Issues 2004 - Homeland Security

Jeff laid out his views on homeland security in his third post on Issues 2004.

I don't disagree with much of what Jeff has to say on this subject. It's strange that we essentially agree about homeland security but disagree so fundamentally about Iraq which was pitched as something we needed to do to make us safer at home.

I would like Bush/Cheney to take back the tacit accusation that a vote for Kerry is a vote for Al Qaeda and the rest of the terrorists because its nonsense. No president, no matter how stupid (and I don't believe Kerry is stupid), or how liberal (and I don't think Kerry is nearly as liberal as the Bush machine has made him out to be), would do anything to make us less secure. We have enormous investments in intelligence, security, and monitoring and they will only get increased under whomever runs this country for the next four years. Until Bush/Cheney acknowledges that fact, its really hard to have an intelligent debate about this issue. It's like my kids when they start bickering, you can't get back to a reasoned discussion.

Unlike Jeff, however, I do have an issue with the "Patriot" Act. We are a country that relishes our freedoms and civil liberties. The Bush Administration used 9/11 to put through a huge reduction in both our freedom and civil liberties. It's way overdone and dangerous. You'd think we'd all learn the lessons from doing things like imprisoning the innocent Japanse Americans in World War II. But we don't. We just keep making the same mistakes again and again.

I would focus more of our efforts on intelligence and I mean spies. People who will infiltrate the terrorists and neuter them. That's how we beat the Mafia. And that's how we'll beat the terrorists. It won't happen overnight, but done right with the proper investment of resources, training, and patience, it will happen.

Porter Gross, the nominee for the new CIA Director and a former spy, has said as much in his assessment of what's needed to improve our intelligence systems.

Finally, I think we need to maintain multiple intelligence agencies. The Pentagon should have its intelligence. The State Department should have its intelligence. The Justice Department should have its intelligence. We shouldn't merge it all into one single intelligence organization. We should, however, have some central coordinating role. I think that's what the job of the National Security Advisor should be. The President needs to have a strong and well respected person in that job who can enforce coordination and communication among these different organizations.

Comments

[Hector]

Please explain: "The Bush Administration used 9/11 to put through a huge reduction in both our freedom and civil liberties. It's way overdone and dangerous."

Please give me some examples of this "huge reduction" since I feel I have MORE civil liberties today that matter to me (better domestic partner benefits/laws, ending of the assault weapons ban, more political speech via 527s, etc.)

Most of my liberal friends can't name anything specifically they don't like about the Patriot Act except that it's just "bad".

[jackson]

Hector, I'm so glad you got your assault rifle working again, that's just fantastic news.
Fred, it seems we are doomed to make the same mistakes, not only one's we've made before, but the same one's that the Brittish made, and the Romans....

[Tony Alva]

Don't know how getting assault rifles back in circulation is a win for liberty, but Hector has asked a question that is worthy of an answer. How has the patriot act personnelly affected you (or Jackson) negitively? Very specifically, cite some instances of rights you had before passage of the bill and what you have experienced to date that can fit the description of infringement of your civil liberties other than long lines at the airport.

Just want to know...

[hey]

and how do you square your fear of 70s style CIA with increased reliance on real spies, when we face an enemy who aims to launch an insurgency here???

also, given that john kerry is on the record during the cold war talking about how we need less weapons and less spies, why do you think he'll be different now? when he and all his staff are against the military?

[jackson]

Tony,
I can't cite any infringement of my civil liberties. Most folks would never know if they had been violated by the Pat. Act. because nobody is going to inform them of it. I know I have not been on the recieving end of any of this because if they were listening to my phone calls, or peeking in window, they would have already arrested me! I'm with Jason, I'm not against it, I just wish it could have been more closely inspected and or reworked to insure that no abuses do occur. When you start toying with freedoms it's a slippery slope.

[Helmar]

"I would focus more of our efforts on intelligence and I mean spies. People who will infiltrate the terrorists and neuter them. That's how we beat the Mafia. And that's how we'll beat the terrorists."

Bollocks! The real cause lies much deeper than your cosmetic fixes seemt to suggest. Over and above that, intelligence/spies - in case you've missed that - means a further restriction of your civil liberties, because it would be naive to think that the intelligence/spying simply takes place outside the US in some country that 80% of the US population can't even find on the map.

