Warmist Guru Dr Field--Sucking up Big Bucks from Big Oil

Chris Field, the co-chair of an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) working group told a St. Louis paper that American money spent on the IPCC "is a very good deal for the governments and for the world."

Field, echoed the recent warming alarmist party line of communicating better. He said he and the other smart people like him need to explain the science better to those less fortunate.

And he said "the scientific community" should be more nurturing and help "people understand" both the importance of the IPCC, and "how science works."

Field may be hiding a bit of information that might help us "understand how his science" is paid for.

Field is burrowed into something at Stanford called the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI). At FSI he is working on an "FSE Project." It's not clear what FSE is, but...the project "is a thorough assessment of the climate consequences of converting landscapes from their previous uses to biofuels."

An initial review of Field's background and snout in the trough seems identical to any number of "climate scientists" (Field's scientific background is Biological Sciences. His PhD research was on Leaf Aging in a California Shrub) sucking off the National Academy of Sciences, NASA, NOAA, and other government teats.

Their use of government grant money allows them to maintain their ideological purity. Their purity allows them to criticize any critics as "shills for Big Oil," the standard warmist put-down.

Well, Dr Field has got some 'splaining to do, Ricky.

The FSE project is funded by the Global Climate Energy Program (or Project, they use both on different websites).

And where does GCEP get its money? "About Us" reveals "The Sponsors" are : ExxonMobil, General Electric, Schlumberger, and Toyota!

In fact, "The Project's sponsors will invest a total of $225 million" in this Green boondoggle. Sort of like hush money--pay off the IPCC chairs and they'll leave you alone?

While General Electric is a Global Warming shill, the other three must certainly be in the man-made global warming hall of shame.

The enviro-whackos' constant refrain when criticized is: "You are a paid tool of Big Oil."

As Field said in his interview with the St Louis paper, "I don't get any salary from the IPCC."

No, Dr. Field but you do get a salary from Big Oil!

Cairo Meddler--Czar Brennan Needs to Go

Originally appeared in Big Peace

The Failed Puppet-master: Fire John Brennan

By Kent Clizbe

Late Thursday morning, President Obama’s CIA Director, Leon Panetta (a former Congressman and White House Chief of Staff with zero intelligence community experience) testified to the House Intelligence Committee that Egyptian President Mubarak “will step down this evening.”

 
Four hours later, Mubarak publicly announces that he is not stepping down, and that he rejected “any and all dictations from abroad,” in a direct slap-down of Obama and his minions.

At the same hearing with Panetta, the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), James Clapper opined that the Egyptian-based Islamic extremist group, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), was “largely secular.”

Five days previously, Obama’s hand-picked envoy to Egypt, Frank Wisner, after visiting the country, said that Mubarak must remain in power to manage the transition. Obama immediately retracted that statement, and Wisner disappeared.

Unfortunately, we would be lucky if it were only Panetta, Clapper, and Wisner mucking around. The big story is the Obama lackey we have not seen since the Maghreb Mutinies began, Obama’s Czar for Terrorism, and de facto intelligence chief, John Brennan.

Brennan has sought out TV cameras at every opportunity since January 2009. He popped up to talk about any issue dealing with intelligence, terrorism, Arabs, or Islam. He took it upon himself to declare the words “war on terrorism, jihad, global war” off limits. He trumpeted his “summer in Indonesia,” (like the President!), his semester abroad in Cairo, and his CIA station chief experience in “the region.”

Burrowing into his lair on Pennsylvania Avenue, Brennan gathered the strings of the national intelligence infrastructure and became the intel bureaucracy puppet master. Hapless generals passed through the DNI position, each undermined by Brennan, perched next to his idol’s throne, whispering in Obama’s ear. Remember DNI Clapper telling Diane Sawyer he didn’t know about “London.” Who quickly chimed in with the proper answer? Why, it was Brennan—showing up the titular head of American intelligence.  

To understand the Brennan shadow play going on behind the scenes in Egypt, you first must understand the man—he is a CIA analyst. To understand the man, you must understand the culture of the bureaucracy that he ascended from—the CIA’s Directorate of Intelligence (DI), the nation’s intelligence analysis belly button—and the type of person that culture produces.

