By Paul E. Vallely

Yes, America, you are watching while Washington burns and self destructs before our very eyes. What does a country and its citizens do as their nation continues to collapse? What are you going to do? The Declaration of Independence states:

“To secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.”

“We are the Masters of our Fate and Captains of our Soul”. (English poet William Ernest Henley. It was written in 1875)

We cannot permit the current leaders in the White House and Halls of Congress to continue in their efforts to lead us down the road of Progressive Socialism. This is the current battle that we Constitutionalists face and we must be aggressive in our efforts. Notice, I have eliminated the terms from my vocabulary of liberal…conservative…Democrat…Republican…left and right as they have little meaning in today’s battle for our Country. Incompetence and Dishonesty of officials now the norm, as it relates to our National Security and Economy and is the rationale for resignations and a change of government.

There must be a calling and a plea for we Americans to Demand Resignation of these officials by the people of this country. We are even at a point that if Demand Resignations and elections do not happen to the degree to save the country then we must proceed to Impeachment and a serious transfer of Power at the highest levels of government.

Lincoln issued this warning in his inaugural address,

“Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government and form a new one. This is a most valuable and sacred right – a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world.”

Being a representative republic, not a democracy, and “rising up” means other than revolution by use of arms. The people must “rise up” (Stand Up as we now say) from the grass roots across this great country as we think of the greater good of this and future generations. We are limited in the peaceful transfer of power…resignation, elections, and impeachment.

The oath is simple and reads:

“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

Sadly, we have seen them violate their oath. Fraud, lying, and corruption are rampant and some have engaged in treasonous activities, and they effectively thumb their noses at us and have sold you to the highest bidder.

The Articles of Confederation were replaced with the Constitution, which granted the federal government enough authority to cultivate, promote, and secure the Blessings of Liberty. The balance of authority and individual liberty was understood. Power was confined to that which was enumerated in the Constitution with a certain and meaningful intent for check and balances.

Article One, S5, CII and the 10th Amendment provides the authority but this has been trumped by a system that rewards the powerful. In 1803 each congressional district averaged 38,476 people. In 2010 it is forecast to exceed 710,000. These numbers indicate power growth, and it effectively grew eight fold in the 20th century alone. No wonder our representatives seek to stay in office so long. Power, money and benefits beyond the reach of most Americans are the basis now for many politicians and revolving door appointees staying in office.

They must be termed out. With incumbency comes power. The party in the majority assigns power, so a long-term sitting representative can expect such power. A representative expected to stay in office in the 3rd Congress for approximately two years now expects 12 years, or 6 terms – so much for a “citizen government.” But this can be changed through grass roots organization and discourse. We must make it a local imperative and movement….of the People…by the People… and For the People.

“We, the People” have had enough. Enough is Enough.

The Obama White House and identifiable Members of Congress are now on a progressive socialist and treasonous death march and are bankrupting the country beyond expectations. We have watched them violate their sacred oath of office. “We, the People” cannot necessarily wait for the next round of elections. It is now that many of these public servants (and you know who they are) must put the people and the country’s interests above self-interest by resigning immediately. A civil uprising is still not out of the question as “pain” grips the country more each day. I am confident resignations will be forthcoming based on the efforts of the people. The 2010 vote is critical. This means raising your voice now to your neighbors, family, co-workers, and friends.

“We are the Masters of our Fate and Captains of our Soul”. I pray for another George Washington to appear within the year and lead us.

Paul Vallely is Chairman of Stand Up America.

Editor’s Note:

While Charlie Rangel (D-NY) is investigated for ethics violations stemming from his tax returns and influence peddling, he wants every American to serve mandatory duty to the country in uniform or in civil support of law enforcement agencies like the DHS.

Roll Call

Jennifer Yachnin writes in part:

It has been 729 days since Rep. Charlie Rangel publicly appealed for an ethics investigation into his own actions. He’s still awaiting the outcome.

The New York Democrat, who has paid more than $1.5 million to date on legal fees, faces a multipronged investigation into his personal finances, living arrangements, fundraising efforts and even his use of a House parking space.

