Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Does this help. Homeland security force.

Posted By: Taking away freedom of speech, section 899A (3) on 2008-11-18
In Reply to: Not a credible source - gourdpainter

KNOWN AS HOMELAND SECURITY FORCE, CIVIL DEFENSE.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwaAVJITx1Y&feature=related


This is about freedom of speech being taken away.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn_llXvTx5g


This is about section 899A (3), developing home grown terrorists in our own land (civil defense).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLQ68jBGK8o&feature=related


 




Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Head of Homeland Security?...nm
//
More bad grades for Bush-Homeland Security
Homeland Security Is Faulted in Audit
Inspector General Points to FEMA, Cites Mismanagement Among Problems

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, December 29, 2005; A01


Nearly three years after it was formed, the immense Department of Homeland Security remains hampered by severe management and financial problems that contributed to the flawed response to Hurricane Katrina, according to an independent audit released yesterday.


The report by Homeland Security Inspector General Richard L. Skinner aimed some of its most pointed criticism at one of DHS's major entities, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Katrina and a subsequent storm, Rita, increased the load on FEMA's already overburdened resources and infrastructure, the report said.


In addition, the report found, the circumstances created by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita provide an unprecedented opportunity for fraud, waste and abuse, primarily because FEMA's grant and contract programs are still not being managed properly.


While DHS is taking several steps to manage and control spending under Katrina, the sheer size of the response and recovery efforts will create an unprecedented need for oversight, the report concludes.


The audit is the latest in a series of tough assessments of the beleaguered department, which has been widely criticized since it was formed in March 2003 by combining 22 disparate agencies. In a final report card issued earlier this month, for example, the former members of the Sept. 11 commission gave the DHS low or failing grades in many key areas, including airline passenger screening and border control.


Earlier this week, a group of House Democrats issued a report alleging that the department had failed to follow through on 33 promised improvements to border security, infrastructure protection and other programs.


In an 11-page response to the inspector general's findings, homeland security officials acknowledged problems but disputed some of the criticisms and offered explanations for others. For example, the department said it has created a special procurement office to oversee hurricane contracts and is using consultants to monitor the process.


Department spokesman William R. Russ Knocke said that retooling FEMA is one of our greatest and most urgent priorities.


We continue to make programs more efficient, effective and results-oriented, Knocke said, adding that the department is making substantial progress in implementing several core management initiatives, including improvements in personnel policies and financial accountability.


Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, who took over the department this year, is in the midst of implementing a broad reorganization of the 180,000-employee department and has announced initiatives in border security and other areas.


But the department's bumbling after Katrina prompted widespread criticism -- along with the resignation of FEMA's director -- and many lawmakers have since questioned whether DHS is capable of handling recovery efforts along the Gulf Coast. White House homeland security adviser Frances Fragos Townsend is reviewing the hurricane response by DHS and other agencies.


Congress has approved more than $63 billion in disaster relief funding, and some estimate that the total federal recovery costs for New Orleans and other storm-ravaged areas could exceed $200 billion. As of last week, officials said, more than $4 billion in Katrina-related contracts had been awarded by the department.


Skinner's audit deals not only with the department's response to Katrina but also with an array of broader management challenges that have troubled DHS. The department brought together immigration and customs agencies, the Secret Service, the Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration, among others. Although there has been progress, integrating its many separate components in a single, effective and economical department remains one of DHS' biggest challenges, the audit said.


The report found, among other things, that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has failed to maintain proper financial records; that much of the department's technology infrastructure remains fractured and ineffective; and that DHS faces formidable challenges in securing the nation's borders.


Skinner also reiterated complaints about poor coordination between the border patrol and immigration investigators. Chertoff has rejected Skinner's recommendation that the agencies responsible for these employees be merged.


The audit followed a report Tuesday by 13 Democratic members of the House Homeland Security Committee, who alleged that the administration has failed to fulfill promises for improvements in areas such as border security and intelligence sharing. The report also noted that the department has missed deadlines to create a comprehensive database of critical infrastructure targets that face a high risk of terrorist attack.


The findings of the report are significant because they uncover a number of unnecessary vulnerabilities to our homeland security that the American people deserve to know about, the committee's ranking Democrat, Rep. Bennie Thompson (Miss.), said in a statement with the report.


Knocke disputed many of the Democratic criticisms, arguing that they ignore many specific changes that are underway and do not take into account significant progress in homeland security since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.