A CIA analyst’s life is like being in grad school, forever. Just like an academic, the analyst is evaluated on his record of “publications.” Just like an academic, the analyst spends his time researching, writing, defending his work to committees, and trying to get his writing published. The big difference is that a CIA analyst has more resources, classified intelligence reports from operators around the world that an academic does not have. Otherwise, a CIA is a virtual clone of an academic.

Just as in academia, the point of the exercise (creating finished intelligence to guide U.S. policy makers) becomes lost in academic politics, backstabbing, ass kissing, and internecine scheming. Just as in academia, CIA analysts who want to move up yearn for a position closer to the seat of bureaucratic power.

An analyst’s most treasured professional accomplishment is to have a hand in the Presidential Daily Brief (PDB). An article published in the PDB can be the crowning achievement of an analyst’s career. Circling the flame of power, like calculating moths, they try to get closer. The ultimate career position for a CIA analyst is to be the President’s Briefer, the guy who carries the PDB in to the President every morning. If an analyst is allowed to do that only once in his lifetime, he can die happy, fulfilled. He’s been to the mountaintop.

The other point that you must understand about analysts is what they are not. CIA analysts, regardless of what you’ve read or seen in Tom Clancy movies, are not spies. They do not manage spies. They do not recruit spies. They do not handle spies. They are not covert operators. They do not uncover secrets. They do not fast-rope from Blackhawks.

They sit in cubicles and research and write. Then they argue among themselves about what each other has written. Then they brief others on their articles. Then they do that again. And again, and again, and again. Because of the dreary reality of their lives, the analysts are allowed large budgets for travel. They travel to the countries in their portfolio, on boondoggle familiarization trips—which are more like vacations.

Many CIA analysts join the Agency believing the Tom Clancy hype. Once they learn what their job is, they can become bitter. And they can succumb to envy—of the operators who do recruit spies, travel the world under cover, meet and befriend exotic people, and plan and execute clandestine operations. There is a definite culture of envy in the CIA’s DI.

Because of this envy, occasionally, when the CIA goes through one of its bouts of self-destructiveness, the director of the CIA appoints an analyst, to be the chief of an overseas operational station. And when a presidential administration is extremely anti-CIA, like the Clintons, it appoints an analyst to be in charge of the entire Directorate of Operations.

John Brennan is a CIA analyst. In his mind, he is the Tom Clancy hero—the analyst fast-roping into a crisis, sub-machine gun locked and loaded, ready to respond. But in reality, he is an academic with sharply honed in-fighting claws, ready to rip to shreds a rival’s analytical piece so that his will be published.

Brennan clawed his way to the top of the analytical pile—he was President Clinton’s PDB briefer. During the Bush presidency, he burrowed into the CIA bureaucracy, snuggling up to Clinton appointee DCI Tenet. He finished his career by standing up the failure-prone Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC) and the National Counter-terrorism Center (NCTC), both of which were supposed to “connect the dots,” which analysts failed to connect before the 9/11 attacks.

Brennan retired from NCTC and joined an intelligence contractor. NCTC then awarded his firm a contract to provide connect-the-dots analytical software. In the Christmas Day “panties-bomber” failed terrorist attack, NCTC, using Brennan’s software, failed to connect the dots. Obama assigned Brennan to investigate the failure. Sweet work, if you can get it.

Now he’s used those nasty analytical academic skills to worm his way into the clueless White House’s foreign policy and intelligence inner sanctum. He hitched his wagon to Obama’s star early, and has ridden it far. Nestled into his office in the White House, an analyst’s nirvana, he has jealously built his intelligence empire. He is the de facto DNI, DCIA, and director of covert operations. Like a corrupt Turkish eunuch, manipulating a callow crown prince, he whispers in his ruler’s ear and rivals disappear.

This background brings us up to today. The morning after Mubarak told Obama to leave Egypt alone, after the DNI said the MB is sort of like Knights of Columbus, after the DCIA said he’s watching CNN and it looks like Mubarak will resign.

