, few people outside of the military understand what military lawyers do.

The short answer is that military attorneys, called judge advocates or JAGs, do more than wills and courts-martial. Although there are attorney client and privacy issues, I can tell you generally some of the projects I recently had something to do with.

While there was recently a tragic incident involving a stolen vehicle, a security incident and a law enforcement officer involved shooting at Luke AFB, most of the day-to-day operations of lawyers do not involve things that necessarily make the evening news. For example, I recently authored a labor law brief concerning actions taken against civilian employees. The Air Force had won the arbitration; but the union was essentially appealing the decision.

People with a military ID card are also entitled to free legal advice on personal civil legal matters. I was able to help a dependent wife, whose husband is deployed to Afghanistan, file a lawsuit. She had purchased a significant consumer product from a California company and had received neither the product nor a requested refund.

If I say something about Luke AFB, it almost always triggers a question about the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The Air Force recently held a series of public scoping meetings in Maricopa County because Luke AFB is one of the locations being considered for F-35A training aircraft. Those meetings are required under federal environmental laws. Next, a draft environmental impact statement will be prepared and that will be followed by public hearings.

I genuinely enjoy my military service and have done things as varied as serving as a medical law consultant to a regional medical center to defending an officer accused of a friendly fire event over Northern Iraq. As long as I can be useful, I will continue to serve.

Judge Gerald Williams is the presiding justice of the peace for the Northwest Regional Court Center. His column appears monthly in The Foothills Focus.

Iran announces today that they are a nuclear nation.

Total FAIL for the Obama Administration.

Obama spoke on numerous times during the campaign about his goal to REDUCE nuclear weapons. Evidently, he meant only evicerating America’s defenses while Iran is on full speed to OFFENSIVE weapons manufacturing.

Iran has long publicized its intention to wipe Israel off the map. It is now a critical step closer. It has already been launching missles and rockets to gain experience in developing a reliable nuclear weapon delivery system. We only know what they’ve told us, they are certainly NOT telling us everything, but what we know is suffiicent:  they are poised to put it all together for the purpose of exporting mass destruction.

Iran is a well-educated, modern, and oil-prosperous society with a brutal and idealogically-driven regime that is staying in power solely by raw, lethal force against its own people. Today’s internet is full of videos of the Iranian people being beaten today for the crime of demanding freedom from tyranny.  We don’t need even today’s raw footage of the clubbings in Tehran to know the character of the brutal men in charge of the radical Revolutionary Iranian Regime; during the Iraq-Iran War, the mullahs gave children a piece of Koranic scripture, promised them a place in heaven and pushed them across fields ahead of the troops … to clear the landmines.   What worse can we expect if they treat their citizens that way, while they consider us, “The Great Satan?”

So, evidently it isn’t scattered global strikes today, but the achievement of a Revolutionary Iranian Regime military objective that guarantees total WAR, and soon.

Why war?   And why soon? The threat of nuclear destruction is so serious that Iran’s neighbors cannot hold or they will be effectively held hostage or forced to capitulate the moment Iran can deliver a bomb to Cairo, Baghdad, Tel Aviv, Amman, Ankara, Kabul, New Delhi, Rome. Any American troops in Iraq would be in harm’s way. America could easily be blackmailed by a threat of nuclear strike to pull out all troops, leaving newly Democratic Iraq at the mercy of their neighbor and arch enemy, Iran.

But not to worry, the Democratic Party has assured us we are ‘post-war’ and no longer require a military capable of defending America, nor do we  require a functioning missile shield. As Rep Kirkpatrick (D) said, representing the Democratic Majority Party Congress and the Democratic Party Controlled Administration’s policy:

“Our military will have to make due with less.”

As if the military’s purpose to provide national security was at the same strategic level of multimillionaire Nancy Pelosi’s U.S. Taxpayer funded jet, which she needs more than our troops need support, the U.S. government owning General Motors, which the White House needs more than reinforcing our troops, nationalizing student college loans which is more important than enhancing our intelligence capabilities – despite the debacle of the Christmas bombing attempt,  TARP bailouts, massage parlors, schools buying iPODs with stimulus funds, all of which trump national security issues as recipients of taxpayer-derived funds.