Virtually each of these claims fall short of reflecting the substantial work that has been done in securing America since 9/11, Knocke said.


Researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.


Directive 51 is part of the Homeland Security Act.......sm
and makes a provision for continuity of leadership in the event of events that could harm the citizens of America, such as an enemy attack on our own soil or our current financial crisis.

Yes, technically, we could have Bush in the White House beyond January 20 if our current financial crisis worsens to the point that a change of leadership would interrupt the continuity of tending to the business at hand. I think this is why Obama has stepped up the process a bit with his transitional team....to avoid having to invoke Directive 51.

Here is a link to more information.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html
Homeland Security opening private mail





  MSNBC.com

Homeland Security opening private mail
Retired professor confused, angered when letter from abroad is opened


By Brock N. Meeks

Chief Washington correspondent

MSNBC

Updated: 5:55 p.m. ET Jan. 6, 2006



WASHINGTON - In the 50 years that Grant Goodman has known and corresponded with a colleague in the Philippines he never had any reason to suspect that their friendship was anything but spectacularly ordinary. 


But now he believes that the relationship has somehow sparked the interest of the Department of Homeland Security and led the agency to place him under surveillance.


Last month Goodman, an 81-year-old retired University of Kansas history professor, received a letter from his friend in the Philippines that had been opened and resealed with a strip of dark green tape bearing the words “by Border Protection” and carrying the official Homeland Security seal.


“I had no idea (Homeland Security) would open personal letters,” Goodman told MSNBC.com in a phone interview. “That’s why I alerted the media. I thought it should be known publicly that this is going on,” he said.  Goodman originally showed the letter to his own local newspaper, the Kansas-based Lawrence Journal-World.


“I was shocked and there was a certain degree of disbelief in the beginning,” Goodman said when he noticed the letter had been tampered with, adding that he felt his privacy had been invaded. “I think I must be under some kind of surveillance.”


Goodman is no stranger to mail snooping; as an officer during World War II he was responsible for reading all outgoing mail of the men in his command and censoring any passages that might provide clues as to his unit’s position.  “But we didn’t do it as clumsily as they’ve done it, I can tell you that,” Goodman noted, with no small amount of irony in his voice. “Isn’t it funny that this doesn’t appear to be any kind of surreptitious effort here,” he said.


The letter comes from a retired Filipino history professor; Goodman declined to identify her.  And although the Philippines is on the U.S. government’s radar screen as a potential spawning ground for Muslim-related terrorism, Goodman said his friend is a devout Catholic and not given to supporting such causes.



A spokesman for the Customs and Border Protection division said he couldn’t speak directly to Goodman’s case but acknowledged that the agency can, will and does open mail coming to U.S. citizens that originates from a foreign country whenever it’s deemed necessary.


“All mail originating outside the United States Customs territory that is to be delivered inside the U.S. Customs territory is subject to Customs examination,” says the CBP Web site.  That includes personal correspondence.  “All mail means ‘all mail,’” said John Mohan, a CBP spokesman, emphasizing the point.


“This process isn’t something we’re trying to hide,” Mohan said, noting the wording on the agency’s Web site.  “We’ve had this authority since before the Department of Homeland Security was created,” Mohan said. 


However, Mohan declined to outline what criteria are used to determine when a piece of personal correspondence should be opened, but said, “obviously it’s a security-related criteria.”


Mohan also declined to say how often or in what volume CBP might be opening mail.  “All I can really say is that Customs and Border Protection does undertake [opening mail] when it is determined to be necessary,” he said.


© 2006 MSNBC Interactive




src=http://c.msn.com/c.gif?NC=1255&NA=1154&PS=69728&PI=7329&DI=305&TP=http%3a%2f%2fmsnbc.msn.com%2fid%2f10740935%2f

src=http://msnbcom.112.2o7.net/b/ss/msnbcom/1/G.9-Pd-R/s27230400008802?[AQB]&ndh=1&t=8/0/2006%208%3A25%3A24%200%20300&pageName=Story%7CU.S.%20News%7CU.S.%20Secur%7C10740935%7CHomeland%20Security%20opening%20private%20mail%7C&g=http%3A//www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10740935/print/1/displaymode/1098/&ch=U.S.%20News&c3=Brock%20N.%20Meeks&c4=U.S.%20News&c5=U.S.%20Security&c7=handheld&c8=N&c15=10740935&c16=Story&c18=17&pid=Story%7CU.S.%20News%7CU.S.%20Secur%7C10740935%7CHomeland%20Security%20opening%20private%20mail%7C&pidt=1&oid=javascript%3AprintThis%28%2710740935%27%29&ot=A&oi=589&s=1024x768&c=32&j=1.3&v=Y&k=Y&bw=644&bh=484&ct=lan&hp=N&[AQE]

