The Homeland Security Defense Coalition and the Homeland Security University College project
BRIEFING CLASSIFICATION: NOT RESTRICTED - OPEN SOURCE INTELLIGENCE//OSINT
NOT EMBARGOED - AVAILABLE FOR DISTRIBUTION - PUBLIC DOMAIN
BRIEFING LEVEL: Public
SUBJECT OF BRIEFING: Actual footage of Apache Gunship attacking ISIS
FOR YOUR ANALYSIS AND CONSIDERATION:
Recent footage of an Army Apache Gunship engaging ISIS positions. You will be watching a A/H1-GD model Longbow Apache Gunship working in concert with American Special Forces, not SEALS, deploying laser designators upon primary targets. You will hear a buzz sound which is the 20mm mini-gun, and the hack-hack sound of a 30mm chain gun. You will also see the hydra 2.75 rockets and the large explosions of Hellfire Missiles.
Sent from an Army source who wrote: "...this is our Army in action. We don't get a lot of publicity, and of course it is not sought, what we do is covertly done without a lot of fanfare. We just do it, we don't brag about it." What you are about to see is a great light show. You will be looking through an infrared night vision device so it can all be captured digitally. All of this action is guided by United States Special Forces (SF) with laser target designators.
Yes...the SF guys
definitely have their boots on the ground in hostile territory.
Simple click on the site below, sit back and enjoy the reduction of evil, and please give thanks to the Lord God Almighty for brave men and women in our military who accomplish the unimaginable, in all sorts of conditions, and without any recognition. They fight for us so we may enjoy Monday Night Football and all the many blessings bestowed upon our Nation. Sit in awe and watch an actual attack, but please sit and give thanks to God for those who stand in the gap for us.
Lyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D.
LYLE J. RAPACKI, Ph.D.
Protective Intelligence and Assessment Specialist Consultant at Behavioral Analysis and Threat Assessment Private-Sector Intelligence Analyst U.S. Border Intelligence Group
HSDC Mission Statement
The Homeland Security Defense Coalition and Homeland Security University project were founded specifically to address the terrorist crisis that envelops our country and our citizens and, indeed, all the citizens of the free world. The need for well-trained and educated personnel in the areas of security and public safety has never been more prevalent than it is today. The mission of the Homeland Security University project is to establish 60 college campuses nationwide and internationally to provide current education and state-of-the-art training in the area of anti-terrorism and counterterrorism to those presently employed or seeking employment within the homeland security and public safety professions. By providing an extensive curriculum at the training through collegiate level that has a continually reviewed and updated course content, HSU will produce a new breed of highly-trained, highly-educated security professionals capable of providing the nation and the world with an unrivaled anti-terrorism and counterterrorism force.
For over a century, the conventional approach to developing security and emergency management education alongside training programs and curricula focused on asset protection that assume reactive responses to overarching incident’s, emergencies, or other extreme disaster situations. However, the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the U.S. and the July 7 and July 21, 2005 terrorist attacks in London are dramatically changing the security and emergency management industry. The threat of terrorism is driving the introduction of new and more innovative strategies that teeter on more aggressive preemptive approaches to deter, intercept, and obstruct terrorism.
Security, in general, and emergency management have historically required limited education beyond high school. In many cases an associate or bachelor degree has sufficed for management. Although education and training up to this point has served the purposes of past priorities, they are quickly proving to be inadequate and ineffective to the current tactics of terrorist groups. Security and emergency management is not about simply preparing for and reacting to a natural or man-made emergency, threat, or disaster; rather, it consists in assuming the most extreme terror circumstance and preemptively diffusing it before it becomes a disruptive situation.
The critical factor here is terrorism, which is the random murdering of innocent people (called noncombatants) for the expressed purpose of destroying the morale and undercutting the solidarity of a nation or a class of people until they feel so fatally exposed that they demand their governments to negotiate for their safety, and grant terrorist’s demands or accede to their objectives. To spread and increase the rate of fear and anxiety among the people, terrorists randomly target and expose people within that nation or class of people to a violent death or injury, not because of their individual conduct; rather, they indiscriminately aim at a nation or class of people precisely because they share a collective identity. Terrorist commit the fallacy of guilt by association.
For terrorist, no one is immune from attack. They will kill anybody simply to convey their message. Terrorist do not require the capability to eradicate an entire nation or class of people; they only require generating the perception that a nation or class of people are at risk. Terrorist indiscriminately commit murder to a) create the perception that a nation or class of people are extremely vulnerable to death or harm at home or abroad; b) demonstrate they control the destiny of others; and c) achieve their objectives.
The indiscriminate murder campaign conducted by terrorists reveal their true intentions; it is the attempt to rob people of their unconditional worth and intrinsic value. Since terrorism is the attempt to devalue the existence of people, terrorists are tyrants who intentionally violate the moral law.
Terrorism occurred in the U.S. before 9/11. For example, prior to 9/11 the U.S. sustained attacks via courthouse bombings; mail bombs; the Oregon salad bar salmonella attacks; the Tylenol cyanide poisoning; sniper shootings, abortion clinic bombings; the bombing at the World Trade Center on February 23, 1993; and the Oklahoma City of bombing at the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building on April 19, 1995. By using inherently indiscriminate weapons that generate random effects, terrorism makes everyone vulnerable and subject to an unjust attack. In particular, the specter of catastrophic terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD), such as nuclear, biological, radiological and chemical, become the consummate weapons for terrorists.
Unlike natural hazards, terrorists are intelligent human beings that learn and adapt to achieve their intentions. While the probability of using WMD is low, the risk of terrorists acquiring a WMD generates the very fear and anxiety they want to instill in a nation or class of people, even without using it.
Terrorists do exact a devastating cost to society and the world by using conventional tactics such as handling commercial airplanes as guided missiles with bombs. Although the element of surprise using commercial airplanes has virtually disappeared, terrorists constantly look for weaknesses not yet used for exploitation. The message is clear: everyone is impacted by the constant and more invasive terrorism.
Homeland security is our national solution to terrorism as well as natural hazards. Congress enacted two legislations in reply to and in anticipation of the threats posed by terrorism. President George W. Bush signed into law on October 26, 2001, the U.S.A. Patriot Act of 2001 (PL 107-56) entitled “Uniting and Strengthening America by Proving Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism. The Patriot Act authorizes law enforcement agencies, particularly the attorney general and the Department of Justice, to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world by collecting information on suspected terrorists, detaining suspected terrorists, detouring terrorists from entering and operating within the borders of the United States, and limiting the ability of terrorists to engage in money-laundering activities that support terrorist actions.
President Bush signed into law on November 25, 2002 the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (PL 107-296). The legislation established and activated on January 24, 2003, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as an executive branch agency with the Secretary reporting directly to the president. The Homeland Security Act mandated establishing a safe and secure homeland by combining 22 federal entities under the umbrella of the Department of Homeland Security; this is the most extensive federal reorganization since President Harry S. Truman signed into the law on July 26, 1947, the National Security Act of 1947
The National Strategy for Homeland Security, July 2002, defined homeland security as…”a concerted national effort to prevent terrorist attacks within the United States, reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur.” First responders will remain responsible for managing the consequences of attacks, incidents, emergencies or disasters; however, the National Strategy for Homeland Security further recognizes that “an informed and proactive citizenry is an invaluable asset for our country in times of peace and war.” To successfully protect our homeland, in the end, each person, workforce member, organization, business, private security company, public security organization, and community must contribute by helping deter and prevent attacks.
As a new discipline and a nascent industry, homeland security continually invents itself by anticipating, preempting, and reacting to the constant and more effective terrorists’ techniques. Homeland security, therefore, requires a new paradigm that is based on a recursive flow of integrated proactive and reactive solutions. Homeland security education and training organizations then must develop and flawlessly deliver innovative programs and curricula based on this new paradigm.
AN OVERVIEW OF HOMELAND SECURITY EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Most universities and colleges promoting homeland security curricula fail in this endeavor because they offer diluted versions of the hard lined reforms and new paradigm required in homeland security. Offered under the guise of a “new program,” many university homeland security programs and curricula are simply watered-down or slightly modified criminal justice programs or military science courses. Yet these homeland security programs are developed under unquestioned assumptions and misconceptions. Particularly, that homeland security is the same as law enforcement.
Homeland security is more than policing, law enforcement, and emergency management; it is about comprehensive asset security. While law enforcement focuses on the maintenance of order and the enforcement of laws, homeland security emphasizes ensuring assets are not unduly or inadvertently placed at risk. Therefore, law enforcement does not equate to homeland security.
Moreover, most courses are offered under the reactive model rather than being designed using a recursive flow of integrated proactive and reactive solutions with original strategies and techniques. For example, a Washington Times article stated that the University of Connecticut is offering a master’s degree in homeland security. The article claims, “Students will learn how to respond to disasters such as outbreaks of diseases or terrorist attacks that endanger food supplies.”