The investigation into Rangel, begun in July 2008, has yet to set a House record for longevity. But Congressional ethics observers acknowledge that nearly two years is nonetheless a lengthy inquiry.

Fox News reports just now: The Rangel investigation is formally bringing charges with multiple ethics violations today.

In light of these developments, on July 15, 2010, he filed HR 5741:

HR 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.

Here is the full PDF of the bill: FRWebGate

Talk about ironies, do as he says, not as he does. Yes I can smell the air of irony too. It reeks like rotting flesh.

Editor’s Note:

To those of us who have been studying terrorism, jihad, and Islam itself for many years, it is difficult for us to understand why world politicians, and lay people alike do not understand what we already know to be true. It is difficult to have a discussion with people who clearly do not understand the differences between western thought and eastern thought, especially where Islam is involved.

In fact, it is apparent to we non-Muslims of understanding that many, and I dare say most Muslims do not know what we know. The reason is obvious to us, they have only listened to people that tell them what the teacher wants them to hear. They have, like most other people on earth, not taken the time to self-educate, to study, to understand. In our sound-bite mentality world in the west, this is utterly apparent. What is more disturbing is that most Muslims including many Imams are woefully under-educated in their own so-called religion.

I can say this, because I have argued with numerous Muslims, I have seen and heard others argue with them, and in virtually every case, it was easy to shred their core beliefs with facts they never knew. There are so many examples of these types of discussions, but most people never hear them, nor do they care. That is what is so frustrating to those of us who do understand Islam, its creator, its Qu’ran, and its teachings.

Therefore, it was great to see a video come out that in very simple terms breaks the ice for the unknowing, the ignorant, and the deniers. This is true, make no mistake, please watch:

YouTube

Press Release – For Immediate Release

Contact: Prof. Raymond Tanter

202-320-8434

rtanter@iranpolicy.org

U.S. Court of Appeals Slams Secretary of State Rice:

Re-Designation of Iranian Opposition Group as Terrorist Flawed

Washington, DC – On 16 July 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals – D.C. Circuit ruled that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice erred in renewing the terrorist listing of an Iranian opposition group, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI). The Court ordered Secretary Clinton to review the process of re-designation.

According to IPC President and former member of the National Security Council at the White House, Professor Raymond Tanter, “The Court’s decision provides Secretary Clinton with an opportunity to reverse the errors of Secretary Rice.”

The Court asserted, “The PMOI was notified of the Secretary’s [Rice’s] decision and permitted access to the unclassified portion of the record only after the decision was final. And even though the PMOI was given the opportunity to include in the record its own evidence supporting delisting, it had no opportunity to rebut the unclassified portion of the record the Secretary was compiling…”

According to R. Bruce McColm, President of the Institute for Democratic Strategies, “Clinton’s review could allow the PMOI to rebut questionable evidence Rice used.” Regarding that evidence, the Court judged, “Some of the reports included in the Secretary’s analysis on their face express reservations about the accuracy of the information contained therein…the Secretary did not indicate whether she accepted or discredited the reports…” As McColm points out, the Clinton State Department conceded that “the ultimate sources of the information was [sic] unknown and as such, their access, veracity, and motivations were unknown…”

General Thomas McInerney (Lt Gen, US Air Force Ret) said, “Condoleezza Rice’s errors do not surprise me in the least, given her pattern of appeasing rogue regimes, such as Syria, North Korea, and Iran. By failing to follow the rule of law in re-designating an organization that represents pro-democracy forces in Iran, Rice appeases the ayatollahs and suppresses democracy in Iran.”

General Paul Vallely (MG, US Army Ret) said, “National security grounds can be used as a basis to revoke a terrorist designation; Secretary Rice’s failure to appreciate the national security benefits of revoking the PMOI listing was typical of her tenure as Secretary of State. The PMOI provides valuable intelligence on Tehran’s subversion of Iraq and the Iranian nuclear program. Such information provided by the PMOI could be used as lead intelligence to compare with that provided by Iranian defectors, such as nuclear scientist Shahram Amiri.”

Wanna get away? How about something completely new and different? Not just a cruise, but a chance to to be part of something larger than ourselves.