Where is John Brennan? Since the uprising began in Tunisia, until today, John Brennan has not appeared on national TV once. Now that you know his background, it should be easy to guess, as I’m doing. I don’t have any inside knowledge, but I’d bet that our hero Brennan is ensconced in a five-star suite in Cairo, running what he believes is a cunning covert influence operation. My guess is that Mubarak’s rejection of “dictations from abroad” should have been “dictations from John Brennan.”

This massive cluster-failure of a foreign policy looks like an amateur operation, run by a wannabe operator. The one personality in the Obama administration that fits that description is John Brennan.

Egypt today is no place for a “semester abroad expert” political analyst to be allowed free rein. Obama, fire John Brennan today. Let the DNI that you and your party craved do his work. You have a huge intelligence collection and analysis infrastructure idling while Brennan plays his egomaniacal games.

Do the right thing. Bring Brennan back out of the shadows and put him to pasture. Let professionals do the job.

What Ronald Reagan Means to me

Originally published on BigPeace

February 2011

Ronald Reagan—Inspiration for Personal Development

The first Presidential election I was old enough to vote was 1980, Ronald Reagan’s first successful run. My journey during his two terms was a miracle—from a lost anti-American liberal to a proud American veteran and conservative. Was that a coincidence? Or was it leadership?

I was a 20 year old, maggot-infested, long-haired, skull-full-of-mush product of liberal brain-washing. I read Time magazine every week, and watched Walter Cronkite on the 6 o’clock news. I’d spent twelve years in National Education Association controlled public schools. I knew that Joseph McCarthy was bad, that Richard Nixon had done something really bad and was “Tricky.”

I knew that it was cool to “party.” That drinking and marijuana were ways to open your mind and show how counter-culture you were. I knew that Ronald “Raygun-zzzz,” like they pronounced it on the Woodstock album, was a whacky old kook.

As I looked for my voter registration card, I couldn’t have cared less about the vote. I had no appreciation of my country, my freedom, or the grave responsibility that our country entrusted me with—the right to vote.

Drinking a six-pack every night, everything was pretty much a fog to me. I’d screwed up, big time, flunked out of college. Now I waited for the date to report to Air Force basic training. Riding my ten-speed over the Roanoke River, up the hill to Gaston for a four hour shift the in mini-mart a couple times a week kept me busy.

Faced with the momentous decision, Jimmy Carter, or Ronald Reagan, I threw away my vote. Thank God I didn’t vote for Carter, but I didn’t vote for Reagan either. Something I’d read in National Lampoon stuck with me when I went to the fire station that day, and I wrote in “Nobody.” What a waste.

Basic training in San Antonio started a week after President Reagan’s inauguration, the end of January 1981. Sobered up, I started a slow progression to reality. Basic whipped a little discipline into me. Vietnamese language training and technical training showed me that I could learn, and had a talent for languages, and a passionate interest in Asia.

Three years in the Philippines kept my interest in Asia alive, and opened my eyes to the beauty of America.

Discharged and back in college, it was President Reagan’s second term. Of course, I’d voted for the Gipper the second time around, fully aware and sober.

Being a veteran in a university, during the long peaceful Cold War interregnum, was eye-opening. I saw the liberal bias and vile anti-Americanism on campus, directed at President Reagan.

Ronald Reagan was my hero now. He stood up to the communists, who I now understood, after studying the Vietnam war, and communism, were exactly what President Reagan called them—evil. And he stood up to the American friends of the communists, the Progressives, liberals—Carter, the Kennedys, McGovern, Jesse Jackson, and the press.

Every day, I realized more and more how right President Reagan was, in foreign policy and in domestic policy. By 1989, when President Reagan left office, I was teaching at a university in Saudi Arabia, after working in a refugee camp in Southeast Asia.

Every day, I thanked God I was an American, and that my country was a shining beacon of hope, freedom, and prosperity for the world. I was proud to be a Reagan American.

Ronald Reagan, reviled by the Progressive haters, and denigrated by the liberal press, was the ideal of American humility, humor, dignity, honor, and quiet determination to do the right thing.

Ronald Reagan’s presidential administration coincided with my own coming of age, and emergence from a liberal haze of ignorance and weak-minded following.