The consequence is that students and workforce members are short-changed because knowing criminal law, crime scene investigation, police tactics, and emergency management does not equate to proactively deterring and preventing the loss of life and assets, and mitigating risks. Students only learn to prepare for and respond to incidents, emergencies or disasters. As a result, homeland security requires a different approach, different paradigm, different skill set, and distinct education and training requirements.
On the other hand, private security firms claim to offer superior training programs. While this may bear some truth, they do not have the credentials to establish and sustain a homeland security training programs since it is an infant industry. For example, the security services profession is not a codified profession. The profession does not have federal laws and national standards that stipulate and enforce mandatory requirements. Furthermore, those private security managers, instructors and employees with higher education were most likely the same people instructed at criminal justice schools or attended military science programs. More importantly, evidence indicates that all curriculum topics emphasize reactive strategies rather than proactive contributions of workforce members, organizations, businesses, and communities.
Finally, research conducted by Graeme, K. Deans, Fritz Kroger, and Stefan Zeisel, in Winning the Merger Endgame (McGraw-Hill, 2002), disclosed that four foreign owned companies account for approximately thirty (30) percent of market share in the United States. The top four foreign owned companies are Swedish-based Securitas North America, which owns Pinkerton, Burns and other companies; Copenhagen and The Hague based Group 4 Falcks, which owns Wackenhut Corporation; British owned Initial Security; and British owned AHL Services. This highly suggests that these foreign owned businesses are in the business of security, but not homeland security. Thus, they continue using and teaching the reactive paradigm.
THE IMPORTANCE OF THE WORKFORCE
We entered the 21st Century with trends emphasizing the importance of intangible assets, in particular the contributions by our workforce, which sometimes is referred to as human capital.
They are truly the key to our prosperity and the continued success of our national economy. Terrorists quickly recognize this fact and intentionally attack the workforce to disrupt and destabilize our economy. The World Trade Center attacks in 1993 and 2001 and the London attacks during July 2005 are prime examples.
Although the workforce is the key terrorist target, the workforce is the neglected component in homeland security. They receive inadequate training on security and little to no proactive homeland security training. Effective training is an
educational, informative, and skill developing process resulting with employees learning how to accomplish a task, project, or procedure. Empirical evidence suggests that new employees are not trained; rather, they receive only a general orientation, and unfortunately, people tend to learn little and retain less. While security training should be a continuous, recurrent, and ongoing program, workforce members generally receive repeated instances of the original orientation.
There exists a high probability that public and private sector workforce members can significantly contribute to homeland security by proactively deterring, preventing, and mitigating the risk to terrorism. They are on the front lines as targets, and we have not taken advantage of educating the people who can serve as witnesses or obstructers of such terrorist techniques or tactics.
Law enforcement agencies are responsible for obtaining, fusing, analyzing, and disseminating “intelligence” everyday in the course of their operations to detect events or activities that may have some national implications. However, the workforce is a fundamental source of intelligence because they are the primary agents to come into contact with possible terrorists and/or their activities. For example, a Florida flight school instructor reported to law enforcement agencies his suspicion that a student was possibly taking the course to perform terrorist activities.
In order to be of any intelligence value, workforce members must know what to look for and how to properly respond. This is successfully accomplished through a sound, comprehensive, and integrated formal education and training in homeland security, presented in accordance with an instructor systems development program, and developed, overseen, and taught by counter-terrorism experts.
PRIVATE SECTOR INVOLVEMENT
The private sector assumes the increasing responsibility for fulfilling the demands of homeland security. It is the point of attack with the greatest loss of people, facilities, data, archives, and revenue as a consequence of the events of 9/11. Homeland Security Presidential Directive-5 dated February 28, 2003, recognizes the role the private and non-governmental sectors perform.
The private sector owns approximately 85 percent of the infrastructure in the U.S. Statistical data published in the Department of State report “Patterns of Global Terrorism 2001” illustrated that terrorist attacked private sector facilities more frequently than any other types of facilities.
Additionally, the Insurance Information Institute published a chart depicting that 9/11 resulted in business interruption in the amount of $11.0 billion; it was 27 percent of all estimated damage and the largest of the total damage.
Deterring attacks, dramatically decreasing the vulnerabilities and increasing the security of the private sector protects the largest portion of U.S. infrastructure and economic viability. Corporate America must proactively take the steps to deter, mitigate the risks, and prevent terrorist attacks on our homeland. To successfully meet this challenge, the private sector must break away from the conventional approach and use a new paradigm.
Finally, threats to people and assets are not new phenomena. Although we experienced an increased awareness and concern for our well being immediately following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, violence in the workplace continues unabated. Today’s workforce operates under continuous stress to do more with less and of the fear of unemployment. As a result, workplace violence may occur in any type of workplace environment.
Recent events involving disgruntled employees, visitors, upset customers, and people with interpersonal conflicts include workplaces such as the post office, office buildings, municipal buildings, insurance companies, legal offices, college and university campuses, high school, and now even elementary schools. This places a great responsibility and burden on the private and public sectors to take every reasonable measure to deter, prevent, and mitigate the opportunity for a violent episode.
The Homeland Security Defense Coalition is seeking immediate humanitarian or angel funding for this worthwhile project which will employ:
|Number of Jobs this Project will generate:
||16,000 college campus jobs for 15 to 30 years
||16,000 construction jobs for 84 months
||64,000 community support jobs created
||96,000 Total Jobs Created
This non-political, non-profit organization has been working with more than two dozen foundation and none of them has been able to come through with even preliminary project funding. Can your foundation or angel funder help? Serious, no-nonsense prospective funders, please contact us at: Brandon Walker BWalker@homeland-security-college.org
Embassy Consulting Services, LLC In partnership with Community Hospital Long Beach
Presents: ACTIVE SHOOTER
For Educators and Law Enforcement
“I never thought it would happen here”
Sergeant Melvin McGuire, Long Beach Police Department, will provide participants with the “Right Mindset” in order to safely deal with an active shooter. While you can never answer the “WHY,” you can be best prepared for the “WHAT NOW”
Thursday, October 24, 2013
8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon
Community Hospital Long Beach
1720 Termino Ave
Long Beach, CA 90804
Includes: Continental Breakfast
1. Visit www.embassyconsultingservices.com, click on the Classes tab
2. Under the list of upcoming classes, click on Active Shooter – October 24, 2013
3. Complete Booking Form and online payment information through PayPal
Embassy Consulting Services LLC is owned and operated by Josef Levy, Commander (Retired) Long Beach Police Department. Embassy training seminars are not open to the general public. Embassy seminars are for Law Enforcement personnel or those who, in some capacity, represent law enforcement, public or government agencies. Embassy reserves the right to restrict or deny enrollment or access to any individual. For additional information, please visit our website at www.embassyconsultingservices.com
WAMS talks Homeland Security with Dr. Richard Hoyer.
Date / Length:
|1/19/2010 2:00 PM- 30 min
How secure is America from terrorist threat? Has the situation improved since 9/11? Where does the training come from for our local, state and regional law enforcement? WAMS talks with Dr. Richard Hoyer from the Homeland Security Defense Coalition and the Homeland Security University College project .
Update on the Next World War
by Hollis Armstrong
The dynamic changes that have taken place in Lebanon since 2006 have led to the most volatile and dangerous situation in recent history. Hezbollah has been armed to the teeth by Iran and Syria, and has virtually taken over the southern half of Lebanon, holding its citizens hostage in an environment of fear and dread.
Hezbollah is now thought to have close to 80,000 rockets and missiles, brought into Lebanon through Syria in large, tarp-covered trucks. The rockets are hidden under the canopies of trees in the lush valleys that dot Southern Lebanon, and in the houses of Lebanese civilians, which have either been commandeered or purchased throughout the south, to expand Hezbollah's reach from within.
They have built extensive military training programs for their youth, some as young as seven. Their Mahdi Scouts are said to number more than 60,000 youngsters who have been trained to hate and to kill. Their targets are the "infidels" and, most particularly, Jews.
The threat emanating from Lebanon is not a local one. Hezbollah's instructions come directly from Teheran and indirectly through Syria. Iran has supplied them with a massive arsenal that includes rockets, sophisticated missile systems, weapons of mass destruction, and hundreds of Iranian Republican Guard Corps (IRGC) officers to train the soldiers and man the weapons now aimed at Israel.
Iran has not invested in Hezbollah lightly. Its own nuclear program, still under international scrutiny, continues apace despite the mounting but ineffectual world pressure against it. A strike by Hezbollah against Israel (with simultaneous strikes from Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank), would effectively distract the world from the final stages of Iran's nuclear development.
Should Israel be attacked in such a pincer move, with a rain of missiles and rockets targeting its populated areas from north, south, and east, Israel's response can be expected to be immediate and powerful. And the nations of the world will not stand by silently as the crisis in the Middle East threatens to engulf them in the ensuing global-and most probably nuclear-conflagration.
