Tag: Putin

Russian Spy Towers in America? This is “Smart Power”?

On By kingsjesterIn Uncategorized2 Comments

obama and putinIf you see an innocent-looking structure with a dome-topped tower, behind a security fence, as you are traveling through America, it won’t be a cell tower.

It will be here “From Russia With Love, courtesy of the same bureaucratic buffoons who brought us “Smart Power!”

In recent months, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Pentagon have been quietly waging a campaign to stop the State Department from allowing Roscosmos, the Russian space agency, to build about half a dozen of these structures, known as monitor stations, on United States soil, several American officials said.

They fear that these structures could help Russia spy on the United States and improve the precision of Russian weaponry, the officials said. These monitor stations, the Russians contend, would significantly improve the accuracy and reliability of Moscow’s version of the Global Positioning System, the American satellite network that steers guided missiles to their targets and thirsty smartphone users to the nearest Starbucks.

“They don’t want to be reliant on the American system and believe that their systems, like GPS, will spawn other industries and applications,” said a former senior official in the State Department’s Office of Space and Advanced Technology. “They feel as though they are losing a technological edge to us in an important market. Look at everything GPS has done on things like your phone and the movement of planes and ships.”

The Russian effort is part of a larger global race by several countries — including China and European Union nations — to perfect their own global positioning systems and challenge the dominance of the American GPS.

For the State Department, permitting Russia to build the stations would help mend the Obama administration’s relationship with the government of President Vladimir V. Putin, now at a nadir because of Moscow’s granting asylum to Mr. Snowden and its backing of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria.

But the C.I.A. and other American spy agencies, as well as the Pentagon, suspect that the monitor stations would give the Russians a foothold on American territory that would sharpen the accuracy of Moscow’s satellite-steered weapons. The stations, they believe, could also give the Russians an opening to snoop on the United States within its borders.

The squabble is serious enough that administration officials have delayed a final decision until the Russians provide more information and until the American agencies sort out their differences, State Department and White House officials said.

Russia’s efforts have also stirred concerns on Capitol Hill, where members of the intelligence and armed services committees view Moscow’s global positioning network — known as Glonass, for Global Navigation Satellite System — with deep suspicion and are demanding answers from the administration.

“I would like to understand why the United States would be interested in enabling a GPS competitor, like Russian Glonass, when the world’s reliance on GPS is a clear advantage to the United States on multiple levels,” said Representative Mike D. Rogers, Republican of Alabama, the chairman of a House Armed Services subcommittee.

Mr. Rogers last week asked the Pentagon to provide an assessment of the proposal’s impact on national security. The request was made in a letter sent to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, Secretary of State John Kerry and the director of national intelligence, James R. Clapper Jr.

The monitor stations have been a high priority of Mr. Putin for several years as a means to improve Glonass not only to benefit the Russian military and civilian sectors but also to compete globally with GPS.

The kicker is, of course, we have no satellite towers located within Russia.

President Ronald Reagan, gave a speech, concerning our relationship with Russia, on March 8 1983, which has since come to be called “The Evil Empire Speech”. His words ring as true today, as they ever have.

During my first press conference as President, in answer to a direct question, I pointed out that, as good Marxist-Leninists, the Soviet leaders have openly and publicly declared that the only morality they recognize is that which will further their cause, which is world revolution. I think I should point out I was only quoting Lenin, their guiding spirit, who said in 1920 that they repudiate all morality that proceeds from supernatural ideas—that’s their name for religion—or ideas that are outside class conceptions. Morality is entirely subordinate to the interests of class war. And everything is moral that is necessary for the annihilation of the old, exploiting social order and for uniting the proletariat.

Well, I think the refusal of many influential people to accept this elementary fact of Soviet doctrine illustrates an historical reluctance to see totalitarian powers for what they are. We saw this phenomenon in the 1930s. We see it too often today.

This doesn’t mean we should isolate ourselves and refuse to seek an understanding with them. I intend to do everything I can to persuade them of our peaceful intent, to remind them that it was the West that refused to use its nuclear monopoly in the forties and fifties for territorial gain and which now proposes 50-percent cut in strategic ballistic missiles and the elimination of an entire class of land-based, intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

At the same time, however, they must be made to understand we will never compromise our principles and standards. We will never give away our freedom.

…It was C.S. Lewis who, in his unforgettable “Screwtape Letters,” wrote: “The greatest evil is not done now in those sordid ‘dens of crime’ that Dickens loved to paint. It is not even done in concentration camps and labor camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice.”