Ronald Reagan was a real American hero. An original and a role model. With his philosophical and moral guidance, we all had a chance to glimpse his shining city on a hill. Did you?

Was it a coincidence that I made the journey from a lost liberal to American conservative during President Reagan’s time in office? What do you think?

Maghreb Mutinies: Karl Marx Meet Sayid Qutb; Lenin Meet Osama bin Laden

Maghreb Mutinies: Karl Marx Meet Sayid Qutb; Lenin Meet Osama bin Laden

Originally appeared in BigPeace,; January 28, 2011

The Wikileaks revolutions sweeping the Arab world seem democratically promising. Tweeting twenty-somethings challenge iron-fisted dictators. Populist mutineers trash the ruling clique’s Mediterranean villas. Royal families (and wannabe royal families) pack up their gold and flee to Europe or a nearby sympathetic kingdom.

Popular sentiment in the North African countries (“the Maghreb,” the lands beyond the sunset) appears to support reform. But it is a broad-based support—with a wide range of flavors. All the reformers, in all the Maghreb, share a commonality—they are Muslim.

Recent history provides a parallel to guide our understanding, and response, to the Maghreb Mutiny—the Russian Revolution.

A broad-based coalition reflecting popular discontent, made up of a spectrum of loosely linked groups that shared a common philosophical base. In Russia, the common base was socialism. In the Maghreb the common base is Islam.

The majority of people in 1905 Russia supported government reform to relieve the oppression of the tsar’s royal dictates. A socialist coalition, ranging from the radical Marxists, to the more moderate Social Revolutionists, took control of the Russian government after the tsar fell to riots, strikes, and protests.

The majority of people in the Maghreb support government reforms to relieve the oppression of their leaders’ secular dictates. While details are sketchy in the Maghreb, it is very likely that the opposition is gathering a coalition, which will be formed around their common belief system—Islam. It is also sure that the Muslim coalition will represent a range of flavors—from modernist Islam, to Islamic extremists. The extremist Muslim Brotherhood, followers of the teachings of Sayid Qutb, and bin Laden followers are surely in the coalition.

If, as has happened in Tunisia, and as it seems increasingly likely elsewhere, the Maghreb Mutinies succeed in overthrowing dictators, the aftermath could continue the parallels to the Russian revolution. This will not be a good development, for America, or for the people involved.

After the broad-based Russian socialist revolution, a committed extremist minority, the communist Bolsheviks, out-maneuvered the majority. The communists were tireless in using political, military, and terror tactics to wear down their coalition partners. Finally, the Bolsheviks seized power from their coalition partners, in October 1917.

The immediate aftermath was a bloodbath—the Red Terror. The Red Terror was followed by several years of ruthless civil war. The communists wiped out their coalition partners and anyone else who resisted their rule. The next 70 years were miserable, bloody, soul-deadening proof of the bankruptcy of communism.

While we may cheer a seemingly democratic uprising in the Maghreb, to paraphrase the prophet Hosea, the sowers of the wind shall reap the whirlwind. The fall of secular oppressors could very likely lead to the rise of religious oppressors, even against the will of the majority. A Green Terror could very easily mimic the Red Terror.

Marxist extremists did it in Russia; Qutubist extremists could repeat the strategy and tactics in the Maghreb.

If ever America needed a self-interested, strong, clear voice in the realm of foreign affairs, now is the time. Unfortunately, we are saddled with the reed- thin, apologetic Obama foreign affairs crowd. Following Obama’s Cairo apology to the Muslim world, he withdrew to the golf course on Ft. Myers.

His Middle East representatives, czar George Mitchell, and foreign affairs neophyte (which part of first lady of Arkansas prepared her for international affairs?) Hillary Clinton, are doomed to disrespect in a region where face and power are requirements for effectiveness.

Will we sit back and watch the second coming of an extremist coup following a popular revolution, dooming to slavery the masses struggling for freedom? Or will we aid and abet the wrong side? The President’s shaky foundation--apologizing for America, and uncertain bows to kings—does not bode well for America’s interests. Prepare for the whirlwinds.