The likelihood that another war in this inflamed region will remain limited becomes less likely every day. The global ramifications of an assault on Israel, however unimaginable, are nevertheless more likely every day as the situation continues to destabilize. The unintended consequences of decisions made by delusional leaders-Ahmadinejad, Assad, and Nasrallah-for whom conquest is worth risking the world, will be a global inferno that pits radical Islam against everyone else.
What makes this particularly dangerous to us is not just the threat of a third world war. Unlike the last wars, this war will also be fought on US soil. The large presence of Hezbollah members and supporters here in the US present a clear and present danger to us in our heartland.
There are active cells throughout the country, in Dearborn and Detroit, North Carolina, Arizona, and in the volatile and hostile border region of Mexico, to mention only a few. Hezbollah is only one of the dozens of radical Islamic groups that have sprung up around the country, but it may be the most dangerous of them all. The activation of these cells will open a new front for Islamic terrorism, and they will be supported by the other radical Islamic organizations, whose leaders will rally their enthusiastic followers against our society when the time comes.
This is not conspiracy theory. The threat against us right here at home is well documented, and is likely to evolve from theoretical to existential when we least expect it.
The Hezbollah cells in the US take their orders directly from the senior leadership of Hezbollah in Lebanon, who in turn take their own orders from Teheran. Their own agenda is based on the tyranny of radical Islam, the conquest of the infidel, and Shari'ah law. It is the one they will carry to battle against the freedom that characterizes the West.
Hollis Armstrong is a veteran intelligence analyst and a contributor to INTELANALYSIS. Comments and questions can be addressed to firstname.lastname@example.org
Next Issue: The New Russian Spies-KGB Revisited
Political Correctness Led to 13 Dead and 31 Being Wounded.
On November 7, 2009 around 1:30 PM a Major Malik Nidal Hasan, MD, MPH killed 13 people and wounding 31 at the Fort Hood Army Base in Texas in his shooting rampage shouting "Allahu Akbar!” (Praise God).
According to military records, Hasan worked as a psychiatrist at the Walter Reed military hospital for six years until this July. Congressman McCaul says Hasan had a poor performance evaluation at Walter Reed, which resulted in his transfer to Ft. Hood and "while there received a lot of advanced training in weapons, shooting classes."
His classmates in 2007/2008 while completing his MPH degree voiced their opinion about his radical Islamic views to their faculty and no one took any action in fear of being politically correct.
"There were definitely clear indications that Hasan's loyalties were not with America," said Lt. Col. Val Finnell, Hasan's classmate at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md.
"The issue here is that there's a political correctness climate in the military. They don't want to say anything because it would be considered questioning somebody's religious belief, or they're afraid of an equal opportunity lawsuit.
"I want to be clear that this wasn't about anyone questioning his religious views. It is different when you are a civilian than when you are a military officer," said Finnell, who is a physician at the Los Angeles Air Force Base.
"When you are in the military and you start making comments that are seditious, when you say you believe something other than your oath of office — someone needed to say why is this guy saying this stuff.
"He was a lightning rod. He made his views known and he was very vocal, he had extremely radical jihadist views," Finnell said. "When you're a military officer you take an oath to defend against all enemies foreign and domestic.
"They should've confronted him — our professors, officers — but they were too concerned about being politically correct."
SIX RED FLAG BEFORE FORT HOOD SHOOTING
The 13 killed were:
Rank or Occupation
Michael Grant Cahill
Civilian Physician Assistant
L. Eduardo Caraveo
Justin Michael DeCrow
John P. Gaffaney
Serra Mesa, California
Mountain City, Tennessee
Jason Dean Hunt
Amy Sue Krueger
Aaron Thomas Nemelka
West Jordan, Utah
Private First Class
Michael S. Pearson
Private First Class
Russell Gilbert Seager
Francheska Velez ‡
Private First Class
Juanita L. Warman
Kham See Xiong
Saint Paul, Minnesota
Private First Class
‡ Francheska Velez was pregnant at the time of her death.
This photograph taken on Friday, Nov. 6, 2009 in Killeen, Texas, shows a business card that Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan gave to his neighbor a day before going on a shooting spree at the Fort Hood Army Base. (AP Photo/Jack Plunkett)
The man accused in the Fort Hood shooting spree that killed 13 people kept business cards with the initials, SoA, the abbreviation for "Soldier of Allah,"
This is not a matter or race, color of skin, ethnic background or religion. What all our law enforcement, security personnel, human resources staff, and military personnel need to do is profile behavior. Behavior includes body language at airports, border entry points, workplace behavior and what the individual says related to work satisfaction or radical anti-American beliefs. All potential threats must be reported and decisive action must be taken to avoid another workplace violence situation such as this and the dozens of school shootings that have occurred across our country.
This is not as much an issue as to motive, real or imagined. Was this a terrorist attack? You decide. Was this just another example of workplace violence no matter what the reason? The answer is yes! When being concerned about making waves or over reacting, thinking it may be innocent and just someone blowing off steam gets in the way of taking the obvious proper action, we have taken political correctness to a dangerous extreme.
This tragedy could well have been averted if all of the people hearing this man’s rants took the appropriate action and went as high up the reporting chain as was necessary to bring it to the right person’s attention. This must be corrected so we never see an incident such as this happen again.
Dr. Richard J. Hoyer, Ph.D., Psy.D., Ed.D., CCP,
Homeland Security Defense Coalition
A National Security Organization
Incident report-Delta flight 086 New York to Tel-Aviv
September 26th 2009 /S eptember 27th 2009
Delta flight 86 to Tel Aviv took off without any special hitches, regarding delays etc, the only thing that was wrong that Delta security allowed on the plane, an estranged Palestinian woman, 36 years old that later on in the flight caused an incident that almost forced the pilot to decide to make an emergency landing(procedure), had she not been overpowered and restrained by one of the passengers, SWO retired Israeli Police, Daniel Sharon who identified her BPR(Body Language) signs of threatening behavior, even in the terminal before boarding the aircraft.
The passenger! A Palestinian woman of US citizenship from the Chicago area was apparently on a trip to meet her family living in Ramallah, the West Bank, and North of Jerusalem.
Mr. Sharon's recollection and actions in the incident:-
I was waiting for the boarding at the terminal at Gate 6 in JFK and as it is normal with me I observe who and what is waiting for the plane. Boarding started roughly 1 hour before the flight was due to depart, and the reason is that there is another security check with X ray scanning before getting onto any Tel Aviv bound flight, even if you have been through any TSA regular check. We have learned in Israel not to trust any other security checks by any country other than our own security checks.
The checks were done by Delta personnel and they missed spotting the Palestinian woman whose behavior should have set alarm bells ringing and not allowed her on the flight as she endangered the whole flight and could have caused delays if an emergency landing had been envisaged by the plane's captain, plus putting up 250 plus passengers in a hotel somewhere, extra fuel costs and unnecessary surcharges for the plane as well.
I restrained her by limited force, alerted the crew, and doctors who were traveling to Israel during the flight. There were no Air Marshals on the plane to assist me restraining the passenger, who was problematic all the way to Tel Aviv. I was asked whether I needed to cuff her with plastic restraints, and I said no need as I would guard her till we get to Tel Aviv and hand her over to the authorities there after landing.
Before the incidents started around Ireland around 500 miles west in mid-Atlantic, I started to suspect her as I sat almost next to her and we opened a conversation, where she talked about being met by someone from the Ramallah area to take to her family, which is impossible as the Israeli Security forces close all access from the West Bank and Gaza early in the morning before any major Jewish holiday starts, so I knew that she was lying, after the incident, another thing that she told me and I observed that was probably true that she was an Epileptic which also could have been the reason for her behavior as she told me that in the morning that she had a seizure which would explain her behavior , I asked assistance from the crew for an Air Marshal to help me out, I was answered that the company does not have any marshals to cover flight security unlike El Al.
On completion of the flight I was thanked by the crew and the Delta station manager for preventing a major incident on the plane and the financial loss of making an emergency landing, plus the embarrassment to the company security as well.
The week before the incident, my son who is an Israeli Government Security Agent flew out to New- York on the outgoing Delta flight that left Tel-Aviv's Ben Gurion Airport on September 17th at 11:00 am to prepare the Israeli Prime Ministers Security arrangements, and as he is permitted to carry a weapon on El-Al flights which is the normal carrier for our personnel and have Air Marshals, he was told that there were Marshals on his plane, so he deposited his weapon with the other agents in the secure bay on the plane as he was mislead to believe that there were Air Marshals on the plane, which we know as a non truth which I exposed during and after the incident on Delta flight 086, September 26th.
Wasn't September 11th, 2001 enough for America, because at this level of security and trust between our nations that Delta Personnel have to lie that there are Air Marshals on their planes and I exposed the truth, which a copy of this report will be forwarded to the Israeli Secret Service, Israeli Airports Authority, Delta Security and the TSA as this is a scandal. No matter the circumstances, the woman should not have travelled without someone to assist her and someone that could have helped out in her condition. Had she been a terrorist as she had no passport with her as I searched her bags for a passport and did not find it, matters could have turned out differently.