So, after tripling national debt, into beyond the next generation, then raising the debt ceiling so they can keep spending on everything BUT our military, the Democratic Party in the White House and the Congress insists that Americans will have to make due with LESS SECURITY.

“Belt-tightening,” Obama intones weekly, “Everyone has to sacrifice.”

They need the money for Democratic Party national priorities like buying up $50 million beaches in the Virgin Islands.

(more…)

Every politician from liberal democrat to conservative republican likes to wrap themselves in the flag and the constitution.  Do they really support it?

Article One, Section Eight of the constitution states: “Congress shall have power to … declare War”.  It does not state that the President shall have power to declare war.  Nor does it state that the Congress shall have the power to delegate its power to declare war to the President.

The Tenth Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  It does not state that the federal government has powers not expressly granted to it in the Constitution.  It does not state that the Congress or President can take powers not expressly granted to it if no one objects.

The Constitution plainly and clearly states what it means.  It was written at grammar school level English at the time it was written.

While all of us accord respect and gratitude to the military, especially veterans, for their service, anyone who has served recently, especially if they have fathers or grandfathers who have served, know that today’s military is not the same military it was 20 or 40 years ago.

Today’s military is a political force.  It is a globalist force.  It has been stalinized by the executive branch through purging experienced military leaders, replacing them with political lackeys at the Pentagon.

It’s primary purpose is no longer defense of the constitution or the constitution of this nation, in other words its people, but is used as an extension of foreign and domestic policy.  Do you believe that is constitutional in the spirit and intent of what the founding fathers would consider “constitutional”?

“…what all of us need to realize is, World War II was the last constitutionally fought war in which America has been engaged. The United Nations was created at the end of WWII, and ever since then, our military forces have increasingly become the “peacekeeping” arm of that evil institution.”

“Since WWII, American forces have fought major wars in South Korea, South Vietnam (including Laos and Cambodia), Kosovo, the Persian Gulf (Kuwait), Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Pakistan–all for the benefit of the United Nations.”

“Ever since the United Nations was created, its interests have dominated the usage of US forces. In fact, our military today is quickly morphing into the tip of the spear for a burgeoning, global New World Order. To those with eyes to see, the evidence is everywhere. It’s not even being hidden anymore. Have you seen that new US Navy television commercial? It boldly proclaims, “The US Navy: A GLOBAL FORCE For Good.”"

“This politically correct, UN-dominated New World Order has changed (and is changing) our US military right before our eyes. It has taken the greatest and proudest independent fighting force in the world–one created to defend the people and property of the United States–and turned it into a global military policeman for evil Machiavellians at the UN.”

The above was written by the Constitution Party’s last candidate for president.  To dismiss it out of hand due to its source would be foolhardy, if indeed what is stated is factually accurate.

Sometimes an outsider’s perspective is a fresh reminder if one has deviated of one’s intended path.

Not Your Father’s Army
by Chuck Baldwin
February 5, 2010
Click here to read the rest of the article.

Reading like a poorly drafted high-school term paper, Gabby Giffords delivers this nonsensical letter to the Sierra Vista Herald. Gabby rambles incoherently about climate change, oil independence, military supply lines, global warming, and how solar panels will not only protect the United states but the US Military fighting in Afghanistan.  It is written so poorly that one would have to conclude that she hastily penned  it on the school bus in route to first period.   Please tell me Gabby, that you had a staffer ghost-write this one for you.  Since we now “grade” our elected officials, you definitely do not get a B+ for this term paper.

The safety and security of the United States will depend on how well we as a nation address the challenges of climate change. [Huh?]

That was reaffirmed for me at the recent United Nations climate conference in Copenhagen, which I attended as part of a bipartisan congressional delegation.

Opponents of climate action argue there is no proof that greenhouse gas emissions are causing climate change and therefore we should not expend significant effort to reduce those emissions.

But many of the steps that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions are steps we must take to increase our national security — specifically by weaning ourselves off oil.

As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I am concerned about how our dependence on oil threatens our national security. As a member of the House Science and Technology Committee, I am confident that renewable energy, especially solar energy, can be a key solution.

The Department of Defense accounts for 80 percent of the federal government’s energy consumption. Three-quarters of the department’s energy is used for military operations — and 94 percent of that energy comes from petroleum.