© 2006 MSNBC.com




URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10740935/


Since Homeland security was a horse and pony show.....
there was really little Bush could do. But, he did promise to catch Bin Laden but never did - he invaded Iraq instead. I think Katrina gives a birdseye view on how a catastrophe would be handled by Bush. He screwed that up AFTER 9/11. Like they say - NEVER FORGET.
You guys remember the homeland security report...(sm)
that warned of extreme right-wing terrorist acts that you guys raised cane about?  After the recent incidents, including the newest shooting at the DC museum, do you still think it was out of line?  It seems to me it was right on target.
You guys remember the homeland security report...(sm)
that warned of extreme right-wing terrorist acts that you guys raised cane about?  After the recent incidents, including the newest shooting at the DC museum, do you still think it was out of line?  It seems to me it was right on target.
Civilian National Security Force...

These are Obama's words...


"We cannot rely only on our military for our national security, we need to have a Civilian National Security force that is just as strong, just as well funded."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s


 


Civilian National Security Force
From FactCheck.org (Complete analysis at link below.)

Obama was not talking about a "security force" with guns or police powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies overseas.
CIA, Dept of Defense, Homeland Security, State Dept, et al.
x
A blog by an Iraqi about his homeland and Democracy. sm
I read this every day until he stopped posting.  It's very informative and not something seen in the MSM.  There are other links there that are still active.
OP said not to force beliefs on others...
if you don't want to read religious toned posts, don't open them.
O says that he will force insurance
companies to insure preexisting conditions. That sounds like something that will put them out of business to me. No need to buy insurance until you need it. Think of all the lost jobs.
PS, NOT ENCOURAGE, FORCE!!
XX
Require = force
xx
I don't believe I force people

to convert to my religion.  I don't kill in the name of my God.  I am nothing like the Jihad extremists and for you to say that is just absolute BS and you know it.  What you people seem to forget is that we are at war here.  A war were people want me and you dead.  I don't want to torture them for revenge but if we can get other names of people or any plot information to save American lives.....I'm all for it....including saving your atheist behind in the process.  Doesn't quite sound like I'm a Jihad extremists or I'd say something like blow your butt up too since you won't convert to my religion but I don't see me saying that.  So don't you EVER compare me to a terrorist. 


I see all the dems are out in force...keep it up ladies...sm
.....having a good ol' time ganging up on me....I have come to expect no less from the left on this site.

She's dynamite and will get rave reviews....wait and see....wait and see.....


Once again, a "civilian military force" that is

ENDORSED BY BUSH.


That little tidbit was conveniently deleted from the link that was provided.


Keep believing all the hype and the lies.  That's your choice, but don't insult me because I can tell the difference.


There is no force involved whatsoever. I do it
because I "choose" to do what the Bible commands.  I love the Lord and want to do what His Word says.  There is nothing forced about.  If you don't think it's a sin, that is your perogative.  I, however, feel that it is and that is my perogative, too. 
I don't really understand the civilian force...
why not just beef up the military we already have? But, I don't actually think that it will ever happen, at least not to the extent that people are thinking and during Barrack's presidency. Americans will not allow that to come to fruition. It would take a very long gradual change for something like this to be implemented and accepted.
From a founding member of Delta Force
http://www.dailynews.com/portlet/article/html/fragments/print_article.jsp?article=3641046

'Unit's' military expert has fighting words for Bush
By David Kronke, TV Critic
U-Entertainment
Eric Haney, a retired command sergeant major of the U.S. Army, was a founding member of Delta Force, the military's elite covert counter-terrorist unit. He culled his experiences for Inside Delta Force (Delta; $14), a memoir rich with harrowing stories, though in an interview, Haney declines with a shrug to estimate the number of times he was almost killed. (Perhaps the most high-profile incident that almost claimed his life was the 1980 failed rescue of the hostages in Iran.) Today, he's doing nothing nearly as dangerous: He serves as an executive producer and technical adviser for The Unit, CBS' new hit drama based on his book, developed by playwright David Mamet. Even up against American Idol, The Unit shows muscle, drawing 18 million viewers in its first two airings.