TERRORISM AND FIRST RESPONDER SEMINAR
OPERATION CAST LEAD – Will Israel’s Armageddon Lead to a Solution?
by: Maj Gen R S Mehta (Retd)
It is ironic how "seemingly intractable" the Palestinian problem is, as Hillary Clinton, the designate Secretary of State in the Obama administration succinctly put it, while deposing on January 12, 2009, before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee. The irony is that, on January 9, 2009, the day following the promulgation of UN Security Council Resolution 1860 calling for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, there was a substantial increase in Hamas rocket fire at Israeli targets. On January 8th, 15 rockets and four mortar shells fell in Israeli territory and 35 rockets and 14 mortar shells on January 9th. Clinton said America must recognize Israel’s right to defend itself from Hamas rockets but could not ignore the suffering of Palestinians. "Real security for Israel, normal and positive relations with its neighbours as well as genuine security for Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank" is, in her perception, the challenge she faces on Day 1 of her assuming office. She has her task cut out for her. Let us examine the complexities the world faces in resolving this conflict.
Operation Cast Lead
The Israelis began the operation by air strikes on December 27, 2008, with the ground offensive commencing on 03 January 2009. Israeli Defence Force (IDF) infantry, armoured, engineering and artillery forces entered the Gaza Strip with backup from the sea and air. Their objectives were to damage Hamas and its terrorist infrastructure, take control of rocket / mortar launching sites and reduce attacks on Israeli territory. The war continues unabated, notwithstanding the Israeli claim of having killed nearly 200 Hamas fighters. Since the offensive began, 971 people have been killed in Gaza with 4,400 people injured. 13 Israelis have died so far, three of them civilians, with 41 wounded.
The ground operation has dismantled terrorist infrastructure, including tunnels, weapons stores, rocket and mortar shell launching sites, terrorist operatives, military bases and terrorist bases that had situated in mosques and other buildings. The Israeli Air Force and Navy have provided back-up for the ground forces operating in the Gaza Strip, attacking approximately 1,500 targets numerated above, Hamas’s operational network, weapons stores, posts and training camps. Since the beginning of Operation Cast Lead, Hamas has fired 439 rockets and 158 mortar shells at the Israeli heartland/IDF.
Genesis of the Palestinian Problem: Early History
It is necessary to place the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict into context before exploring its various strands. The facts are not in dispute. In 1897, the First Zionist Congress was held for establishing a homeland for the Jewish people. Palestine, 112 years ago, had about 600,000 inhabitants, 95% of whom were Arabs, while 5% were only Jews. It comprised of current day Israel as well as the West Bank and the Gaza strip. In 1922, the League of Nations granted Great Britain mandatory power over Palestine to aid in establishment of a Jewish homeland. Jewish immigration into Palestine reached peak levels after the German genocide against Jews. By 1947, on the eve of the UN decision to partition Palestine, there were 1.35 million Palestinian Arabs and 650,000 Jews, who had acquired roughly 6% of the mandated area of Palestine. Yet, the UN General Assembly gave the Jews around 56% of Palestine.
The Palestinians and neighbouring Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition resolution and waged war on the new state of Israel but lost. In the aftermath of the1948 defeat, close to half the Palestinian population (around 750,000) became refugees, both inside and outside what remained of their own country. They number over three million now, with no hope of returning or being integrated in neighbouring Arab countries where most of them live. After their defeat in 1948, Arab states continued to wage wars on Israel, and continued to lose. Finally, "the era of peace" arrived, ushered in by the Camp David Agreement with Egypt in 1978. This offered a temporary respite from conflict.
Recent Developments on Palestine
The September 1993 Accord provided for a transitional period of Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza Strip that comprise today’s Palestine "State". Between May 1994 and September 1999, Israel transferred to the Palestinian Authority (PA), the security and civil responsibilities for the Palestinian occupied areas of the West Bank and Gaza strip. Negotiations stalled due to the Intifada in September 2000. In April 2003, the Quartet (US, EU, UN and Russia) presented a road map for final settlement of the Palestinian problem by 2005. Progress was stalled as both sides reneged on the preconditions to make a final settlement possible. Yasser Arafat, the charismatic PLO leader, died in end 2004 and Mahmoud Abbas was selected the PA leader in January 2005. In September, Israel unilaterally withdrew settlements and troops from the Gaza portion of the PA. In March 2006, Hamas, post elections, democratically took control of the PA government. Voters rewarded Hamas for its efficient administration of public services and lack of corruption that had become associated with Fatah. However the new government failed to renounce violence and recognise the right of Israel to exist within a potential two state solution. The Hamas dominance also led to Fatah and Hamas clashes.
In February 2007, the "Mecca Agreement" was signed in Riyadh that resulted in the formation of the Palestinian National Unity Government (NUG) headed by Hamas leader Haniya, with Mahmoud Abbas continuing as President. This Government has also failed as the Hamas agenda of war against Israel continued unabated. In June 2007, Hamas took over complete control of Gaza. Since then, it has relentlessly followed its focused agenda of jihad against Israel. The Israelis however regard Palestine as their own "biblical homeland"
and many aspire for a "Greater Israel" that includes the West Bank and Gaza. The Palestinians continue to resist, increasingly in ways which most of the world has come to regard as terrorist. It is now necessary to have an insight about the Palestinian state as it exists; its geography, economy, demography and interplay with Israel
The West Bank
This is the major part of today’s Palestine. It is located West of Jordan and has a land area of 5860 square kilometers including the North West portion of the Dead Sea. It includes, the West bank, the Latrun Salient, the North West Dead Sea but excludes Mount Scopus. The West Bank as a whole has a 307 km boundary with Israel and 97 km with Jordan. It has 340 Israeli settlements (187,000 inhabitants) and 29 Israeli settlements (177,000 inhabitants) in East Jerusalem. The total population is over 2.4 million with 75 percent being Sunni Muslims, 17 percent Jews and 8 percent Christians. The median age is 20.2 years. The GDP per capita (PPP) is $1100. The West Bank uses the New Israeli Shekel and the Jordanian Dinar as currency. Most of its electricity is supplied by Israel. It has three airports, a relatively good network of roads and a work force led by services provision, cottage industry and agriculture. It has a 350 strength UN Truce Supervisory Organisation (UNTSO) headquartered in Jerusalem. Its trading partners are Israel, Jordan, Gaza and Egypt.
THE GAZA STRIP
Gaza (locally called Qita Ghazzah) is located in the Middle East and borders the Mediterranean Sea between Israel and Egypt. It is 365 kilometers square, has a 62 kilometer border (51 kilometers with Israel, 11 with Egypt) and a 40 kilometer sea front. This part of the Palestine "State" is 40 kilometers long, with the narrowest and widest parts being five and ten kilometers respectively. Gaza has rolling sandy countryside, some of it arable, located mostly at sea level. It has a population of 1.5 million with the median age being 15.65. It is inhabited by 98.7 percent Sunni Muslims and 0.7 percent Christians. O.6 percent Jewish settlers were also present but were relocated in September 2005 by Israel. Literacy in Gaza is at 91 percent. Per capita GDP is equated to a Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) of $600. Gaza has a services driven economy. It has a labour force of 7, 25,000 with 63 percent employed in services, 28 percent in small cottage industry and 9 percent in agriculture. 81 percent Gazans live below the poverty line. 45.5 percent Gazans are unemployed. About 1 million of Gaza's 1.5 million people are refugees. Gaza trades with Egypt, Israel and the West Bank. Its currency is the new Israeli Shekel. Electricity is provided by Israel, as also Maritime and Air security. Gaza has one International Airport (decommissioned by Israel since 2004), one airstrip (out of use), one heliport, one port, two TV stations and three Internet Service Providers (ISP’s). Telephone services are rudimentary. The borders of the strip are enclosed by Israeli fences, checkpoints and buffer zones designed to prevent bomb-wielding militants from attacking Israel, but imposing a claustrophobic atmosphere that makes peace seem a distant dream.
Gaza has thus been "gated" from three sides with the Mediterranean Sea completing its isolation. It has six manned crossing points, of which five connect it with Israel and one with Egypt. These from North to South are Erez (in Gaza North administrative "province"), Nahal and Karni (in Gaza province). The next two provinces, North to South, are "Middle Area" and "Khan Yunis," which have no crossings. Rafah, the Southern most provinces, has the Sufa and Keren Shalom crossing points with Israel and the Rafah crossing with Egypt. The wall facing Israel has, besides the wall, a 150 meter "No-Go" buffer zone. On the Gazan side, the buffer zone is 500 meters. The Hamas has constructed various types of tunnels on the Gaza border with Egypt for smuggling in arms, munitions etc, thereby bypassing the manned Rafah crossing point through which Israel permits only humanitarian aid to pass. 20 percent of households are unconnected to the water and sewage system, and 90 per cent of the drinking water is contaminated with nitrates. About 70 per cent of Gazans are dependent on food aid.