BigPeace.com article: Qutb Meet Lenin; El-Baradei Meet Kerensky

SOTUS 2011--WTF?

BigPeace article: Obama 2012--WTF?

Assange the Anarchist

Wik-An-Ar-Ki in the Cloud

By: Kent Clizbe

Originally appeared in BigPeace; Dec. 19, 2010

Anarchists in the 19^th and early 20^th centuries plotted violence against governments around the globe. Their anti-organization philosophy was attractive to a strange fringe of social misfits. Some recognized the reality of might versus right. Some advocated illegal acts to satisfy personal desires, instead of ideology. Others advocated a vague belief in free love and multiple sexual partners. Their anti-establishment beliefs seemed to parallel the objectives of socialists and communists. Anarchists joined the Russian revolutionaries to fight the Czar.

Zo d’Axa, French anarchist, a predecessor of Assange

By definition, anarchists are unorganized. But loosely linked groups of anarchists helped the communist revolution. Less than five years after the Bolsheviks seized power, anarchists were destroyed by the communist dictator’s intelligence service. Arrested, convicted, exiled to the gulag, or executed, the anarchists felt the sting of the dictator’s lash as did the capitalists they despised.

Emma Goldman, Russian Anarchist

Fast forward to the 1990s, anarchists were like a global mobile party. Dressed in black, faces fashionably cloaked in Palestinian head scarves, they partied at global economic meetings around the globe. Trashing McDonalds was the anarchist statement of 2000.

Then the internet changed everything. Suddenly thin techno-geeks who couldn’t get dates were empowered. They could express their individuality by hacking. They hacked into government systems, commercial systems, stole credit card numbers, and generally wreaked havoc.

Cloaking their hacking antics in some sort of ideology must have seemed like a good idea. Some of them cloak themselves in anti-establishment anarchist robes. Much like the anarchists of a hundred years ago, these cyberpunks seem to be mostly unable to fit in to society.

Ironically, the tools the anti-establishment, anarchist hackers use—the internet, personal computers, wireless communications, and other technology—are the peak achievements of capitalism’s technological and industrial efforts. Without the combination of advanced social and government organizations providing the framework for capitalist endeavor, none of the technology so ably used by the anarchist hackers would even exist.

From the point of view of government and industry security specialists, the Julian Assange Wikileaks story is a nightmare. One of the first rules for any security is control. You need control of the input into the system. You need control of the network itself, the physical wiring or wireless connections. And you need to control access to your system. But the internet has thrived on anarchic freedom.

This relative freedom has worked pretty well up to now. Some countries block the free flow of information. Chinese government wraps any opinions it doesn’t like in a security blanket, behind the Chinese internet firewall. Other authoritarian governments control the flow of electrons through their networks, and control the bits delivered to consumers under their control.

Now, the anarchist Assange has revealed the ultimate vulnerability of the “Cloud.” The current Cloud dreams will dissolve with the inevitable response to the anarchist exposure of massive amounts of classified information.

During the dot.com frenzy of the late 1990’s I was the premier computational linguist recruiter. No one had the knowledge of the specialty, combined with a network of professionals that I did. My business was pure knowledge and relationships. Communicating only on the internet and telephone, I established relationships with businesses that needed computational linguists. They paid me to find professionals who were ready, willing and able to work for them.

Without the internet, I could never have created the business, nor been successful. But at the same time, I had to protect my business from the internet. I kept notes on each candidate and client, candid assessments of their personalities, and personal and professional needs and requirements. If those private business files were exposed on the internet, the result would have been disastrous, to my business, to my clients, and to the candidates.

An early Cloud company offered to put all my recruiting records and communication on their servers, removing the need for me to maintain my own databases in house. It didn’t make sense to me—give up control of the keys to my business, in return for what? I didn’t play, and still don’t. Losing control of the keys to the business, putting confidential details in the Cloud seemed insane.

In the same way, governments and companies’ internal communications and deliberations must be kept secret. These communications are the internal thought processes of organizations. These are confidential for good reason. Public exposure would destroy their ability to operate. Protection of this information is a fundamental right. The U.S. Constitution protects us in the Bill of Rights—the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure.