Since he has devoted his life to protecting his country in some of the world's most dangerous hot spots, you might assume Haney is sympathetic to the Bush administration's current plight in Iraq (the laudatory cover blurb on his book comes from none other than Fox's News' Bill O'Reilly). But he's also someone with close ties to the Pentagon, so he's privy to information denied the rest of us.

We recently spoke to Haney, an amiable, soft-spoken Southern gentleman, on the set of The Unit.

Q: What's your assessment of the war in Iraq?

A: Utter debacle. But it had to be from the very first. The reasons were wrong. The reasons of this administration for taking this nation to war were not what they stated. (Army Gen.) Tommy Franks was brow-beaten and ... pursued warfare that he knew strategically was wrong in the long term. That's why he retired immediately afterward. His own staff could tell him what was going to happen afterward.

We have fomented civil war in Iraq. We have probably fomented internecine war in the Muslim world between the Shias and the Sunnis, and I think Bush may well have started the third world war, all for their own personal policies.

Q: What is the cost to our country?

A: For the first thing, our credibility is utterly zero. So we destroyed whatever credibility we had. ... And I say we, because the American public went along with this. They voted for a second Bush administration out of fear, so fear is what they're going to have from now on.

Our military is completely consumed, so were there a real threat - thankfully, there is no real threat to the U.S. in the world, but were there one, we couldn't confront it. Right now, that may not be a bad thing, because that keeps Bush from trying something with Iran or with Venezuela.

The harm that has been done is irreparable. There are more than 2,000 American kids that have been killed. Tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis have been killed � which no one in the U.S. really cares about those people, do they? I never hear anybody lament that fact. It has been a horror, and this administration has worked overtime to divert the American public's attention from it. Their lies are coming home to roost now, and it's gonna fall apart. But somebody's gonna have to clear up the aftermath and the harm that it's done just to what America stands for. It may be two or three generations in repairing.

Q: What do you make of the torture debate? Cheney ...

A: (Interrupting) That's Cheney's pursuit. The only reason anyone tortures is because they like to do it. It's about vengeance, it's about revenge, or it's about cover-up. You don't gain intelligence that way. Everyone in the world knows that. It's worse than small-minded, and look what it does.

I've argued this on Bill O'Reilly and other Fox News shows. I ask, who would you want to pay to be a torturer? Do you want someone that the American public pays to torture? He's an employee of yours. It's worse than ridiculous. It's criminal; it's utterly criminal. This administration has been masters of diverting attention away from real issues and debating the silly. Debating what constitutes torture: Mistreatment of helpless people in your power is torture, period. And (I'm saying this as) a man who has been involved in the most pointed of our activities. I know it, and all of my mates know it. You don't do it. It's an act of cowardice. I hear apologists for torture say, Well, they do it to us. Which is a ludicrous argument. ... The Saddam Husseins of the world are not our teachers. Christ almighty, we wrote a Constitution saying what's legal and what we believed in. Now we're going to throw it away.

Q: As someone who repeatedly put your life on the line, did some of the most hair-raising things to protect your country, and to see your country behave this way, that must be ...

A: It's pretty galling. But ultimately I believe in the good and the decency of the American people, and they're starting to see what's happening and the lies that have been told. We're seeing this current house of cards start to flutter away. The American people come around. They always do.

THE UNIT

What: Action-adventure about special-ops unit.
Where: CBS (Channel 2).
When: 9 p.m. Tuesdays.

---
David Kronke (818) 713-3638 david.kronke@dailynews.com
It's a beautiful thing to see dems out in force
nm
I see the Witches of Leftwick are out in force today....sm
just posting under different names.

Halloween must be around the corner.



wait for it......



.......the pig comments are about to be unleashed.....lol.....again.....
Israel air force is ready to attack Iran

capable of making nuclear bomb.  I have been reading about Israel and Iran every day and looks like one of these days we are going to hear a special report that Israel is attacking Iran.  My question is if the US is going to help?  I read Iran would attack the US if US tries to help Israel.  I also read Iran has missels pointed in our direction to hit our oil refineries and power plants in the gulf coast states. 


The first 2 links are about Israel ready to attack Iran.


http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=75885&sectionid=351020104


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455005,00.html


This is about Iran nuclear capibility as of today from Fox news. 