What is Hamas? The Hezbollah/ Syria/Iran Connection
Hamas, which today runs Gaza strip, takes its name from the Arabic initials for the Islamic Resistance Movement. It is seen by its supporters as a legitimate fighting force defending Palestinians from a brutal military occupation. It is the largest Palestinian militant Islamist organisation, formed in 1987 at the beginning of the first intifada, against Israel's occupation in the West Bank and Gaza. The Hamas charter was formulated during 1987-1993. It is Hamas’s most important ideological document. The main points of the Hamas charter are that the conflict with Israel is religious and political. All Palestine is Muslim land and no one has the right to give it up. The importance of jihad (holy war) is the main means for the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) to achieve its goals. The charter is rife with overt anti-Semitism. For years the organisation was divided into two main spheres of operation: Social programmes like building schools, hospitals and religious institutions and militant operations carried out by Hamas' underground Iss al-Din Qassam Brigades.
Hezbollah (Arabic for "party of God") emerged in 1982 from the Shiite Muslim population of South Lebanon with the help of Iranian Revolutionary Guards who traveled to the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon to fight Israel following its incursion into the region. Israel entered Lebanon in response to the PLO, which mounted repeated cross-border attacks against Israel after establishing its base in Lebanon in the early 1970s. Despite the Israeli army's withdrawal from South Lebanon, Hezbollah has reinforced its grip over that territory, acquiring missiles and armaments and entrenching itself on Israel's northern border. Hezbollah has also increased its presence in the West Bank and Gaza, providing weapons, training and funds to Palestinian terrorist groups. Its moral and material sustenance comes from Iran and Syria. Since it is not on the best of terms with Hamas, the Arab world led by Hezbollah, has not responded with much enthusiasm. Hezbollah is consolidating its position and does not want to open a front against Israel at this critical juncture.
Israel, firstly, expects to weaken Hamas substantially by killing its fighters and destroying its rocket stockpile. Secondly, to establish Israeli deterrence so that Hamas will be more wary of firing cross-border rockets and using smuggling tunnels. Israel's underlying motivation for going to war in Gaza is, more importantly, to protect some of its most important defence installations. "It's only a matter of a year or two before Hamas threatens Ben-Gurion, the only international airport Israel has," said Hillel Frisch, senior research fellow at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies in Tel Aviv. In the past week, Palestinian militants in Gaza have been firing longer-range Grad-type missiles at targets in Israel, scoring numerous hits on towns like Beersheba, 40 kilometres from Israel's border with Gaza. The airport is located 20 kilometres southeast of Tel Aviv. Frisch says that the facilities that could be targeted as also Israel's nuclear reactor in Dimona, about 40 kilometres east of Beersheba, or 80 kilometres from Gaza.
What the Future Holds
As per BBC reportage, Maj Gen (Retd) Yaakov Amidror believes Israel should neutralise Gaza "as decisively as it went into the West Bank during the second intifada". Amidror however concedes that few people inside Israel want to put the 1.5 million Palestinians inside Gaza back under full Israeli control. On the other hand, Maj Gen (Retd) Giora Eiland, the former head of Israel's National Security Council, says that though a "wide military re-occupation of Gaza" is certainly an option, he favours halting operations now, and instead turning the screw(s) on Egypt. The ideal, he says, would be to stop arms smuggling by forcing Egypt to police a buffer zone five to 10 kilometres (three to seven miles) around Gaza's south-western border.
India is used to (if not callous) the loss of lives. To us, therefore, Israel’s obsession with the safety of its soldiers appears ridiculous. Not so in Israel. This display of state policy is best indicated that the Israelis have yet another goal which the senior echelons of the Israeli military discuss – releasing Corporal Gilad Shalit, the soldier captured by Hamas two and a half years ago. Maj Gen Dayan thinks that "
Israel's military objectives should extend beyond stopping rockets, to mass arrests". He says Israel now has a "good opportunity to arrest 1,000 Hamas members". That should be enough, he feels, to speed up Corporals Shalit's return to Israel. The BBC further reports that Maj Gen Eiland feels Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert may be wrong in considering the option of toppling Hamas altogether. He says "It is not necessarily better than to have a weakened Hamas." That, at least, he says, would be "one accountable government, that has something to lose, something to deliver to its own people."
A united Israel however knows that it has only a few days at most to achieve its goals. As one senior Israeli officer has put it, "
Israel may have all the time in the world; but the world does not have all the time for Israel".
THE AGENDA ● HOMELAND SECURITY
"We are here to do the work that ensures no other family members have to lose a loved one to a terrorist who turns a plane into a missile, a terrorist who straps a bomb around her waist and climbs aboard a bus, a terrorist who figures out how to set off a dirty bomb in one of our cities. This is why we are here: to make our country safer and make sure the nearly 3,000 who were taken from us did not die in vain; that their legacy will be a more safe and secure Nation."
-- Barack Obama, Speech in the U.S. Senate, March 6, 2007
The first responsibility of any president is to protect the American people. President Barack Obama will provide the leadership and strategies to strengthen our security at home.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden's strategy for securing the homeland against 21st century threats is focused on preventing terrorist attacks on our homeland, preparing and planning for emergencies and investing in strong response and recovery capabilities. Obama and Biden will strengthen our homeland against all hazards -– including natural or accidental disasters and terrorist threats -- and ensure that the federal government works with states, localities, and the private sector as a true partner in prevention, mitigation, and response.
Defeat Terrorism Worldwide
- Find, Disrupt, and Destroy Al Qaeda: Responsibly end the war in Iraq and focus on the right battlefield in Afghanistan. Work with other nations to strengthen their capacity to eliminate shared enemies.
- New Capabilities to Aggressively Defeat Terrorists: Improve the American intelligence apparatus by investing in its capacity to collect and analyze information, share information with other agencies and carry out operations to disrupt terrorist networks.
- Prepare the Military to Meet 21st Century Threats: Ensure that our military becomes more stealthy, agile, and lethal in its ability to capture or kill terrorists. Bolster our military's ability to speak different languages, navigate different cultures, and coordinate complex missions with our civilian agencies.
- Win the Battle of Ideas: Defeat al Qaeda in the battle of ideas by returning to an American foreign policy consistent with America's traditional values, and work with moderates within the Islamic world to counter al Qaeda propaganda. Establish a $2 billion Global Education Fund to work to eliminate the global education deficit and offer an alternative to extremist schools.
- Restore American Influence and Restore Our Values: Stop shuttering consulates and start opening them in the tough and hopeless corners of the world. Expand our foreign service, and develop the capacity of our civilian aid workers to work alongside the military.
Prevent Nuclear Terrorism
Barack Obama and Joe Biden have a comprehensive strategy for nuclear security that will reduce the danger of nuclear terrorism, prevent the spread of nuclear weapons capabilities, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime. They will:
- Secure Nuclear Weapons Materials in Four Years and End Nuclear Smuggling: Lead a global effort to secure all nuclear weapons materials at vulnerable sites within four years -- the most effective way to prevent terrorists from acquiring a nuclear bomb. Fully implement the Lugar-Obama legislation to help our allies detect and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction.
- Strengthen Policing and Interdiction Efforts: Institutionalize the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), a global initiative aimed at stopping shipments of weapons of mass destruction, their delivery systems, and related materials worldwide.
- Convene a Summit on Preventing Nuclear Terrorism: Convene a summit in 2009 (and regularly thereafter) of leaders of Permanent Members of the UN Security Council and other key countries to agree on preventing nuclear terrorism.
- Eliminate Iran's and North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Programs Through Tough, Direct Diplomacy: Use tough diplomacy -- backed by real incentives and real pressures -- to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and to eliminate fully and verifiably North Korea's nuclear weapons program.
- Strengthen the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA): Seek to ensure that the Agency gets the authority, information, people, and technology it needs to do its job.
- Control Fissile Materials: Lead a global effort to negotiate a verifiable treaty ending the production of fissile materials for weapons purposes.
- Prevent Nuclear Fuel from Becoming Nuclear Bombs: Work with other interested governments to establish a new international nuclear energy architecture -- including an international nuclear fuel bank, international nuclear fuel cycle centers, and reliable fuel supply assurances -- to meet growing demands for nuclear power without contributing to proliferation.
- Set the Goal of a Nuclear-Free World: Show the world that America believes in its existing commitment under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to work to ultimately eliminate all nuclear weapons. America will not disarm unilaterally.
- Seek Real, Verifiable Reductions in Nuclear Stockpiles: Seek deep, verifiable reductions in all U.S. and Russian nuclear weapons and work with other nuclear powers to reduce global stockpiles dramatically.