Well, because these “quiet men” do not “raise their voices,” because they sometimes speak in soothing tones of brotherhood and peace, because, like other dictators before them, they’re always making “their final territorial demand,” some would have us accept them at their word and accommodate ourselves to their aggressive impulses. But if history teaches anything, it teaches that simple-minded appeasement or wishful thinking about our adversaries is folly. It means the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.

So, I urge you to speak out against those who would place the United States in a position of military and moral inferiority.

While America’s military strength is important, let me add here that I’ve always maintained that the struggle now going on for the world will never be decided by bombs or rockets, by armies or military might. The real crisis we face today is a spiritual one; at root, it is a test of moral will and faith.

…Whittaker Chambers, the man whose own religious conversion made him a witness to one of the terrible traumas of our time, the Hiss-Chambers case, wrote that the crisis of the Western World exists to the degree in which the West is indifferent to God, the degree to which it collaborates in communism’s attempt to make man stand alone without God. And then he said, for Marxism-Leninism is actually the second oldest faith, first proclaimed in the Garden of Eden with the words of temptation, “Ye shall be as gods.”

The Western World can answer this challenge, he wrote, “but only provided that its faith in God and the freedom He enjoins is as great as communism’s faith in Man.”

President Reagan knew that, one day, the struggle against Marxist Ideology would not just be waged externally, against foreign enemies, but internally, against domestic ones, as well…bureaucrats who would give away our very sovereignty for perceived political expediency. As we have seen in the ongoing Middle East Islamic Fundamentalist Revolution, known as Arab Spring, and, more recently, President Obama and Sec. Kerry’s bungling of Syria and Iran, our enemies, like Vladimir Putin, love this present administration, who are more than willing to “negotiate” with their new-found “friends”.

And, much like the small town fellow, who gets conned into a three-card monte game on the sidewalks of New York, the deck is stacked against us.

Until He Comes,

KJ

A Reply to President Putin Concerning American Exceptionalism

On By kingsjesterIn Politics7 Comments

americaneagleflag

Over the past couple of weeks, I have felt like a witness to some macabre play, in which the United States of America is saddled with a weak, sniveling, clueless milk toast of a President, whose entire Administration is comprised of a bunch of unqualified and unprincipled neophytes, who have no qualms about embarrassing our country and making us look like fools on the World Stage.

And, today, I realize that what I am watching with such horror and disgust…is reality.

And, I don’t like it. One bit.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, the new leader of the “Free” World, since United States President Barack Hussein Obama abdicated the role, says that every little t’ing is gonna be alright ( Hey. That would make great song. Oh…never mind.), if we just remember that America is now just another country.

I welcome the president’s interest in continuing the dialogue with Russia on Syria. We must work together to keep this hope alive, as we agreed to at the Group of 8 meeting in Lough Erne in Northern Ireland in June, and steer the discussion back toward negotiations.

If we can avoid force against Syria, this will improve the atmosphere in international affairs and strengthen mutual trust. It will be our shared success and open the door to cooperation on other critical issues.

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

On July 17, 1980, Ronald Wilson Reagan, at the Republican National Convention, accepting their Nomination as the Presidential Candidate, spoke the following prophetic words:

The major issue of this campaign is the direct political, personal and moral responsibility of Democratic Party leadership — in the White House and in Congress — for this unprecedented calamity which has befallen us. They tell us they have done the most that humanly could be done. They say that the United States has had its day in the sun; that our nation has passed its zenith. They expect you to tell your children that the American people no longer have the will to cope with their problems; that the future will be one of sacrifice and few opportunities.

My fellow citizens, I utterly reject that view. The American people, the most generous on earth, who created the highest standard of living, are not going to accept the notion that we can only make a better world for others by moving backwards ourselves. Those who believe we can have no business leading the nation.

I will not stand by and watch this great country destroy itself under mediocre leadership that drifts from one crisis to the next, eroding our national will and purpose. We have come together here because the American people deserve better from those to whom they entrust our nation’s highest offices, and we stand united in our resolve to do something about it.

We need rebirth of the American tradition of leadership at every level of government and in private life as well. The United States of America is unique in world history because it has a genius for leaders — many leaders, on many levels. But back in 1976, Mr. Carter said, “Trust me.” And a lot of people did. Now, many of those people are out of work. Many have seen their savings eaten away by inflation. Many others on fixed incomes, especially the elderly, have watched helplessly as the cruel tax of inflation wasted away their purchasing power. And, today, a great many who trusted Mr. Carter wonder if we can survive the Carter policies of national defense.