Assange and his anarchist buddies illegally obtain personal and confidential information from free governments, like the U.S., and from businesses. Like the Russian anarchists after 1917, they may very well soon find the truth in the old saying, “Be careful what you wish for, because you may get it.”

Although the anti-American forces now sing his praises, it’s unlikely Assange would prosper in a totalitarian society. Imagine how he or his fellow anarchists would fare in a Chinese, Iranian, North Korean, or Burmese prison cell. Assange may soon be begging to spend time in an American prison.

BigPeace.com article: Wik-Anarki

Obama's Extra-judicial Killings

Selective Progressive Outrage? Extra-judicial Killings or Water-boarding, Take Your Pick

By Kent Clizbe

Originally appeared in BigPeace; Dec. 9, 2010

Newsweek first revealed that the Bush administration used harsh interrogation tactics to obtain intelligence from terrorist masterminds in 2004. American Progressives leapt at the chance to attack the evil, war-mongering, Halliburton-loving, Cheney-controlled Bush. Their pious, humanitarian tinged caterwauling was heard non-stop, coast to coast, on every Progressive media outlet, from every college campus, and from Hollywood.

Progressive hand-wringing over the horror of water-boarding grew to epic proportions. They called for war crimes tribunals for the unrepentant fascist scum working to keep them safe from Al Qaeda. Hazing of prisoners at Abu Ghraib—in which helpless prisoners were stripped naked and forced to wear demeaning clothing—became, in the fevered Progressive imagination, tantamount to Auschwitz.

When I attended the International Ethics in Intelligence conference in 2006, the Progressive academics in attendance were mainly interested in discussing one topic—torture. Of the hundreds in attendance, I only ran across two other members who had ever been intelligence officers in the field. Few of the presenters on Torture, or the myriad related “ethical” issues had ever been at the pointy end of the spear. They lectured on “Just War Theory” and Hegelian ethics as applied to an Aristotelian world view, or other pseudo-intellectual rot. To a person, they condemned the Bush administration’s use of harsh interrogation tactics. The Guantanamo Bay prison camp was another popular target of revulsion.

Fast forward just four years later. Torture is out of the news. Gitmo remains open. The media quietly reports that CIA “drone strikes” (missile attacks from an unmanned aerial vehicles) and associated “targeted killings” have sky-rocketed since Obama gained control of the covert action elements of the U.S. Government. 

Our new President, the Progressive hero, rules the Executive Branch. The Executive controls the CIA, and all law enforcement and intelligence, including covert action. Covert killings, including UAV targeted killings, require a “finding” to be signed by the President.

In 2006 there were a reported total of two drone attacks in Pakistan, which killed a reported 23 people. In the first 11 months of 2010 the Obama administration is reportedly carried out 106 attacks in Pakistan, with a death toll of up to 857. Evidently, Obama’s left hand has been quite busy signing findings between rounds of golf and elbow-banging sessions on the hardwood court.

The faux outrage over water-boarding was over the top. Progressives vowed revenge on the Bush administration members who had reviewed and approved the harsh methods. The Progressive reaction to low-level, untrained jailers playing pranks on defenseless prisoners at Abu Ghraib created world-wide ill-will against the U.S. and our interests. In response, Americans were taken hostage and brutally tortured. Terrorists sawed and hacked the heads off of American and other allied hostages. They shared their gory work online.

The Progressive outrage machine seems to have run out of steam. Where is the outrage over the extra-judicial killings of 857 people, in Pakistan alone? We are not at war with Pakistan. The Obama administration waffles on whether we are still at war or not, and if so, with whom. People, including American and allied citizens, are alleged to be members of terrorist organizations. They are alleged to be planning terrorist attacks.

The Obama administration made a public vow to use legal and defensible approaches to combating “man-caused contingencies,” or whatever their political commissars have decided to call terrorism. They vowed to close Gitmo. They vowed to bring clarity to dealing with the poor innocents the bad Bushies had snatched from their cradles and sent to the prison on Cuba.

Their vain, self-congratulatory certainty of moral superiority was, and is, a sham. Now that Obama and his minions control the covert action apparatus, it has shifted into high gear. They operate in ways that were not even conceivable during the Bush administration. American, international, and local laws be damned.