- Work with Russia to Increase Warning and Decision Time: Work with Russia to end dangerous Cold War policies like keeping nuclear weapons ready to launch on a moment’s notice, in a mutual and verifiable manner.
- Appoint White House Coordinator for Nuclear Security: Appoint a deputy national security advisor to be in charge of coordinating all U.S. programs aimed at reducing the risk of nuclear terrorism and weapons proliferation.
- Strengthen Nuclear Risk Reduction Work at Defense, State, and Energy Departments: Expand our foreign service, and develop the capacity of our civilian aid workers to work alongside the military. Thwarting terrorist networks requires international partnerships in military, intelligence, law enforcement, financial transactions, border controls, and transportation security.
Strengthen American Biosecurity
Biological weapons pose a serious and increasing national security risk. Barack Obama and Joe Biden will work to prevent bioterror attacks and mitigate consequences. They will:
- Prevent Bioterror Attacks: Strengthen U.S. intelligence collection overseas to identify and interdict would-be bioterrorists before they strike.
- Build Capacity to Mitigate the Consequences of Bioterror Attacks: Ensure that decision-makers have the information and communication tools they need to manage disease outbreaks by linking health care providers, hospitals, and public health agencies. A well-planned, well-rehearsed, and rapidly executed epidemic response can dramatically diminish the consequences of biological attacks.
- Accelerate the Development of New Medicines, Vaccines, and Production Capabilities: Build on America's unparalleled talent to create new drugs, vaccines, and diagnostic tests and to manufacture them more quickly and efficiently.
- Lead an International Effort to Diminish Impact of Major Infectious Disease Epidemics: Promote international efforts to develop new diagnostics, vaccines, and medicines that will be available and affordable in all parts of the world.
Protect Our Information Networks
Barack Obama and Joe Biden -- working with private industry, the research community and our citizens -- will lead an effort to build a trustworthy and accountable cyber infrastructure that is resilient, protects America's competitive advantage, and advances our national and homeland security. They will:
- Strengthen Federal Leadership on Cyber Security: Declare the cyber infrastructure a strategic asset and establish the position of national cyber advisor who will report directly to the president and will be responsible for coordinating federal agency efforts and development of national cyber policy.
- Initiate a Safe Computing R&D Effort and Harden our Nation's Cyber Infrastructure: Support an initiative to develop next-generation secure computers and networking for national security applications. Work with industry and academia to develop and deploy a new generation of secure hardware and software for our critical cyber infrastructure.
- Protect the IT Infrastructure That Keeps America's Economy Safe: Work with the private sector to establish tough new standards for cyber security and physical resilience.
- Prevent Corporate Cyber-Espionage: Work with industry to develop the systems necessary to protect our nation's trade secrets and our research and development. Innovations in software, engineering, pharmaceuticals and other fields are being stolen online from U.S. businesses at an alarming rate.
- Develop a Cyber Crime Strategy to Minimize the Opportunities for Criminal Profit: Shut down the mechanisms used to transmit criminal profits by shutting down untraceable Internet payment schemes. Initiate a grant and training program to provide federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies the tools they need to detect and prosecute cyber crime.
- Mandate Standards for Securing Personal Data and Require Companies to Disclose Personal Information Data Breaches: Partner with industry and our citizens to secure personal data stored on government and private systems. Institute a common standard for securing such data across industries and protect the rights of individuals in the information age.
Improve Intelligence Capacity and Protect Civil Liberties
- Improve Information Sharing and Analysis: Improve our intelligence system by creating a senior position to coordinate domestic intelligence gathering, establishing a grant program to support thousands more state and local level intelligence analysts, and increasing our capacity to share intelligence across all levels of government.
- Give Real Authority to the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board: Support efforts to strengthen the Privacy and Civil Liberties Board with subpoena powers and reporting responsibilities. Give the Board a robust mandate designed to protect American civil liberties and demand transparency from the Board to ensure accountability.
- Strengthen Institutions to Fight Terrorism: Establish a Shared Security Partnership Program overseas to invest $5 billion over three years to improve cooperation between U.S. and foreign intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
Protect Americans from Terrorist Attacks and Natural Disasters
- Allocate Funds Based on Risk: Allocate our precious homeland security dollars according to risk, not as pork-barrel spending or a form of general revenue sharing. Eliminate waste, fraud and abuse that cost the nation billions of Department of Homeland Security dollars.
- Prepare Effective Emergency Response Plans: Further improve coordination between all levels of government, create better evacuation plan guidelines, ensure prompt federal assistance to emergency zones, and increase medical surge capacity.
- Support First Responders: Increase federal resources and logistic support to local emergency planning efforts.
- Improve Interoperable Communications Systems: Support efforts to provide greater technical assistance to local and state first responders and dramatically increase funding for reliable, interoperable communications systems. Appoint a National Chief Technology Officer to ensure that the current non-interoperable plans at the federal, state, and local levels are combined, funded, implemented and effective.
- Working with State and Local Governments and the Private Sector: Make the federal government a better partner to states and localities, one that listens to local concerns and considers local priorities. Reach out to the private sector to leverage its expertise and assets to protect our homeland security.
Protect Critical Infrastructure
- Create a National Infrastructure Protection Plan: Develop an effective critical infrastructure protection and resiliency plan for the nation and work with the private sector to ensure that targets are protected against all hazards.
- Secure our Chemical Plants: Work with all stakeholders to enact permanent federal chemical plant security regulations.
- Improve Airline Security: Redouble our efforts to adequately address the threats our nation continues to face from airplane-based terrorism.
- Monitor our Ports: Redouble our efforts to develop technology that can detect radiation and work with the maritime transportation industry to deploy this technology to maximize security without causing economic disruption.
- Safeguard Public Transportation: Work to protect the public transportation systems Americans use to get to work, school and beyond every day.
- Improve Border Security: Support the virtual and physical infrastructure and manpower necessary to secure our borders and keep our nation safe.
Modernize America's Aging Infrastructure
- Build-in Security: Ensure that security is considered and built into the design of new infrastructure, so that our critical assets are protected from the start and more resilient to naturally-occurring and deliberate threats throughout their life-cycle.
- Create a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank: Address the infrastructure challenge by creating a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank of $60 billion over 10 years, to expand and enhance, not supplant, existing federal transportation investments. This independent entity will be directed to invest in our nation's most challenging transportation infrastructure needs, without the influence of special interests.
- Invest in Critical Infrastructure Projects: Invest in our nation's most pressing short and long-term infrastructure needs, including modernizing our electrical grid and upgrading our highway, rail, ports, water, and aviation infrastructure. Establish a Grid Modernization Commission to facilitate adoption of Smart Grid practices to improve efficiency and security of our electricity grid.
Wednesday 10 October 2007 at 10:00 AM we lost a valuable member of our HSDC Team. Bill Jenkins passed away of natural causes. Bill originally started with HSDC volunteering his time five years ago as our Director of online programs and was moved up to Vice President of Regulatory Affairs. Bill was an major part of building our current infrastructure.
William Jenkins, MBA, Ph.D. (can) is the Vice President of Educational Regulatory Affairs for the Homeland Security Defense Coalition and a course Instructor and Regulatory Affairs professional with the Homeland Security University. He has spent the last 28 years working in college level education filling a variety of positions within the academic community. Bill started his career upon leaving the US Navy in 1976 where he served as an Electronic Technician in support of the Naval Oceanographic Office.
His career journey began as a Professor of Electronic Technology, working with special needs students in Charleston, South Carolina. Teaching basic and advance electronics theory to minority students where they were often first time college students in their family. This appointment provided the foundation for a successful platform career that continues today.
Seeking to expand his teaching options to include software development and training, Bill joined the faculty of a private college in southern New Hampshire. He completed his Bachelor degree from Franklin Pierce College in Rindge, NH, and included software development and Business Administration. Offering classes in software programming and basic business administration, Bill continued to work with special needs students in the New Hampshire Job Training program (CETA). In addition, he worked with integrating the PC platform into the education arena as a training tool for word-processing, electronic spreadsheet analysis and database development.
In the early 1990s Bill completed his MBA with a concentration in Business Administration from Pfeiffer College in Misenheimer, North Carolina. This provided opportunities for developing course work in faculty development with a focus on using technology in the classroom. Working as the Systems Administrator and Assistant Professor of Computer Information Systems Bill was instrumental in bringing technology to the classroom for every college discipline.
In the following years a number of management positions included Academic Department Chair and Academic Dean for a larger for-profit University system in Florida. This included opportunities in faculty development and supervision, and new program development and implementation.
As technology and the Internet have developed with the introduction to Distance Education/On Line Learning he moved toward this new venue. Today Bill is working with groups across the country to translate on-ground teaching techniques into classes he is teaching in this new environment. He has training with online presentation platforms to provide strong learning experiences for his online students.
During his career, Bill has received numerous recognitions for his platform presence. He served as an Accreditation Visiting Team Specialist for ACICS, and has worked with accrediting campus visits for New England Regional and Southern Association. He also developed and presented training materials at the entry level, intermediate and advanced levels for use with Microsoft Office products in the classroom.