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455024,00.html


They are also a viable grass roots political force
in the region, just like Hezbollah. How successful was Israel in trying to eradicate Hezbollah by bombing them off the face of the earth just 2 short years ago in Lebanon? The harder they try to suppress with violence, starvation, dehumanization, occupation and genocidal wars, the stronger those movements become. Israel is the consummate poster child for Einstein's definition of insanity.

Until the US and Israel have the guts to come to terms with the root causes of WHY these Islamic movements are gaining such traction across the board in the region, we are doomed to stay mired in the same atrocious tit-for-tat cycles of wholesale slaughter and human suffering. There seems to be an endless supply of that on both sides of the fence. The question is why and what can e do to effect a different outcome? Here's a clue for you. End the occupation.
SINCE WHEN DOES THE KORAN FORCE PEOPLE TO CONVERT TO ISLAM?..
Are you still living in the stone ages?
Big Brother is I believe a covert force infiltrating each and every one's personal lives without
their knowledge. That is hardly the same thing as a poster on an MT board noticing that 4 different names post the same thing. I think that is creepy.  I have been on this board for a long time and I recognize patterns, phrases that are repeated verbatim from far in the past, things people remember about me and say something like ***weren't you the one who ....*** and it is posted under a name different from the original. I leave Big Brother to our shadow government, wherever they are.
Air Force chief: Test weapons on US citizens before using on enemies.





Air Force chief: Test weapons on testy U.S. mobs




WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.


The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne.


If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation, said Wynne. (Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press.


The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved.


Nonlethal weapons generally can weaken people if they are hit with the beam. Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also can be effective in disabling some electronic devices.


On another subject, Wynne said he expects to choose a new contractor for the next generation aerial refueling tankers by next summer. He said a draft request for bids will be put out next month, and there are two qualified bidders: the Boeing Co. and a team of Northrop Grumman Corp. and European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., the majority owner of European jet maker Airbus SAS.


The contract is expected to be worth at least $20 billion (&euro15.75 billion).


Chicago, Illinois-based Boeing lost the tanker deal in 2004 amid revelations that it had hired a top Air Force acquisitions official who had given the company preferential treatment.


Wynne also said the Air Force, which is already chopping 40,000 active duty, civilian and reserves jobs, is now struggling to find new ways to slash about $1.8 billion (&euro1.4 billion) from its budget to cover costs from the latest round of base closings.


He said he can't cut more people, and it would not be wise to take funding from military programs that are needed to protect the country. But he said he also incurs resistance when he tries to save money on operations and maintenance by retiring aging aircraft.


We're finding out that those are, unfortunately, prized possessions of some congressional districts, said Wynne, adding that the Air Force will have to take some appetite suppressant pills. He said he has asked employees to look for efficiencies in their offices.


The base closings initially were expected to create savings by reducing Air Force infrastructure by 24 percent.












 
 







 
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/12/usaf.weapons.ap/index.html

Like that'll happen. Trying to bomb a grassroots political force
into extinction will be about as effective and trying to bomb Iraq into democracy.

Thanks to their last fiasco when they tried this in Lebanon, Hezbollah has an 80+% approval rating among Lebanese factions (13 points higher than O) and its support among Lebanese Sunni Sunni, Christians and Druze soared in 2006. Their demonstrations attracted hundreds of thousands of protestors, especially in the aftermath of Israel's failed massacre, when protests against PM Siniora sent his approval ratings into a deep-6.

Hezbollah was given veto power in the parliment via the Doha Agreement in 2008 and under its newly formed National Unity Government, Hezbollah gained the Labor Minister's appointment and holds 11 out of 30 seats, or slightly over one-third alongside Greek Orthodox and Catholics, Maronites, Armenians, Shia, Sunni and Druz.

So you see, instead of giving Hezbollah the boot, Israel legitimized their standing the Lebanese government.


http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0728/p06s01-wome.html
http://www.mideastmonitor.org/issues/0609/0609_6.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006%E2%80%932008_Lebanese_political_protests
http://www.tayyar.org/Tayyar/UnityGovernmentEN.htm
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9155/hezbollah.html?breadcrumb=%2F
Britain to pull troops from Iraq as Blair says 'don't force me out' sm-long article
Britain to pull troops from Iraq as Blair says 'don't force me out'

· Defence Secretary confident withdrawal will start in May
· Plan follows pressure for exit strategy


Peter Beaumont and Gaby Hinsliff
Sunday September 25, 2005
The Observer



British troops will start a major withdrawal from Iraq next May under detailed plans on military disengagement to be published next month, The Observer can reveal.