The problems the US (and its allies) are facing has IMO two causes: greedy and unadulterated capitalism/imperialism AND the fact that Islam in general has been on its deathbed for the past dozen or so decades. The religion is outdated, hollow, spineless - and it's being abused left right and center. Now mix the misguided/fundamentalist attitude of some extremists with the "we are always right" attitude of the US, and you end up with a recipe for disaster, and for 9/11 repeats to be expected anytime, anywhere.

In short: as the British ambassador to Italy said recently: "George W. Bush is the best recruitment officer for al-Qaeda". What he means is that the US are making their own problems through their expansionist commercial and military "invasions" or other countries and the assimilation of their cultures and values. That this is the perfect breeding ground for guerilla fighters (so called "terrorists") goes without saying. But hey, it's always easier to divert funds from education and health care towards the military and intelligence services rather than going inside and thinking about the root cause of the problem.

That said, you should maybe ask yourself the question that David Icke always reminds us of: "Who benefits?" And as you find the answer (*), you will find that the enemy is essentially "you", not some misguided little religious fundamentalist who thinks some virgins are waiting for him in heaven.

* Who benefits from an oil price of $50/barrel? Who benefits from increased military spending? WHO? You KNOW who! And you also know that in many indirect ways you are SUPPORTING them. Time for introspection and some soul-searching, I'd say.

[Helmar]

Some of my previous posts may need backing up. Here it is.

URL: http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040922/D858E8780.html

NAVY TO AWARD $6.4B SATELLITE CONTRACT: The U.S. Navy will soon announce whether Lockheed Martin Corp. or Raytheon Co. will build a $6.4 billion communications system to beef up satellite services for U.S. troops, the White House and State Department, a spokesman said on Tuesday. Last Thursday, the Pentagon's Defense Space Acquisitions Board approved the Mobile User Objective System, or MUOS, of four to eight satellites that will provide narrowband communications to ships, aircraft, submarines and ground forces. That decision paved the way for the Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command to make a contract award within the next two weeks, spokesman Steven Davis said. Sources familiar with the process said a decision could come as early as Friday. The system, slated to become operational in 2010, would provide 10 times more throughput than the current Ultra High Frequency Follow-On System, built by Boeing Co. Lockheed launched the UHF Follow-On satellites and has teamed with Boeing for this competition. General Dynamics Corp. also is part of the team. Raytheon is teamed with Honeywell International; Northrop Grumman Corp. and Loral Space and Communications Ltd. Marco Caceres, satellite analyst with the Virginia-based Teal Group, said the Lockheed team offered the Navy "a safe bet" due to their long years of experience in U.S. military satellite systems, but the Navy could opt for the Raytheon bid to broaden the industrial base and possibly save some money. (Andrea Shalal-Esa, Reuters - 9/21)

AMERICAN BDG KEYING IN ON ISRAELI HLS FIRMS: American Business Development Group (BDG) is narrowing down its search of Israeli firms as part of the group's Homeland Security (HLS) Master Key Project designed to match technologies with emerging U.S. requirements in the $100-plus billion HLS market. "In some areas, the majority of the homeland security technologies are found [in Israel]," Rob Hartwell, an American BDG senior consultant, said last week at an international conference on combating terrorism. "We have already met with 170 Israeli firms, and recently narrowed our search down to about 60 companies" that have technological solutions that match up well with specific requirements in the United States, he added. American BDG officials working closely with Israel Export Institute (IEI) are continuing to visit additional facilities in the country, trying to gain a "careful understanding" of new technologies and their potential HLS applications, Hartwell said. Since aligning with IEI in March, American BDG's efforts in Israel have been designed to increase clients' share of the U.S. defense and HLS markets. American BDG has helped the government direct more than $100 million annually to client programs, the group said. In addition to matching innovative products with specific customers and developing teaming arrangements, the firm is looking to place advocates in senior government positions as part of its business development approach. Several large U.S. defense firms, including Lockheed Martin, Boeing and General Electric, have stepped up their interest in Israeli tech-firms, either through hosting corporate delegations in the United States, meeting with industry officials here, or both. A major conference is planned for October 28-29 in Washington on the heels of the annual AUSA symposium, Hartwell said. Sen. John Warner (R-VA), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is scheduled to deliver the keynote speech on mutual security cooperation. Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has been invited to speak as well. (B.C. Kessner, Defense Daily - 9/21)