SpyCruise® is a private group aboard a cruise ship where members attend exclusive lectures and talks on espionage, spies, intelligence, counterterrorism and more. Speakers are intelligence experts, leaders, officers, operatives, analysts, authors and historians, many of whom served in the US Intelligence Community. Each cruise we choose a different ship, a different destination and a different agenda.

NEXT SPYCRUISE:

November 13-20, 2010 in the Caribbean

See previous SpyCruises:

Western Caribbean

Hawaii

London on the QE2

SpyCruise® is a unique opportunity for anyone interested in the topic of intelligence to meet and learn from real experts in the intelligence field as well as others who share the same interest in this topic and history, world affairs, intelligence, military, books, etc. Lectures are normally once a day and the rest of the time is yours to enjoy the cruise ship and its excursions at different destinations.

---

Speakers

Porter Goss, former Director of the CIA (more)

“Radical Fundamentalism and (Judeo-Christian) Western Civilization are Irreconcilable”

General Michael Hayden, former Director of the CIA and NSA (more)

“Iran’s Pursuit of Nukes and War on Terror: Continuity, and Change Between the 43rd and 44th Presidents”

Peter Brookes, Heritage Foundation Fellow, former CIA Operations Officer (more)

“North Korea: Master of Mayhem”

Michael Braun, retired DEA Operations Chief; Managing Partner, Spectre Group International (more)

“Drugs and Terror”

Clare Lopez, retired CIA Operations Officer; CI CENTRE Professor; Vice President, Intelligence Summit (more)

“Iran in Transition: Regime Destabliziation and Militarization”

Bill Harlow, retired US Navy Captain; former chief spokeman for the CIA (more)

“National Security and the News Media: Keeping Secrets in an Open Society” with Fred Francis

Fred Francis, broadcast journalist, retired national security reporter for NBC News (more)

“National Security and the News Media: Keeping Secrets in an Open Society” with Bill Harlow

Major General Paul Vallely, US Army, retired (more)

“Current Intelligence and Current Security Threats to the US: Middle East, Afghanistan and more”

Dr. Michael Corcoran, President, Henley-Putnam University

---

By Kerry Patton and Scott W. Winchell

Stand Up America presented an article only a short few months back entitled Enemy Infiltration by an Ideology. Within, it was noted that the United States has been infiltrated by the Soviet Union dating back to the 1960’s. The espionage tactic was not traditional; rather the concept was extremely unconventional to those understanding the art of espionage.

The entire principle of Russian espionage tactics used against the United States was simple; socially condition the masses with memes. A meme, is a unit of cultural ideas, symbols or practices, which can be transmitted from one mind to another through writing, speech, gestures, rituals, or other imitable phenomena. Memes are akin to the human gene that physically transfers traits to offspring. The meme transfers a thought pattern that is adopted by others.

A great example is the fad of wearing clothing with the visage of Che Guevara imprinted on them. A man who was reviled by their grandparents, somehow became a status symbol among our youth.

The “Che” Phenomenon

Interestingly enough, a meme is only as strong as the human network it strikes as a social virus. Until recently, it was not easy to identify the memes that were sown ages before. Americans were taught to think for themselves. However, today, we seem memes manifested openly, and the result has become groupthink. The best example of that style of meme was the hope and change and fundamental transformation political statements of the Obama campaign. Our society swallowed the meme like a pill and in lock step, devoid of individual reasoning, voted for the man with the glib tongue who implanted memes throughout his entire campaign.

Take a second and ask yourself one very simple question. When was the last time you worked in an environment where a decision was made without going to the round table; a decision was made without group thought? The groupthink phenomenon has a certain underlying aspect that makes it impossible to think for yourself. If you do not agree with the group, then you are on the outside, the enemy, a freak, a racist. You must have nefarious intentions and therefore your thought is cast aside, and the meme has succeeded.