Where does that petroleum come from? In 1970, we imported 24 percent of our oil. Today, it’s more than 65 percent and growing.  By depending on foreign sources for two-thirds of our oil, we are in a precarious position in an unpredictable world.

The impact of our oil dependence is more than just a vague, geopolitical risk — it is felt directly by our troops on the front lines every day, where they use petroleum for everything from armored vehicles to air conditioners.

A recent report by the Government Accountability Office determined that transporting fuel to the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan poses tremendous security risks and logistical burdens to U.S. armed forces.

For the military, greater fuel efficiency and solar power prove their worth with lives saved and battles won.

Our dependence on oil weakens us at home, as well. In his recent speech on Afghanistan, President Barack Obama noted that we cannot be militarily strong unless we are economically strong.

Yet our nation spends more than $400 billion a year on foreign sources of energy. That’s money taken out of our economy and sent to foreign nations — and it is draining the lifeblood from our economy.

However, a recent report by the Solar Energy Industries Association found that solar can meet 15 percent of our nation’s electricity demands by 2020. That would mean 800,000 new jobs for American workers.

Clearly, reducing our dependence on imported oil and switching to domestic, renewable energy sources would make our nation more secure.

Because it understands this, the Department of Defense is taking the lead on energy efficiency and renewables. The military has set an ambitious goal of obtaining 20 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020.

The results of this effort are apparent in Tucson at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. A vast array of 80,000 solar panels soon will provide power to 900 homes for Air Force personnel and their families.

Now the rest of our country must follow.

We in Congress recently took an important step to make solar power even more effective — and attractive — in the years ahead. The House of Representatives gave strong bipartisan approval to my Solar Technology Roadmap Act, a bill that would boost federal research for the development of improved solar energy technology.

This bill would advance solar research and help move new technologies from laboratories into our homes, businesses and military bases. I am hopeful the Senate soon will consider my bill and send it to the president.

Our dependence on oil is a threat to our national security — but we have the knowledge and the tools to address the challenge.

The United States military represents the paragon of American ingenuity, discipline and dedication. They are applying those traits to the development of a 21st century energy policy, one that will not only reduce emissions, but also make us and our men and women in uniform more secure.

In 1970 we imported 24% of our oil.  Jimmy Carter promised then to “wean us off of foreign oil?”  President Peanut created the Department of Energy, whose main goal was to gain energy independence for America.  30+ years later, the Dept of Energy has a budget of $24.2 billion, 16,000 employees, and  approximately 100,00 contract employees.  The results? Now we import 65% of our oil.  Job well done!

Gabby bounces back and forth between oil and solar as though they are interchangeable commodities.  “We have to get off of oil and the solution is solar”, is her theme and that is just plain lunacy.  We will NEVER not need oil.  For the last thirty years, I have heard day in and day out that solar is the answer and viable solutions are just around the corner [if we only spend enough money].  The idea that the government has to subsidize the solar energy industry for innovations to come to fruition is moronic at best.  The company that finally develops the big breakthrough in solar tech will become a multi-billion dollar global company overnight.  That is enough incentive for any business, not some tax-payer funded House bill.

Gabby states [and gets it wrong] that “Our dependence on oil is a threat to our national security”.  Our dependence on foreign oil is the threat to our national security.

Gabby should be made to answer the  questions that arise from her op-ed.  Such as; How will solar panels help our troops in war zones?  How has your Solar Initiatives helped us win battles on the war on terror?  As a member of the House Science and Technology Committee, can you please explain why our dependence on foriegn oil has increased under your watch?  The list of questions is long.  What questions do you want answered?

I can’t wait to see that new Humvee with solar panels on the top of it. You know, the one that’s saving lives and winning battles.

The MSM reporting on this week’s heralded “President Obama’s First State Dinner” is heavy on arugula, sustainable magnolia and curry than political meat. 