The document being drawn up by the British government and the US will be presented to the Iraqi parliament in October and will spark fresh controversy over how long British troops will stay in the country. Tony Blair hopes that, despite continuing and widespread violence in Iraq, the move will show that there is progress following the conflict of 2003.

Britain has already privately informed Japan - which also has troops in Iraq - of its plans to begin withdrawing from southern Iraq in May, a move that officials in Tokyo say would make it impossible for their own 550 soldiers to remain.

The increasingly rapid pace of planning for British military disengagement has been revealed on the eve of the Labour Party conference, which will see renewed demands for a deadline for withdrawal. It is hoped that a clearer strategy on Iraq will quieten critics who say that the government will not be able to 'move on' until Blair quits. Yesterday, about 10,000 people demonstrated against the army's continued presence in the country.

Speaking to The Observer this weekend, the Defence Secretary, John Reid, insisted that the agreement being drawn up with Iraqi officials was contingent on the continuing political process, although he said he was still optimistic British troops would begin returning home by early summer.

'The two things I want to insist about the timetable is that it is not an event but a process, and that it will be a process that takes place at different speeds in different parts of the country. I have said before that I believe that it could begin in some parts of the country as early as next July. It is not a deadline, but it is where we might be and I honestly still believe we could have the conditions to begin handover. I don't see any reason to change my view.

'But if circumstances change I have no shame in revising my estimates.'

The disclosures follow rising demands for the government to establish a clearer strategy for bringing troops home following the kidnapping of two British SAS troopers in Basra and the scenes of violence that surrounded their rescue. Last week Blair's own envoy to Iraq, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, warned that Britain could be forced out if Iraq descends so far into chaos that 'we don't have any reasonable prospect of holding it together'.

Continued tension between the Iraqi police force, the Iraqi administration and British troops was revealed again yesterday when an Iraqi magistrate called for the arrest of the two British special forces soldiers. who were on a surveillance mission when they were taken into custody by Iraqi police and allegedly handed on to a militia.

For Blair, the question of withdrawal is one of the most difficult he is facing. The Prime Minister has abandoned plans, announced last February, to publish his own exit strategy setting out the milestones which would have to be met before quitting: instead, the plans are now being negotiated between a commission representing the Shia-dominated Iraqi government, and senior US and UK diplomats and military commanders in Baghdad.

Senior military sources have told The Observer that the document will lay out a point-by-point 'road map' for military disengagement by multinational forces, the first steps of which could be put in place soon after December's nationwide elections.

Each stage of the withdrawal would be locally judged on regional improvements in stability, with units being withdrawn as Iraqi units are deemed capable of taking over. Officials familiar with the negotiations said that conditions for withdrawal would not demand a complete cessation of insurgent violence, or the end of al-Qaeda atrocities.

According to the agreement under negotiation, each phase would be triggered when key security, stability and political targets have been reached. The phased withdrawal strategy - the British side of which is expected to take at least 12 months to complete - would see UK troops hand over command responsibility for security to senior Iraqi officers, while remaining in support as a reserve force.

In the second phase British Warriors and other armoured vehicles would be removed from daily patrols, before a complete withdrawal of British forces to barracks.

The final phase - departure of units - would follow a period of months where Iraqi units had demonstrated their ability to deal with violence in their areas of operation.

Blair will tackle his critics over Iraq in his conference speech, aides said this weekend, but would decline to give a public deadline for withdrawing troops. He is expected to make several major interventions on the war in the coming weeks, before a vote on the new constitution in mid-October, explaining how Iraq could be steered towards a sufficiently stable situation to allow troops to come home.

'What we are not going to set out is a timetable: what we are going to set out is a process of developing that security capability,' said a Downing Street source. 'We don't want to be there any longer than we have to be, the Iraqis don't want us to be there any longer than we have to be, but the Iraqi Prime Minister has made it very clear that our presence there is one that is necessary.'

It was revealed yesterday that an Iraqi judge issued the warrants for the arrest of the two rescued soldiers, accusing them of killing one policeman and wounding another, carrying unlicensed weapons and holding false identification.

The continuing preparations for a military withdrawal come, however, as officials are bracing themselves for a new political crisis in Iraq next month, with what many regard as the inevitable rejection of a new constitution by a two-thirds majority in three provinces, sufficient to kill the document and trigger new elections.