“Trust me” government asks that we concentrate our hopes and dreams on one man; that we trust him to do what’s best for us. My view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons and parties. The trust is where it belongs — in the people. The responsibility to live up to that trust is where it belongs, in their elected leaders. That kind of relationship, between the people and their elected leaders, is a special kind of compact.

You see, President Putin…President Obama, that is where the exceptionalism of America lies…not in the Halls of Power…but in the courage and spirit of the average American. The 9 to 5’er, working himself crazy to try to provide for his family. It was this same average Joe, who fired the shot heard around the world and began the War for American Independence, who stormed the beaches of Normandy on D-Day in World War II, who waded through rice paddies in Vietnam, and who swallowed sand in Desert Storm and Desert Shield. The same average Joe who, as a New York City Policeman or Fireman, ran up the stairs of the World Trade Center on 9/11/01, instead of running down them. The same average Joe, who simply wants things to be easier in this life for his children and grandchildren, than he had it.

The same average Joe who takes family and friends in, when they are in the midst of a life-altering tragedy. The same average Joe who gets misty-eyed when he sees an advertisement for St. Jude’s Children Hospital. The same average American who volunteers on a soup line or at a Senior Citizens Home.

Yes, President Putin, you have played our President and our Administration like a Stradivarius, pulling their strings like Gepetto pulled Pinocchio’s.

It doesn’t matter. They are professional political prevaricators. Men and women, whose ethics and morality change with the direction of the wind, and whose egos override their judgement…every time.

America is a Constitutional Republic. We are not ruled by a faceless all-powerful government. America’s politicians are OUR SERVANTS. “Average Joes”, like myself, are THEIR BOSSES. We can hire and fire them at our pleasure. You cannot understand this concept, because in your country, the Politburo ruled the Proletariat, until an American President, whom your leaders referred to as a “crazy cowboy”, told your president to “Tear down this wall!” and, that was the beginning of the end for the old Soviet Union.

And, yes, President Putin, God did create us all equal.

However, He blessed America.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Syria Situation: A Faux Pas or Escape Clause?

On By kingsjesterIn Politics6 Comments

Obama-Shrinks-2Yesterday was an interesting day. It started out with  Sec. of State John (I served in Vietnam) Kerry, putting his foot in his foot in his mouth.

Kerry was speaking on Monday alongside the UK foreign secretary, William Hague, who was forced to deny that he had been pushed to the sidelines by the House of Commons decision 10 days ago to reject the use of UK force in Syria.

The US Senate is due to vote this week on whether to approve an attack and Kerry was ambivalent over whether Barack Obama would use his powers to ignore the legislative chamber, if it were to reject an attack.

The US state department stressed that Kerry was making a rhetorical argument about the one-week deadline and unlikelihood of Assad turning over Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile. In a statement, the department added: “His point was that this brutal dictator with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts cannot be trusted to turn over chemical weapons, otherwise he would have done so long ago. That’s why the world faces this moment.”

Kerry said the US had tracked the Syrian chemical weapons stock for many years, adding that it “was controlled in a very tight manner by the Assad regime … Bashar al-Assad and his brother Maher al-Assad, and a general are the three people that have the control over the movement and use of chemical weapons.

“But under any circumstances, the Assad regime is the Assad regime, and the regime issues orders, and we have regime members giving these instructions and engaging in these preparations with results going directly to President Assad.

“We are aware of that so we have no issue here about responsibility. They have a very threatening level of stocks remaining.”

Kerry said Assad might avoid an attack if he handed every bit of his chemical weapons stock, but added that the Syrian president was not going to do that. He warned that if other nations were not prepared to act on the issue of chemical weapons, “you are giving people complete licence to do whatever they want and to feel so they can do with impunity”.

Kerry said the Americans were planning an “unbelievably small” attack on Syria. “We will be able to hold Bashar al-Assad accountable without engaging in troops on the ground or any other prolonged kind of effort in a very limited, very targeted, short-term effort that degrades his capacity to deliver chemical weapons without assuming responsibility for Syria’s civil war. That is exactly what we are talking about doing – unbelievably small, limited kind of effort.”

By mid-morning yesterday, Russian President Putin had taken ol’ Horseface up on his magnanimous offer:

Russia and Syria embraced Secretary of State John F. Kerry’s suggestion Monday that the Syrian government could avert a U.S. attack by placing its chemical weapons under international control, upending the Obama administration’s efforts to sharpen its case for military action.

U.S. officials said Kerry’s comment, made in response to a question at a news conference in London, was not intended to be a diplomatic opening. But Kerry’s Russian and Syrian counterparts quickly followed up, and the idea drew immediate interest internationally and from top Democrats in Washington.