While YAHOO! News chatters about First Lady Michelle Obama’s “breaking with tradition dress,” Bloomberg reporters Kate Andersen Brower and Nicholas Johnston pen a detailed description:
“They will join a group of American and Indian executives, diplomats, public officials and celebrities who will be honoring Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh under heated tents on the White House South Lawn.
Guests will dine on potato and eggplant salad with arugula from the White House garden; roasted potato dumplings with tomato chutney, chickpeas and okra, or an alternate choice of green curry prawns served with caramelized salsify, smoked collard greens and coconut aged basmati. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aQ_tY1EpS4FE

Between the coconut aged basmati rice and the chickpeas, what should Americans know that occupies the mind of the Indian Prime Minister? After all, it’s a long way to go for dinner, for Singh, it’s literally half way around the globe, so discussions must be involved.
Howard LaFranchi of the Christian Science Monitor relates, “Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh arrives at the White House Tuesday wondering if his country remains the US priority under President Obama that it became under President Bush.
The Obama administration thought it had answered that question months ago when it announced that Mr. Singh’s day of meetings would constitute the first state visit of Mr. Obama’s presidency – a distinction meant to convey the importance of the occasion.
But Obama’s week-long trip to Asia that ended last Thursday has India questioning anew the value of a US partnership. In particular, the tenor of Obama’s three days in China was heard by Indians as American acquiescence to rising Chinese power across Asia.” http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1123/p02s01-usfp.html

Americans did not get much sense from the MSM that much transpired apart from Obama’s bowing gaffs, and zero sense that other nations watch every move a US president makes like hawks, and parse every word, and at least one major ally didn’t like what they heard.   CNN’s 44th President webpage page, under POLITICS, has this astute political insight:
“The dinner, in a tent set up on the White House South Lawn with a view of the Washington Monument, featured round tables for 10 set in resplendent colors — apple green, ruby, gold — with floral arrangements of roses, hydrangeas and sweet peas in plum, purple and fuchsia.  Place settings in fine china from three previous administrations — Eisenhower, Clinton and George W. Bush — were flanked by five pieces of silverware and crystal glasses. Place cards were in script — “The President” and “Mrs. Obama” read two.

A seasonal menu reflecting both American and Indian flavors started with a potato and eggplant salad made with White House-grown arugula and accompanied by an onion seed vinaigrette, according to the White House.”
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/24/obama.state.dinner/index.html?section=cnn_latest

One is left wondering if the place cards for the Prime Minister and his wife were in Hindi script or the potentially insensitive, “English script.” Inquiring minds might want to know, if they were not more concerned about nations, conflicts, terror and war.

Mian Ridge writes about what’s on Indians’ minds in the Christian Science Monitor, “But while talks between Mr. Singh and Mr. Obama scheduled for Tuesday are likely to focus on such matters as Afghanistan, climate change, and cooperation on nuclear energy, pundits in India are more interested in the question of where the US’s new friendship with China, as well as its relationship with Pakistan, leaves India.
“We may aspire to a seat at the high table of world power but China is already sitting at the head of the table along with the United States,” wrote journalist Gautam Adhikari in the Times of India Monday. “It has enough IOUs in its pocket to stop anyone from pushing it around. We also are a billion-strong nation, a democracy to boot and growing economically at a still impressive rate given the global conditions. But, realistically speaking, we are a second or perhaps third tier force in the eyes of the United States.

A recent joint statement from Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao, which included a line of support for better Indo-Pakistan relations, was regarded in New Delhi as an expression of unwanted interference in a sensitive matter. For some, it raises the worrying specter of Chinese involvement in South Asian diplomacy – and at a time when India’s long running border row with China is especially tense.” http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1123/p06s01-wosc.html

A bit testy. It gets even more interesting though with the Times of India:
“… Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Monday threw down the gauntlet to Washington, Islamabad and perhaps even Beijing and other world capitals that India would not be budged from pursuing its interests in Afghanistan — primarily of preventing the country from turning toxic under Pakistan’s malignant influence and American uncertainty.

“The road to peace on Afghanistan will be long and hard. But given the high stakes involved, the commitment of the international community must be sustained by firm resolve and unity of purpose.” Singh told Washington’s top policy wonks gathered to hear him at the Center for Foreign Relations, amid a continuing review by President Obama about U.S options in Afghanistan.