The same officials believe that a failure of the controversial constitution - which Sunnis say favours the Shia majority - would require at least another year of political negotiations, threatening any plans to disengage.


Exactly! Look what they did to Soc. Security.
nm
O is smarter than JM on nat'l security.
Just for starters, here are a few concepts that would tend to argue in favor of inernational diplomacy...and hes got a brilliantly inspired plan.
2nd clue: He knows that US cannot be a leader in a world that it has alientated.
3rd clue: He understands the concept of common purpose. It is in the best interest of all modern, civilized nations to defeat terrorism.
3rd clue: Understands that securing, destroying and stopping spread of WMDs can only succeed as a a global effort, i.e., we can't be everywhere at once.
4th clue: Recognizes value in renewing and constructing old alliances to meet common challenges and threats.
5th clue: Foreign aid aimed at constructing foundations of sustainable democracies; strong legislatures, independent judiciaries, rule of law, civil society, free press and honest police force.
6th clue: Knows his geography. Appropriage military initiatives against AL Quaeda and Taliban in Afghanistan, their home base.
7th: Securing nuclear weapons and materials from terrorists and rogue states.
8th: Energy Security.
9th: Obama on diplomacy: "The United States is trapped by the Bush-Cheney approach to diplomacy that refuses to talk to leaders we don't like. Not talking doesn't make us look tough — it makes us look arrogant, it denies us opportunities to make progress, and it makes it harder for America to rally international support for our leadership. Obama is willing to meet with the leaders of all nations, friend and foe. Reagan did this with Gorbachev, who posed a much greater immediate threat (i.e., "We are going to wipe you off the face of the earth") than Iran, Venezuela or Cuba does (for example). He will do the careful preparation necessary, but will signal that America is ready to come to the table, and that he is willing to lead."
10th: Obama: "The United States should have the courage and confidence to talk to its adversaries. Demanding that a country meets all your conditions before you meet with them, that’s not a strategy. It’s just naive, wishful thinking."

I realize this is a bit much for the scorched earth disciples, so it really serves very little purpose to really go to far beyond these basic principles, they way that he has. This is was real leadership looks like.
Well they should have the same security clearance
if they are a threat, as Obama is supposed to be. Okay if he gets in, then the FBI can do their thing and he can get thrown out of office, put in jail? or what? What has he done that is illegal??? Do not get it.

We are screwed with McCain also. Face it.
isn't that social security?
We already pay 7.5 of income to social security and employers pay an additional 7.5%. An IC pays the full 15% themself. Is this 5% in addition to that, replacing that or what? Can you provide additional information or a source for such?
Security check?

I apologize.  I'm obviously not understanding your statement.


Are you saying that a United States Senator, now internationally known because of his historic run for United States President, who is constantly surrounded by Secret Service people, is unable to pass a SECURITY check?


If that is what you're saying, please provide a link to support that.


Security Clearance
Can you post where you found that he had a security clearance denied? I have not seen that before.

Isn't US Citizenship required for senators? Wouldn't the FBI or the DSS uncovered back when Obama was first elected to senate?
Look what the Govt did to Soc. Security.
nm
Re: Social Security

Yes, I applied in April of 2008.  Was denied.  Filed Request for Reconsideration.  Was denied.  Am now awaiting a hearing, which might take another year.  Since my initial application, I've developed a few more diseases, and I'm hoping to talk with my lawyer today to see if we can send a "Dire Need Letter," since the situation is now dire.


As far as quarters, I have plenty of them and was even told when I applied how much I could expect to receive each month.


I never, EVER thought I would be in a position like this.  If anything, I've softened my attitude about "those people" who are forced to take advantage of government assistance.  You just never know when it might happen to you.


You don't believe in Social Security and Medicare?

What would your plan be for the elderly population then? 


No drug laws?  I thought libertarians only objected to posession of marijuana as a crime.  I didn't know you actually objected to all drug laws. So then, you believe all drugs should be legalized? 


You don't believe in a standing military.  I am not sure I remember that right. It's hard to remember that very long list without it in front of me.  So is your plan then that we should all live in a drug-haze, leave all other countries to their own devices and we won't need a military because we won't be bothering anyone and who will care anyway because, of course, we will all be stoned?  I can't say that I see any cogent thought behind this list.  It's a morally relative list of Doctor Feel Good.  I thought libertarians had more sense.  What a bummer dude. 