U.S. GOALS SOUGHT ON BATTLING THE UNCONVENTIONAL: U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld wants new policy and planning goals to prepare U.S. forces better for a wider range of challenges, including "irregular, catastrophic and disruptive" threats. The results are expected to shake up the portfolio of weapons and technology the military needs, spur new doctrine and concepts for using military force, and yield concrete operational targets for military planners. Rumsfeld has directed Christopher Henry, principal undersecretary of defense for policy, to draft the new objectives, which likely will influence next year's Quadrennial Defense Review. This spring, Henry's office issued 2006 Strategic Planning Guidance that unveiled new ways to categorize threats: irregular, catastrophic, disruptive and conventional. U.S. forces are well prepared for only one of these - an attack with conventional air, sea and land forces - yet Pentagon planners reckon this type of challenge unlikely. For each threat category, Henry's staff is working to hone a strategic objective and link it to a planning goal. Henry's office declined requests for an interview. But a defense official directly involved in this effort said the project stems from a desire to develop "really usable" guidance for military leaders. (Jason Sherman, Defense News - 9/20)

U.S. ARMY FLESHES OUT NEW FCS PLAN: The U.S. Army's effort to restructure its massive Future Combat Systems program is forcing dramatic changes to the service's five-year spending plan. The Army, which had planned to spend $34 billion on FCS between 2006 and 2011, now intends to defer production of manned ground vehicles so that development efforts can get $5 billion more and $9 billion can go elsewhere, said Lt. Gen. Joseph Yakovac, the Army's top uniformed acquisition executive. The Program Objective Memorandum remains under wraps, but one Army program official said that "99 percent" of the $9 billion will buy new equipment, with the small remainder likely paying for traditional operating costs. A chunk of the money will buy currently available items, but 90 percent of it will go to develop and buy "transformational systems," the program official said. The money also will help to develop several technologies that will complement FCS, but are not listed among its 18 component systems, including the Joint Tactical Radio System and the Warrior Information Network-Tactical. Meanwhile, the Army still is identifying funding to inject FCS technologies into the existing fleet of Abrams tanks, Bradley Fighting vehicles and Stryker vehicles. (Megan Scully, Defense News - 9/20)

FORMER CIA DIRECTOR SEES SLOW CREEP TOWARD NATIONWIDE FINGERPRINTING: American citizens face the prospect of having to submit fingerprints to the government to make it easier to fight terrorism, former CIA director James Woolsey says. Taking a high-level overview of the challenges facing the United States in pursuing terrorists globally, Woolsey said biometric technologies will play a key role in striking a balance between security and liberty. Woolsey, a vice president with Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. of McLean, VA, spoke at the 2004 Biometric Consortium Conference in Arlington, VA. During the question-and-answer session, Woolsey was asked if citizens will have to be fingerprinted to help screen for potential enemies. "I would imagine something like that is coming," he said. The use of fingerprints for identifying citizens is likely to grow incrementally, rather than through the implementation of a national identification system, said Woolsey. "They could be used for getting on airplanes, for instance," he said. (Patience Wait, GovernmentComputerNews.com - 9/21)

BOEING WITHDRAWS STAFF FROM SAUDI ARABIA: Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. are withdrawing foreign staff from Saudi Arabia because of security concerns and an expected decline in military orders, Middle East Economic Digest reported. The companies are giving more of their work to Saudi partners, the London-based weekly reported, citing unidentified Boeing and Lockheed officials. It wasn't more specific. Two Lockheed employees working under contract with the local Advanced Electronics Co. were killed by militants in June, the magazine said. Saudi Arabia's planned spending on defense and security fell by almost 13 percent from 2001 to 2003, the magazine said. A Briton working for Marconi Corp., a U.K. maker of phone equipment, was shot dead in a supermarket car park in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, on September 15, bringing to at least 34 the number of foreigners killed in the kingdom in five-month militant campaign to drive Westerners from the kingdom. (James Cordahi, Bloomberg - 9/21)

I rest my case, and a few more caskets at the same time, I'm afraid. ;(