The remarks were clearly meant for the US President and his principals who have been bashing heads for several weeks now over next steps in Afghanistan amid charges of dithering on the crucial issue. Singh’s advice ahead of his meeting with Obama on Tuesday — Stay the course; we are going to be there.” http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Stay-the-course-in-Afghanistan-PM-Manmohan-Singh-urges-US/articleshow/5262957.cms

So, India, which has been invaded by neighbor Pakistan and neighbor China, at great losses of Indian lives and loss of Indian territory, is not comfortable with the Obama Administration’s “reaching-out” to China, and is extremely concerned that any U.S. abandonment of Afghanistan will have a dangerously negative impact on India’s security.

What does CNN’s political reporting reveal on this important diplomatic and geopolitical issue, which reflects an overdue and dragging Obama Administration decision on an Afghan military strategy?
“The event planned by first lady Michelle Obama emphasized eco-friendly themes such as White House-grown herbs and lettuce served to guests and sustainably harvested magnolia branches — from species native to both India and the United States — in arrangements adorning the tent where more than 300 guests wearing tuxedos and gowns were wined, dined and entertained.”
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/24/obama.state.dinner/index.html?section=cnn_latest

Despite the arugula and traditional Thanksgiving pie and various organically grown vegetables from Michelle Obama’s White House Very Hardy November garden, the special sauces may not have been enough to stave off some serious indigestion that began developing just last week, as reported by the Christian Science Monitor:

“But what has set the Indians on edge now is the wording of a communiqué issued last week by Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao at the end of their Beijing talks. The two leaders said their countries “are ready to strengthen … cooperation in issues related to South Asia.” They specifically pledged to “support the improvement and growth of relations between India and Pakistan.”
That set off an uproar in New Delhi, where even members of Singh’s own party questioned whether a declining superpower was bowing to the “core interests” of another country. Indian officials repeated that India needs no outside involvement in its relationship with Pakistan.
US officials say that the communiqué was not intended to signal a recognition of a supposed Chinese sphere of influence. The State Department’s undersecretary of State for political affairs, William Burns, responded by saying there is “too much reading into statements.”
But Neena Shenai, an adjunct scholar for South Asian issues at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, said the statement was “certainly not the way to roll out the red carpet for Prime Minister Singh.” http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/1123/p02s01-usfp.html

But, how many Americans are aware of that? Has our media, which is meant to inform the U.S. public, been diligent in alerting Americans to the dismay and most importantly, the CONCERNS of our allies? Bloomberg’s reporters enlighten us:
“The menu is intended to reflect American cuisine with a taste of India and will include lettuce and herbs culled from the White House garden. The guest chef is Marcus Samuelsson of Manhattan’s Aquavit restaurant …First lady Michelle Obama told a group of girls from the White House Leadership and Mentoring Program at the White House today that state dinners “are critical to what we do internationally.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aQ_tY1EpS4FE

Really? “Critical to what we do internationally?” Dear Girls, state dinners are luxuries, and can be dispensed with, or can be much more modest for the taxpayer’s pockets than enormous heated tent mega-events with glitzy pop stars to croon along with the fifth course. American soldiers stand at the top of the world, facing the Afghan winter, a bleak, cold, ancient cross-roads of invading armies and rival civilizations, huddled over portable heaters, their rifles slung over their shoulders, stirring boiled water into the plastic pouches of their MREs to bring their desiccated beef stews to some consistency of normal, with one eye and ear always on the alert for the warning movements, cracks of gunfire or shriek of incoming mortar fire – soldiers waiting for reinforcements and a steeling of resolve from the wining and dining civilian leadership in Washington, DC - for these soldiers have seen the enemy up close and know what’s at stake. In the same number of weeks it took to present a sumptuous state dinner for 300 rich and connected guests, a complicatedly elaborate planning as one staffer remarked, critical resources could have been allocated to our soldiers, and much already have been sent on its way.

But despite thousands of words and plenty of video recorded devoted to this week’s state dinner, few syllables in the American media have been devoted to the issue that America waits on, that will have serious and profound implications for many nations, including for the fate of the nation of the man ostensibly honored at that dinner, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, but who rated fewer mentions than the food, the entertainment, and the other guests. The American media, focused on “Eco-friendly,” “White House garden” and a Who’s Who list of Hollywood and Chicago politics, is more aflutter at astoundingly empty reporting of the excruciatingly nothing discovery that: “Place cards were in script — “The President” and “Mrs. Obama” read two.”