While we surely need to have counter-terrorist operations, we also need to consider American and international law when we take those actions. A German legislator, a member of the Left party (leftovers from East Germany), pointed out that “Obama is not God,” after a German was killed. Maybe the understatement of the century, but I believe that unrepentant communist is quite prescient. It is possible that Obama’s extra-judicial killings could be his Watergate. Who knew what and when?

Anwar al-Awlaki is certainly affiliated with terrorism. He clearly inspires al Qaeda wannabes, including the Ft Hood terrorist, Nidal Hassan, and the hapless Christmas 2009 Panties Bomber.

It appears that Obama’s policy is to target for extra-judicial killing by a UAV missile American citizens who inspire terrorists to plan attacks. Considering the actual, armed attack on the Discovery Channel by eco-terrorist (“humans are filth”) James Lee, Al Gore should probably check in with the White House regularly.

BigPeace.com article--Selective Progressive Outrage? Water-boarding or Extra-judicial Killings? Take your pick.

Tilting at Lavendar Windmills

War-time Priorities—Tilting at Lavender Windmills

By Kent Clizbe

Originally appeared in BigPeace; Dec. 8, 2010

We are a nation at war. We are engaged in combat in two countries. We have combat and support troops in scores of countries around the globe. Hostile groups plan and operate 24 hours a day against us. They would love to get their hands on an American to take hostage. They would love to pull off a Mumbai attack in downtown San Francisco.

Our enemies plot ways to weaken our economy and our society. Chinese espionage agents actively steal our economic secrets. Russian espionage officers run networks under commercial cover, aer arrested, and then whisked out of the country in a 10 for 2 swap. The Russians muscle us into a new nuclear arms treaty.

A rogue Aussie cyber-punk operating a global intelligence collection network, with funding from who knows where, recruits penetrations of our military and diplomatic services. His recruits provide him with hundreds of thousands of classified government communications. He brazenly flaunts American security, and publishes his espionage haul on the internet, and shares the raw take with a variety of hostile news outlets, including the New York Times.

An insane punk Communist dictatorship in Korea teases and taunts American good will. After taking millions in assistance funds in exchange for quitting its nuclear weapons development programs, North Korea missiles an allied ship. Then, rubbing our nose in its mess, the little commie-state shells an allied island into oblivion.

Tinpot Latin American communist dictatorships flaunt their disdain for American leadership.

And what is the Progressive Obama administration’s national security focus? Ensuring that homosexuals have equal rights to join and serve in America’s all-volunteer military. Obama’s campaign to end “Don’t ask, don’t tell” is pay-back to his rabid homosexual and Progressive base.

We have had more killed in action in Afghanistan in 2010 than during the eight years previously. We are still battling terrorist and insurgent forces in Iraq. We have combat troops across the globe. We are assisting multiple countries around the world in counter-terrorism operations.

Our military resources are thin in many areas. We need many more linguists—Dari, Pashto, Arabic, and Farsi. We need technical skills—computers and communications. We need people who can operate in foreign cultures.

But in all of the far-flung places we are operating, against various enemies, and with various allies, there has not been one public report of our military not having enough homosexuals to get the job done. I have not heard of an unmet demand for open homosexuals in our forward operating bases in Afghanistan.

Our military should be doing exactly what we need to do to win our wars. Our military should be doing exactly what we need to do to support American and allied interests abroad. Our military is not the place for Politically Correct attacks on our culture.

Those who, during our prosecution of a global war, waste one second of one military member’s time on a social issue, come very close to being a friend of our enemies. One general, one private, one sailor, one airman, any single military member who wastes one minute dealing with the Obama administration’s, and their Pelosite friends’ corrosive drive to allow open homosexuals to serve in the military, is wasting American military resources. Those resource could be used to eliminate the Taliban. Instead, our military is forced to waste massive amounts of time and energy tilting at social engineering windmills.

Stop the cultural combat. Leave the military alone. Let them fight. Let them win. Anything less is near treason.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell: Tilting at Lavender Windmills