The premise of groupthink on the surface has numerous positives, however; the negatives far outweigh the positive but are not identifiable until it is too late. Another example may take place in your workplace. The CEO may gather you together to discuss a decision that must be made. It sounds like you have been invited into the inner sanctum by being invited, but what you don’t know is that the reason for the meeting is actually a method to see who disagrees. The decision has been made, but the meme needs to be fed. If you disagree in that meeting, you may as well pack up your office. Maybe you survive this time, but surely if you do it more than once, you are toast, for good.

In the United States today, we have been infiltrated with a meme that is corrupting our own thought process as individuals. The tactic used to promote this is known as social and cultural cognition. Cultural Cognition is a theory related to the shaping of our own individual opinions to conform to the views of the groups with which we most strongly identify. This theory is often taught in psycho-anthropological educational settings.

Today, the main stream media and entrenched politicians alike have conceptualized grand strategies based upon their own Marxist ideologies incorporating this cultural cognition principle, or meme. Don’t believe me? Why it is that today, anyone who speaks out against President Barrack Obama is immediately construed as a racist, or a mob, or a right wing radical? Why is it that today, that the NAACP viciously attacks the Tea Party as racists, yet their own allies in Eric Holder’s office do the very thing the NCAA purports?

More intriguing, what was the real story of the Russian spy ring caught inside America? If they were not seeking state level secrets as the publicly released affidavit states, what were they attempting? Were they attempting to ‘get close with policy makers?’ Was there an alternative meme in play?

America is rapidly losing its independent intelligence founded within “We the People.” More concerning is the fact that no one appears to stand up against this old Russian tactic of infiltrating and influencing our own individual thought and free will because the truth is, our most sacred freedom of individualism is rapidly deteriorating. Groupthink is now the norm, and anyone who does not agree will find themselves on some sort of list. Maybe the list John Brennan and the White House have tabulated of Americans to be assassinated.

Why don’t we “Stand Up America?” It is time to stand up against these memes of social and cultural principles. Let’s refuse to allow the indoctrination of these negative memes that are rapidly assisting a socialistic agenda within the corrupt Washington D.C. elite. Stand up and re-introduce individual thought. Learn how to think as an individual again by educating yourself, speaking truth to power and groupthink, boldly embracing the values we grew up with, and that our founding fathers gave us the opportunity to seek life, liberty, and happiness. It is the only true medicine to defeat the social and cultural virus of Marxism here within the United States.

By Bret Stephens

WSJ

It’s a question I often get from people who suppose I have a telepathic hotline to Benjamin Netanyahu’s brain. I don’t, but for a long time I was confident that an attack would happen in the first six months of this year. Since it didn’t, it’s worth thinking through why.

First, though, let me explain my previous thinking. In the spring of 2008, there was intense speculation that then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, fresh from ordering an attack on a covert Syrian reactor, was giving serious thought to an Israeli strike on Iran. President Bush – who Israelis believed would give them the diplomatic cover and logistical support they would need for such a strike, especially if things went amiss – had only a few months left to go. The release of the December 2007 National Intelligence Estimate claiming (erroneously, as we now know) that Iran had halted its nuclear weaponization effort meant it was highly unlikely that the U.S. would attack.

Finally, Israeli planners understood that the longer they delayed a strike, the harder it would be to achieve meaningful effects. Iran would have more time to harden its facilities, improve its defenses, and disperse its nuclear materials.

So why didn’t Israel act then? A variety of reasons, the most plausible of which was that Mr. Olmert believed an Israeli strike on Iran was a huge gamble, and that it would be rash to attack before every diplomatic, political or covert means to stop Iran’s nuclear bid had been explored. Then came Barack Obama with his time-limited offer to negotiate with Tehran, followed by Iran’s post-election unrest, which briefly aroused hopes that the regime might be toppled from within.

By the end of last year, it was clear that both hopes were misplaced. It was clear that the limited sanctions being contemplated by the Obama administration were not of a kind to deter Iran from its nuclear bids. It was clear that those bids were moving steadily closer to fruition. And it was clear that the administration was ill-inclined to take military action of its own.

All of which persuaded me that, having duly given Mr. Obama’s diplomacy the benefit of the doubt, Israel – under the more hawkish leadership of Mr. Netanyahu – would strike, sooner rather than later. Plainly I was wrong.