Time to repeat what had to be found in the Indian media at the Times of India newspaper, as the nation of India prepares to mourn her murdered people at a grim anniversary:
“On the eve of the first anniversary of the Mumbai carnage …“Singh offered similar advice in an earlier address to US and Indian business leaders that the international community needs to remain engaged in Afghanistan and any “premature talk of exit will only embolden the terrorists.”
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/us/Stay-the-course-in-Afghanistan-PM-Manmohan-Singh-urges-US/articleshow/5262957.cms

Afghanistan is a geographically and geopolitically strategic nation in central Asia. Six countries share its borders: Pakistan, China, Iran and three former Soviet Republics, now independent but heavily Russian-influenced Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. From Afghanistan’s capital of Kabul, the capital of Pakistan, Islamabad, is only 235 miles away, via the famous Khyber Pass. The capital of Delhi, India is just 624 miles away, closer to Kabul, Afghanistan than Dallas, Texas is to New York City. Pakistan’s road network reaches from Islamabad, along the Indus River Valley, and connects with the ancient Silk Road. China is just a few hours away, bordering both Afghanistan and Pakistan at the Karakorum Mountain Range. Along many of these same roads however, Pakistan’s central government controls just the roadway itself, the areas to the right and left of the tarmac have never been controlled, they have and remain the domain of local Tribal governance.

Afghanistan’s recent history has been one of terrible war and strife. In 1979, Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan to prop up the crumbling Soviet puppet-government. American President Carter reacted by boycotting the Soviets through the Olympics and US grain contracts, but President Reagan armed the Afghans to drive the Soviets out. The Soviet Union withdrew, its economy collapsing under the last straw of an expensive and brutal war. The Afghan warlords, seeing a central government power vacuum began a bloody civil war in 1989 vying for dominance. One faction, Islamofascists called the Taliban, by 1992 began asserting dominance with the help of Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden who’d been searching for a safe haven and base since being booted from his home country of Saudi Arabia and then from Sudan.

Secure in his new home and envisioning the rebirth of the Islamic Caliphate from Spain to China, Bin Laden perceived America as the most serious military threat to his vision, and gave material and planning support to terrorist attacks against America and Americans, such as the Khobar Towers and the USS Cole bombings before the 9/11 attacks. To Bin Laden’s eternal surprise and dismay, America arrived in Afghanistan to fortify the last remnants of the Afghan free resistance, the Northern Alliance, just weeks after 9/11 and Al-Qaeda’s September 9, 2001 brutal assassination of the Northern Resistance’s general, Ahmed Shah Massoud, the Lion of Panjshir, a killing meant to be the coup de grace against the Northern Alliance’s military capabilities. Backed by the US military, the revitalized Northern Alliance was able to break the Taliban front lines and sent the Taliban into a running retreat, and Afghanistan into a national celebration of victory from years of Taliban despotism.

Today, Afghanistan is sheltered under US military protection as it rebuilds its shattered and eviscerated nation. Deforestation, degraded agriculture, opium trade and a ruined infrastructure hold back a nation that didn’t have much freedom to develop its cities and towns or exploit any of its natural resources over the past forty years. Worse, the remnant Taliban continues to disrupt progress, to wage low level war against the Afghan people and the Afghan government, hoping to destabilize it, hoping to demoralize Americans into quitting. Because of this, no Afghan government for the near future has the means to protect Afghanistan from any foreign aggression.

If the United States leaves, Afghanistan will be completely vulnerable to any one of several dangerous scenarios of invasion: by the Islamofascist Taliban, or an expansionistic communist China, or a radicalized Pakistan or even Russia via the former Soviet states, for Afghanistan has strategic placement for oil pipelines originating in Iran.

But, Iran must be examined closer as the long-recognized source of destabilizing Islamic Revolutionary radicalism in the region. For the first time since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, Iran was bottled up, with American troops in Iraq and American troops in Afghanistan; effectively keeping Iranian mischief-makers trapped at home. Iraq, with more modern and less degraded infrastructure, combined with a well-educated population with a tradition of engineering stretching back to ancient Babylon, is better equipped to take over much of its security, but Afghanistan has never achieved the development of Iraq ,so it gravely lacks in basic self-sufficiency, especially after decades of war and strife. With the presence of US combat troops, both Iraq and Afghanistan have been protected from Iranian invasion. If the US leaves Afghanistan, Iran could easily pour over the border and take control, positioning itself to overthrow the moderate and shaky Pakistan government for their Revolutionary brand of radical regime, which would be an enormously dangerous situation for India. Nuclear war would not be unthinkable if India perceives it is under threat.