By the end of the day, President Obama conceded that the idea of monitoring and ultimately destroying Syria’s arsenal “could potentially be a significant breakthrough.” The Senate postponed a vote scheduled for Wednesday on whether to back a proposed punitive strike.

“I think you have to take it with a grain of salt, initially,” Obama said in an interview with NBC that was among several he gave Monday in pursuit of public backing for a military strike in response to an alleged Aug. 21 gas attack on Syrian civilians.

“We are going to run this to ground,” Obama said. “We’re going to make sure that we see how serious these proposals are.”

The President of these United States made the rounds of the news programs all day, as if he was running for another term in office, desperately trying to drum up support for getting America involved in the Syrian Civil War, on the side of al Qaeda. Here is an excerpt from an interview with Scott Pelley, Anchor of the CBS Evening News:

…I’m not looking for an excuse to engage in military action.

And I understand deeply how the American people, after a decade of war, are not interested in any kind of military action that they don’t believe involves our direct national security interests. I– I get that. And members of Congress I think understand that. But in this situation where there’s clear evidence that nobody credible around the world disputes that chemical weapons were used, that over a thousand people were killed, that the way that these weapons were delivered makes it almost certain that Assad’s forces used them, when even Iran has acknowledged that chemical weapons were used inside of Syria.

In that situation, I think the issue is not the evidence — most people around the world are not questioning that chemical weapons were used. I think the question now is what– how does the– how does the international community respond. And I think it is important for us to run to ground every diplomatic channel that we can. There’s a reason why I went to Congress in part to allow further deliberation, not just here domestically but also internationally.

But I think it’s very important for us to make sure that we understand this is important. And if the American people– are not prepared to stand up for what is a really important international norm, then I think a lot of people around the world will take that signal — that this norm is not important.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Yeah, well, not yet. And I, as I said, I understand that. So I’ll have a chance to talk to the American people directly tomorrow. I don’t expect that it’s gonna suddenly swing the polls wildly in the direction of another military engagement. If you ask the average person — including my household — “Do we need another military engagement?” I think the answer generally is gonna be no.

But what I’m gonna try to propose is, is that we have a very specific objective, a very narrow military option, and one that will not lead into some large-scale invasion of Syria or involvement or boots on the ground, nothing like that. This isn’t like Iraq, it’s not like Afghanistan, it’s not even like Libya. Then hopefully people will recognize why I think this is so important.

And that we should all be haunted by those images of those children that were killed. But more importantly, we should understand that when we start saying it’s okay to — or at least that there’s no response to the gassing of children, that’s the kind of slippery slope that leads eventually to these chemical weapons being used more broadly around the world. That’s not the kind of world that we want to leave to our children.

Dear Lord. So, swinging the balance of power in Syria toward the al Qaeda-infiltrated “Rebels” is what is best “for the children”?

Not to be crass, Obama, but why didn’t you just show pictures behind you of those babies’ corpses, while you were speaking?

You wonder why we, the American people, are not supporting you? It’s garbage like that, right there.

You are a wannabe. That’s all you ever have been.

You were a wannabe Muslim (still are), “playing on the streets of Jakarta”.

You were a wannabe “cool kid”, hanging out with the Choom Gang, toking up to hide your own insecurities.

You were a wannabe “foreign student”, from all accounts, identifying yourself as such, so you could get a free ride in college.

You were a wannabe Law Review Editor at Hahvahd, never writing a single thing.

You were a wannabe Community Organizer, who sought out the local religious leaders, like Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who used their calls for “Social Justice” to hide the fact that they were Marxist, just like you.

You were a wannabe Illinois State Senator, who voted present on everything, except for passing a bill to murder babies, still in their mothers’ wombs, in the third trimester.

You were a wannabe U.S. Senator, who opposed President Bush, every chance he got, still trying to hang out with the “cool Kids”, all those years later.

And now, you are a wannabe President of the United States, lacking the leadership and administrative abilities necessary for the post of Leader of the Free World.

You think that Presidentin’ is all about campaigning. And , then you wonder why you are referred to as an “empty suit”.

Tonight, you are going to speak to us, the American People, finally, from your Ivory Tower at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, which used to be “The People’s House”, until you banned us from visiting it, using the “sequester” as an excuse.

An excuse which did not apply to your friends, the Muslim Brotherhood.

If you expect to gain any backing, after your platitudes tonight,for your Syrian Intervention, Obama, you are sorely mistaken.

The well-known Christian American Author, John C. Maxwell, wrote,

Leaders must be close enough to relate to others, but far enough ahead to motivate them.

You are neither.

Until He Comes,

KJ