What gives?

Here are four theories in ascending order of significance and plausibility.

The first is that Israeli military planners have concluded that any attack would be unlikely to succeed (or succeed at a reasonable price). Maybe. But this analysis fails to appreciate the depth of Israeli fears of a nuclear Iran, and the lengths they are prepared to go to stop it. A successful strike on Iran may be at the outer periphery of Israel’s capabilities, but senior Israeli military and political leaders insist it is not completely beyond it.

A second theory is that Israel is biding its time as it improves its military capabilities on both its offensive and defensive ends. Yesterday Israel completed tests of its Iron Dome missile defense shield, designed to guard against the kind of short-range rockets that Hamas and Hezbollah might use in retaliation against an Israeli strike on Iran. The system will begin coming on line in November. Israel is also mulling the purchase of a semi-stealthy variant of the F-15 as an alternative to the much more expensive F-35, delivery of which has been delayed till 2015. What Israel decides could be a telling indicator of what it intends.

The third theory concerns the internal dynamics of Israeli politics. Mr. Netanyahu may favor a strike, but he will not order one without the consent of Defense Minister Ehud Barak, President Shimon Peres, Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi and perhaps also Mossad chief Meir Dagan. This inner cabinet is said to be uniformly against a strike, with the wavering exception of Mr. Barak. But Mr. Ashkenazi and Mr. Dagan are due to step down within a few months, and who Mr. Netanyahu chooses to replace them will have a material bearing on the government’s attitude toward a strike.

Finally, Israeli leaders are mindful of history. Put aside the routine comparisons between a prospective military strike on Iran with Israel’s quick and effective destruction of Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981. As I’m reminded by Michael Doran, a Middle East scholar at NYU, Israel’s leaders are probably no less alert to the lessons of the Suez War in 1956. Back then, a successful military operation by Britain, France and Israel to humiliate Egypt’s Gamel Abdel Nasser (in many ways the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of his day) fell afoul of the determined political opposition of the Eisenhower administration, which mistakenly thought that it could curry favor with the Arabs by visibly distancing itself from Israel and its traditional European allies. Sound familiar?

There is now talk that the Obama administration may be reconsidering its military options toward Iran. Let’s hope so. Israel may ultimately be willing to attack Iran once it reckons that it has run out of other options, as it did prior to the Six Day War. But its tactical margin for error will be slim, particularly since an effective strike will require days not hours. And the political risks it runs will be monumental. As Mr. Doran notes, in 1956 it could at least count on the diplomatic support of two members of the U.N. Security Council. Today, the U.S. is its last significant friend.

This is an unenviable position, and Israel’s friends abroad would do well to spare it easy lectures. Iran is not Israel’s problem alone. It should not be Israel’s problem alone to solve, to its own frightful peril.

By Diana West

MG Paul Vallely has some excellent questions for our civilian and miitary leadership today. He also has some excellent answers – all of which involve abandoning once and for the self-destructive, self-defeating, not to mention masochistic, strategies of “counter-insurgency” (COIN) doctrine and nation-building.

As Gen. Vallely points out: “The COIN principle is not based on winning; it is based on political whims and is not a true tenet of warfare. Warfare is, and always should be, about WINNING.”

Winning this specific war against forces impelled by Islamic ideology calls for unconventional measures, Gen. Vallely writes, not the conventional actions followed by lengthy occupations such as we have seen and are seeing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Such an unconventional war doctrine, as he writes below, “heavily leverages the core capability to break enemy states, target and destroy the enemy’s capability to bring harm to America” – what Gen. Vallely has long advocated as the “unheralded” Global Lily Pad strategy.

Get this through the Pentagon’s head and maybe we’ll get somewhere.

From Gen. Vallely’s Stand Up America blog:

Why do the United States and its military/political leaders and strategists still languish in failed strategies from World War II to the present?

Fact: Jihadists with small arms and IEDS in faraway places cannot harm the United States so there is no reason to order massive armies that require large and extensive bases and massive logistical support to fight them on their home turf. But that is the essence of failed “counterinsurgency” (COIN) strategies that have bewitched US military political leaders.
read more