Bill was divorced and please say a prayer for Bill's significant other and grown children. His daughter had just been married and his sons are in college. Bill was working on completing his doctorate degree through a university online.
God Bless you Bill, you will be remembered and missed.
Propaganda and Why There is No Negotiating with the Resistance
March 28, 2007, By: Tim Greene
The Islamic State of Iraq, under the leadership of Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, released information concerning the attempt of the U.S. military to open negotiations with the Islamic State leadership.
They reported that the U.S. military released al-Mujihadeen fighters from Iraqi/U.S. military prisons with a verbal message for the al-Mujihadeen and Islamic State of Iraq to open negotiations.
Baghdadi says the U.S. agreed to support the Islamic State of Iraq and would fight with them against the shiite's if the Islamic State would cease attacks on the U.S. military, Iraqi security forces and the Iraqi government.
Baghdadi's top field lieutenant says while the negotiation is tempting, he nor any group associated with the membership of the Islamic State of Iraq will negotiate with America because America 's interest is not that of Iraq or the sunni people but only of themselves.
Now the U.S. military is sandwiched between fighting the resistance of Iraq, which is ever more growing in membership and support of money, weapons and technology - terrorist groups such as al-Queda and also the shiite militia's supported and trained by Iran.
They say the war in the middle east in which Iraq is caught in between currently is America's fight for control of the middle east and Iran's fight for control of the middle east.
But it would seem that the fight for control of Iraq is enough for the U.S. military.
Dr. Zalmay Khalizad, the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, says that the U.S. is attempting to negotiate with tribal leaders and some insurgent groups in an effort to turn them away from al-Queda.
The Islamic State of Iraq has no need to negotiate with America when they perceive that their tactics and strategy are far more successful than that of the U.S. military's as well as the Iraqi security forces old and new security plan.
The U.S. military fails to understand the drive and confidence behind the Islamic State of Iraq that is the religion of Islam itself.
The Islamic State of Iraq has 2 agenda's:
- Fight until death
There is no negotiation with the Islamic State of Iraq except for the U.S. military pull-out from Iraq immediately.
The Islamic State of Iraq is costing the United States millions of dollars per day just in manpower, logistics and equipment support, not including the medical cost of wounded soldiers, the destruction of U.S. military equipment, the destruction of Iraqi government facilities such as police stations, army bases Iraqi utility structures and government offices.
For every strategy the U.S. and Iraqi government and military implement, the Islamic State of Iraq reports that it has successfully countered it.
For every new technology the U.S. military has invented and placed in-service, the Islamic State of Iraq has successfully countered and they continue to develop new technology in their improvised explosive devices, anti-aircraft missiles, mortar fired missiles and shoulder fired rockets.
The U.S. military has taken the Israeli approach to fighting terrorism in Iraq and according to the sunni arab culture in Iraq, this does not make militants "think twice" about joining the resistance or terrorist groups when their family members (men, women, children and elderly) are arrested or killed, it drives them stronger to join into the ranks of the resistance.
You can't fight the war on terrorism in Iraq like the Israeli's fight the Palestinians in Gaza , the West Bank and other Palestinian territories and current and former Israeli officials are heavily involved in the coaching of U.S. military strategy in Iraq , Afghanistan and throughout the middle east.
Your dealing with a different culture, a different society, a different set of values, principles and ideology that only a sunni Iraqi knows and can understand.
The U.S. military has a window to negotiate with groups such as former Ba'athist of Saddam Hussein's, with resistance groups such as the 1920 Revolutionary brigades and so forth.
These groups fell from grace as the countries former government and religious ethnic's most powerful people in Iraq before the war.
They are fighting to regain their control, power and money once again so negotiating with them is far more easy and acceptable by them. Religion is not the driving force behind these groups and therefore that leaves a window for negotiating with them.
Actually these groups have internal conflicts that have arisen and caused them to split recently – particularly speaking of the 1920 Revolutionary Brigades.
They are now two separate groups. One named "Islamic Jihad" and the other named "Islamic Conquest". The one thing they did manage to work out during their split was territory.
The Islamic Jihad group will control northern regions of Iraq in Mosul , Kirkurk, Tikrit, sections of Baghdad and Abu Ghraib.
The Islamic Conquest group will control western regions of Iraq , Ramadi, Fallujah, sections of Baghdad and Diyala.
But as one group splits another group arises as of January a new Sulefy group has formed called the "Army of the Men of the Naqshbandi Order". They are fighting U.S. Military in Iraq in honor of the memory of a former Palestinian Liberation Organization leader named Mohammed Abbas who was captured in Iraq by the U.S. Military in May of 2003. Abbas died of natural causes while in custody, however, the group claims that he was tortured and poisoned to death in U.S. custody.
Their other reasons for joining the resistance include discrimination against Sunni's, loss of power, status and unemployment as well as revenge for suffering of other indecencies such as unlawful detentions whereas sunni men have held in U.S. and Iraqi detention centers for months to up to two years and then released with no right to legal counsel and no criminal charges brought against them.
WHO IS AL-QUEDA?
Who is al-Queda anyway? Most all sunni people, tribes and even the "resistance" groups have strongly opposed to al-Queda in Iraq , specifically for religious reasons in which former al-Queda in Iraq leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, strongly misrepresented the true meaning and idea of Jihad in Islam with al-Queda's indiscriminant killing of men, women and children of sunni and shiite religious fellowship.
Every attack that takes place today in Iraq is labeled an "al-Queda" linked attack and a great majority of the attacks in Iraq today are not al-Queda linked but "resistance" linked.
DRIVING FORCE OF ISLAM
The Islamic State of Iraq is a "resistance" organization, not an al-Queda organization, totally against the foreign control and foreign occupation of Iraq.
The shiite dominant Maliki government is seen to be controlled by America, but in the absence of America would certainly be controlled by Iran.
Islamic and Shariah law are the constitution of the Islamic State of Iraq and therefore negotiation between them is definitely going to be impossible. Islam is not-negotiable.
There is no other religion and driving force to stand and fight for one's self, family, culture, values and home than in Islam.
Recently however, the Islamic State of Iraq released information that now they are making deals with al-Queda to increase the quantity and quality of their attacks on U.S. Military in Iraq.
Why should the Islamic State of Iraq negotiate when today they have exactly what they have been wanting?
"IF" they were to negotiate, this would split the organization of the Islamic State of Iraq, because certainly some will be for the negotiation and some will be against the negotiation.
This would decrease their membership, their support from money and weapons and their ability to succeed so exclusively in their strategy to make the Maliki government fail, keep from shiite domination controlled by Iran and to force the U.S. military out of Iraq .
This would make the Islamic State of Iraq appear extremely weak to the sunni population for negotiating with the "Masters of the Maliki government", the "Crusaders" and the "Zionist Jews".
What inspires a young sunni arab to stand in front of a tank and fight it with an AK-47?
The Islamic State's motto is to fight to win or fight until death, whichever comes first. Fighting to the death is a glorious prize in Islam as a martyr of religion supporting GOD's will and law even if that comes down to fighting with nothing but rocks and sticks.
The World's military superpower occupies Iraq today with sophisticated technology of weapons, tactics, planning and equipment.
Fighting them is the world's most un-sophisticated military in the world, the Islamic military, destroying thousands to million dollar pieces of the most magnificent technology in the world with explosive's made with hardware store materials to improvise them for maximum destruction.
Million dollar helicopters shot down with $40 to $100 rockets.
Military minesweeper vehicles, costing $750,000 each, with the worlds most sophisticated and up to date technology in frequency jamming of remote control explosive devices, destroyed completely by the combination of 4 to 8 120mm shells tied together with detonation cord and packed with TNT - about a $250-$400 value.
The top military frequency jamming devices penetrated to set off remote improvised explosive devices.
The top military anti-tank and anti-aircraft defense technology penetrated by techniques such as covering the missile in mud and new electronic technology developed by the engineers of the Islamic State of Iraq themselves to drive through anti-missile flares.
Top experienced military tactical strategist who plan and prepare every attack operation throughly and carefully before implementation.
The Islamic State of Iraq has established their leader, Abu Omar al-Baghdadi, a multi-media team and Information Ministry, field lieutenants that take orders and give orders in all provinces of Iraq under U.S. occupation and resistance operations, teams established for attacks on specific targets, specific investigations teams, intelligence operatives, engineers who work to create new technologies and new weapons to defeat America's most advanced technologies and weapons, former military planners who create the new strategies to defeat America's newest defense and security strategies, financial supporters from all over Iraq and abroad and a membership and recruitment drive associated with their strategic propaganda drives.