So you don't believe we have national security concerns?
If you do believe we have national security issues then what is your answer to keeping us safe?
So no opinion on war and peace, HL security
nm
McCain and National Security

McCain Lobbyist Scandal Continues: Government Warned Senator That Campaign Manager Was Undermining National Interests


The lobbying firm of McCain campaign manager Rick Davis acted in direct opposition to American foreign interests, which prompted a warning to McCain's Senate office from the United States government, according to a recent New York Times article.


Much has been reported about Rick Davis, top McCain adviser and lobbyist whose company, Davis Manafort, made its fortune in part by accepting jobs that didn't require employees to register as lobbyists. Davis has been in particular hot water for his company's work with pro-Russian Ukranian political candidates; Davis arranged for one of Putin's allies to meet with McCain during the time.


However, the New York Times has managed to take that already embarrassing story and make it even worse:


Mr. McCain may have first become aware of Davis Manafort's activities in Ukraine as far back as 2005. At that time, a staff member at the National Security Council called Mr. McCain's Senate office to complain that Mr. Davis's lobbying firm was undercutting American foreign policy in Ukraine, said a person with direct knowledge of the phone call who spoke on condition of anonymity.


A campaign spokesman, when asked whether such a call had occurred, referred a reporter to Mr. McCain's office. The spokesman there, Robert Fischer, did not respond to repeated inquiries.


Such a call might mean that Mr. McCain has been long aware of Mr. Davis's foreign clients. Mr. Davis took a leave from his firm at the end of 2006.



This isn't the only time when Davis' business interests have appeared counter to those of the United States: Davis' Ukranian contacts shared several business ties with Iran.


McCain suffered from a perception problem last month when the extent of his lobbying connection caused his campaign to fire several key staffers, as well as institute a new conflict-of-interest policy. The McCain camp has said that Davis is unaffected by the policy, as its implementation is not retroactive. Davis is no longer registered as a lobbyist.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/12/mccain-lobbyist-scandal-c_n_106832.html






threat to national security
and YOU have undisputed proof of this?
Senators, etc, don't have the same security clearance as
the president. Do a little research on the subject. Face it, if the chosen one gets in we are screwed, without the benefit of dinner and a movie first.
National security and low taxes.. For me, that
nm
Right..and without strong National Security, the
nm
Yes. Natl Security. Biden said O was not
nm
It's called national security. sm
jm is correct, in that the current administration's plans and policies have kept us safe.

A lot will be revealed, when it is safe to do so, so that our national security is not compromised.


You and I, as citizens, do not have the security clearance to be made aware of what has been averted.
It's not like he skipped a security briefing!
There was nothing in Bush's self-serving farewell speech that would be of any importance to Barack Obama. Obama has much more important things to concentrate on these days. Personally, I would rather have Obama concentrate on issues that will be affecting the future of our country than waste his time listening to a lame duck pat himself on the back!

As far as being disrespectful...respect is something that is earned, and George Bush has done nothing to earn respect from anyone.

Four days and counting till the lame duck gets shipped back to his murky Texas pond...and not one minute too soon, if you ask me!
Yes. President's first job is Natl Security.
nm
Speaking of National Security,
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30107040/

I hope we are not having a war on US soil soon.

WASHINGTON - Cyberspies have penetrated the U.S. electrical grid and left behind software programs that could be used to disrupt the system, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.

The spies came from China, Russia and other countries, and were believed to be on a mission to navigate the U.S. electrical system and its controls, the newspaper said, citing current and former U.S. national security officials.

The intruders have not sought to damage the power grid or other key infrastructure but officials said they could try during a crisis or war, the paper said in a report on its website.
"The Chinese have attempted to map our infrastructure, such as the electrical grid," a senior intelligence official told the Journal. "So have the Russians."

The espionage appeared pervasive across the United States and does not target a particular company or region, said a former Department of Homeland Security official.

"There are intrusions, and they are growing," the former official told the paper, referring to electrical systems. "There were a lot last year."

Authorities investigating the intrusions have found software tools left behind that could be used to destroy infrastructure components, the senior intelligence official said. He added, "If we go to war with them, they will try to turn them on."

Officials said water, sewage and other infrastructure systems also were at risk.

Protecting the electrical grid and other infrastructure is a key part of the Obama administration's cybersecurity review, which is to be completed next week.