The new Caliphate, as understood by wary Hindus in India, would stretch from Iran through Afghanistan, through Pakistan, through India’s northern Kashmir State, run eastwards along the Himalayan Mountain Range to the former East Pakistan, now Bangladesh –to the Muslim regions of China. Whoever holds Afghanistan holds the key to the entire region, to the east and to the west. To have that in hand only to throw it away, would waste years of hard-earned gains and would deprive the Afghans of any hope at a future of self-determination. Worse, it hands America’s enemies strategic positioning which can be used against America and her allies.

FoxNews and CNN is reporting that the Pentagon is preparing plans to assist the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) in the event of an anticipated Fall 2009 outbreak of the H1N1 virus.

According to the report:

In the event of a major outbreak, civilian authorities would lead any relief efforts, the official said. As the military would for a natural disaster or other significant emergency situation, it could provide support and fulfill any tasks that civilian authorities could not, such as air transport or testing of large numbers of viral samples from infected patients.

As a first step, Gates is being asked to sign a so-called “execution order” that would authorize the military to begin to conduct the detailed planning to execute the proposed plan.

Speculation is running rampant as to the use of military forces during such a pandemic including the use of massive quarantines.

This is really starting to sound like something out of a movie.

“Soldier who was captured in Afghanistan and then seen in a Taliban video posted online is identified as 23-year-old Pfc. Bowe R. Bergdahl from Idaho.” (http://www.foxnews.com/)

Dear President Barack Obama,

I will get right to my point. Sir, your decisions astound me. I am in awe of you. I am in awe of your abject cruelty and disregard for our people. Every day I see examples of your flippant attitude, and wimpy reactions to strife. You encourage the Congress to hurry up legislation worthy of deep thought and debate; you allow top economic advisers to run wild with fringe theories of extremist liberal spending. You allow your staff to stomp on the system of Checks and Balances, sacred to the Constitution, making sweeping policy change without even an Executive nod. Our families are going broke, while you push more taxes. Legislation is being pushed through without ANY light of day, no debate, and total secrecy. Where is the transparency sir? I am amazed by your indifference.

But today I see you in the Huffington Post, images from yet another ‘date night’ or celebrity party. Time with your family I understand, but the rest of the world cannot take night after night to party. Pfc. Bowe R. Bergdahl, captured and with the Taliban, is not getting to party. He’s begging God to stay alive, and you are having a cocktail. Mr. President, I do not want to see one more luau, image of you shooting hoops, hugs and snuggles with Hollywood Celebrity sycophants, nor you taking a breather. You are heartless to blatantly party when our men and women in uniform are being held hostage.

What exactly are you doing for this family, for this young man who just wants to come home?

I can see through your drink glass to the other side that you do not see. The world is watching this young man, sitting in wait for YOU. The world loves you and listens to your every word. So Mr. Obama, where is your pressure and charm? The citizens of this country see you dancing with the stars, voting present on all matters, allowing advising trolls to run the government. We hear your silence rising.

But this boy who’s more a man than you, he’s just trying to get home. He’s out there defending you! Where ARE YOU? He’s been held since June 30th, and you’re throwing out the first All-Star pitch? You get Pfc. Bowe R. Bergdahl home; get on TV tonight NOT to peddle socialized medicine. Get on TV and let the Taliban know that either he’s released or the United States is coming. No games, no meadow muffin policy. Get up, stand up! FIGHT FOR US! Have just a momentary twinkle of integrity and a blink of the bravery of Bowe; tell him you’re going in and getting him home.

Mr. President, if you cannot take lead, you must resign. Otherwise, I can promise you Mr. President, every one us us that’s a mom or dad, that’s watching you dance, we will remember this horror come election day. Waffling cowards are not fit to lead the greatest nation on earth.

Sincerely,

Ms. Gayle Plato, M. Ed.
Phoenix, AZ
platobesley@gmail.com

by Gayle Plato

On Memorial Day, I feel a need to remember the spouses and children of servicemen and women. For centuries, women have kept the home, raised families as the world around them bubbled with economic strife and social restlessness. Now, we see husbands and wives, parents and children holding firm and waiting the return of loved ones in service to our country.ABIGAIL ADAMS
25 October 1782

“MY DEAREST FRIEND,
 The family are all retired to rest the busy scenes of the day are over a day which I wished to have devoted in a particular manner to my dearest friend but company falling in prevented it nor could I claim a moment until this silent watch of the night Look is there a dearer name than friend Think of it for me look to the date of this letter and tell me what ure the thoughts which arise in your mind Do you not recollect that eighteen years have run their circuit since we pledged our mutual faith to each other and the hymeneal torch was lighted at the altar of Love Yet yet it burns with unabating fervor Old Ocean has not quenched it nor old Time smothered it in this bosom It cheers me in the lonely hour it comforts me even in the gloom which sometimes possesses my mind.”

  Familiar letters of John Adams and his wife Abigail Adams, during the revolution

I’ve a warmth for Abigail and John Adams.  Throughout the years of separation due to John Adam’s service, and political involvements, this couple wrote to oneanother.  They always seemed so real, with a love grounded in the daily trials.  They wrote about a love based on mutual respect, a love of their kids, and a hope for something bigger than themselves. Wouldn’t we all be so lucky to find a love so honest, full of letters, about faith in each other?

 Abigail usually addressed the letters to her husband as ‘My Dearest Friend’ ” I like that part most of all.   To those holding down the homefront, many blessings and a wish for peace in this combative world-

by Gayle Plato

“This has been the disingenuousness that has been going on, and frankly the politicization of our national security,” House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, R-Va., said in an interview with WLS radio in Chicago.

Representative Eric Cantor’s comments got me thinking.  Much is being said about Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s odd choice to state that the CIA has been pointedly misleading and lying to Congress. I speculated that she’s being set up by underlings.  Nothing these high level politicians say is unplanned.  She may have gone off a bit, but someone floated the concept of saying how this misleading of her and others has been going on since President Bush.  Pelosi is claiming there is a conspiracy to lie to Congress and it’s being done by the CIA. 

The CIA acts in a military fashion for us, especially as in the capacity referred, the CIA is the intelligence of much field operation during war time.  We are at war.  Speaker Pelosi just said that there is a planned effort to manipulate Congress. 

Either she is telling the truth, or she is not.  If she is, then there is a serious affront of treasonous proportions.  If she is lying, then there are two issues of the comments made: 1) Did any staffers, employees of public officials, recommend to Speaker Pelosi to say the CIA and past administrations are known to have lied on a regular basis to Congress?  2) Did Pelosi openly say this on her own, and if so, is she lying about a military function of our government during war?

Either way, there is clear suspicion of Speaker Nancy Pelosi commiting an act of sedition.   As she is third in line to the President, she is required under oath to uphold the Constitution.  While not often invoked, it is not without precedent to consider Sedition.

“The federal Sedition Act of 1918 states, in part, as follows:

“Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States…”
This is very clear: if Nancy Pelosi is lying, we must file charges against her for Sedition.  If anyone purposely misled her or conspired to milead her during a time of war, then that is Sediton.  Either way, it must be investigated as possible Sedition in the context of a desire to dissuade government and the military activity  underway during a time of war.
“It has been like a constant drumbeat over the last several years on the part of Speaker Pelosi that somehow our interrogators, the Bush administration, and the lawyers at the Justice Department were engaged in criminal activity — when now it comes to light that she knew and was briefed on what was going on, and in fact has been reported that she was pressing the CIA to do even more,” -Eric Cantor
(http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/05/pelosi-cia-lied.html)

Here is a snapshot of the Drudge Report listing the new promises as outlined in President Obama’s speech tonight.

The big question in all of this is can he deliver?

I was also under the impression that the new administration was going to de-militarize? Did I misunderstand or is this President attempting to duplicate what Ronald Reagan did with the 600-ship fleet?

Now I know that the finest researchers have been working on a cure for cancer for decades so what makes President believe that a cure can be found within the next few years?

More money for the banks? Who would have imagined!

Universal education through college? Maybe I’ll finally be able to go to law school?

Universal health care? Here comes 1993 all over again!