Recently the media released that the Defense Department has put in a purchase for the manufacture of the new minesweeper vehicles such as the Buffalo , the Cougar, the Meerkat and the RG-31 Nayala. These vehicles have the most up to date frequency jamming technology to prevent remote detonation of improvised explosive devices. They have IED detection technology to locate IED's along the roadways in front of military patrols and convoys. The Buffalo is the largest of the new vehicles, sitting high up from the ground and has a V-shaped bottom to deflect the concussion of an explosion under the roadway out and away from the body of the vehicle. It also has a large crane arm with a camera to deal with, disarm or disassemble any explosive devices that it finds.
The Defense Department reported that they had an order of 4000+ of these vehicles to be manufactured and deployed in Iraq before the end of 2007, however, since the vehicle has been so successful, with no soldier casualties and the inability to destroy such a vehicle unlike the humvee which has a large, flat body and takes in most of the explosion, the Defense Department has increased the order to over 6000 vehicles at an estimated cost each of $750,000 US.
The week after this media report, the Islamic State of Iraq released a 26 minute video detailing all 4 new military vehicles with their specialized design and technologies and included in the video was specific and strategic attacks against all of the 4 vehicles resulting in the deaths of soldiers on board as well as the destruction of the vehicles to prove the Defense Departments information release as insufficient.
Two weeks ago the Islamic State of Iraq attacked the Badoosh prison in Mosul.
The western media reports that the prison suffered no known injuries or casualties and that about 114 prisoners were released, however, all but appx. 40 of them were captured within one hour.
Days later the Islamic State of Iraq released their video footage of the attack on Badoosh Prison noting that their attack teams had specific targets. One team attacked the tower guards, who were their largest threat, one team attacked the communications for the prison to prevent them from calling for assistance, one team attacked the electricity and one team attacked the entrance to the prison. They all successfully made entry, released 114 Iraqi prisoners and some approx. 100 other foreign prisoners, none of which were apprehended. The prison personnel suffered heavy injuries and deaths. The whole operation took 14 minutes - and had the prison been successful to contact for help, resistance teams were set up to attack the responding military teams and hold them off until the prison operation was complete. Similar to the attack incident on the Blackwater helicopters and emergency response teams recently in Baghdad .
Recently they released a video showing the attack on an undisclosed U.S. military base where their tactical strategists split their personnel into 3 teams... the attackers, the supporters and the get-a-way. They had a good tactical plan, predetermined and planned carefully. They had their attackers in good operational locations and the ability to move about. They attacked the base from different directions for maximum results and confusion among the base. They closed off support routes with fighters, weapons and explosive devices. They set up a quick and successful evacuation.
The old saying is that there is two sides to every story and the Islamic State of Iraq's main idea is to have their side heard on top of the western media and the press releases they get from the US military and Iraqi government in an attempt to prove that the security plan is not working and that the Iraqi government is not functioning and working for the people of Iraq.
Tim Greene is a lecturer and instructor in Islam, Sharia law, the Sunnah, Haddith, Arab Culture, Tribal Society, Middle Eastern and International militia's, resistance groups and terrorist organizations, and conducts anti-terrorism assessments, consulting, policies and training.
The Trouble with the Baker-Hamilton Study
By Ilana Freedman
The Iraq Study Group Report is one of the most naïve and potentially dangerous documents to impact United States policy in many years. The alarming scope of the panel's ignorance of Middle East realities is made all the more alarming by the respected reputations of those who sat on the panel. They included two former White House Chiefs of Staff, advisors to several presidents, a retired Supreme Court Judge, a former Secretary of State, and several academics and think tank executives.
Significantly absent from this commission, however, was anyone with military expertise or experience, with real and recent knowledge of the current situation in Iraq. Considering that America's involvement in Iraq has been first and foremost a military one, this omission is singularly glaring and it casts a long shadow on the findings. This may explain some of the more serious shortcomings of this report, but it does not lessen the dangers that the report will represent if it is accepted as a reasonable analysis and absorbed into policy.
This is very clear in the very first pages of the report, which refers to "the ability of Iran and Syria to influence events within Iraq and their interest in avoiding chaos in Iraq". In reality, Iran has been one of the key drivers of Iraq's increasing instability since the beginning of America's military involvement in Iraq in 2003. As an element of their national policy, they have offered safe haven, training, and military support to terrorists bound for operations in Iraq. They have flooded Iraq with billions of counterfeit US dollars aimed at destabilizing the local economy, and have provided major military and financial support to terrorist groups within the country. Anyone who has studied the strategic implications of policy changes in Iraq should know this.
Yet the Study Group recommends that "Iran should stem the flow of equipment, technology, and training to any group resorting to violence in Iraq", displays a shocking lack of understanding of the forces that drive the conflict. Iran has no interest in a stable region or a strong Iraq, but rather seeks to dominate the entire Muslim world. When the panel suggests that the United States try to "engage [Iran and Syria] constructively", they ignore Iran's vested interest in destabilizing the region.
The report also ignores the harsh lessons of history. The patterns of pre-World War II Germany are now playing out again in Iran. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has made his game plan clear, just as Hitler did more than 80 years ago. As early as 1919, Hitler was publicly asserting his ideas about"racial purity" and reserving his greatest venom for the Jews, whom he made it clear needed to be "eliminated".
The world did not pay attention then, and Hitler did exactly as he said he would. The six million Jews who were murdered represented 25% of the civilian casualties of the war in Europe. Today, as Ahmadinejad develops his nuclear arsenal while unabashedly calling for the total destruction of the state of Israel and its six million Jews, his message is abundantly clear. Yet this point is totally disregarded by the panel.
Moreover, Ahmadinejad has also declared - in letters and speeches - that the West must follow the path of Allah or "vanish from the face of the earth". These are words that must be taken at face value. In a worst case scenario, they will be there to remind us that we were warned. A student of Islam knows that warnings are a part of the tradition of Mohammed, and are declared today as a prelude to war. The fact that these warnings have not been taken into account by the Study Group is reason for great concern. Like Chamberlain, the panel embraces diplomacy while ignoring the threats and clear warnings of the enemy who preaches the destruction of our nation. As Iran moves purposefully towards the acquisition of nuclear power, the ominous threat of a nuclear war looms large. Ahmadinejad has issued thinly veiled threats of his goal in this regard and we ignore at our peril. A nuclear bomb delivered against one of Iran's precieved will mark the beginning of a world war unlike anything we have ever seen.
The report shows a stunning lack of interest or concern for Israel's place in the Middle East. It calls for a direct talks between Israel and Syria to "deal directly with the Middle East conflict." But it then provides a list of eight fanciful assumptions that includes "verifiable cessation" of Syrian aid to Hezbollah and arms shipments for Hamas, and a Syrian commitment to help obtain from Hamas an acknowledgment of Israel's right to exist. The end result, according to the report, will be a full and secure peace agreement. The idea that Syria will agree to any of this denies Syria's close alliance with Iran, its history of supplying arms, ammunition, funds, a logistical support to the Hezbollah to support their terrorist activities against Israel.
Nevertheless, the panel has recommended that in return for these naïve and simplistic demands, Israel will return the strategic Golan Heights, that overlook its entire northern region, to Syria, with the promise of a U.S. security guarantee and an international force on the borders. Given Israel's past disastrous experience with security guarantees and international forces, it is hardly reasonable to expect them to stake their very survival on such promises. They also ignore the massive support of Iran and Syria, or, no less alarming, the continued movement of long-range missiles to Syria's border with Israel.
Finally, the panel's urgent call for US withdrawal from Iraq is both uninformed and dangerous. Given Iran's consistent and deadly meddling in Iraq, US withdrawal would do more to destabilize the region than any other single act. It could throw the Middle East into a war on several fronts that could merge into a conflagration unlike anything we have yet seen in the region. And it would inflame Islamists around the globe to take up the sword in jihad.
The historical record shows that the Study Group's assumptions are simplistic at best and, more to the point, they are dangerously lacking realistic perspective. While they have raised serious questions about issues which are in urgent need of discussion and resolution, their lack of knowledge about the complex cultures and issues of the Middle East or the ramifications of Western actions there should disqualify this report from playing any significant role in developing foreign policy.
© Gerard Group International LLC 2006
Learning from the enemy's side
Written by P. Michel
The author is a former member of Bundesgrenzschutz, a German federal police force. His company Praesidia Defence provides executive protection and training in executive protection, as well as bomb awareness training and security consulting
The knowledge of terrorist tactics is a valuable tool for predicting future attacks, assessing the most probable means of attacks and developing counter measures for security professionals....Click Here to read full article in pdf format
The Other War: Resurgent Socialism and Insurgency in the Age of Globalization.
By Guntram Werther, Ph.D.
Globalization was sold as a systemic ascent of freer international markets and trade regimes via liberalizing economic and political reforms. Similarly, the development trajectory of poor countries via market-friendly economic and hopefully more democratic political reforms within this globalizing environment envisioned an outcome broadly similar to our experience of market democracies
in the developed "West" and in Asia. That is, "they" would be on "our" side.Increasingly, that is not so. To confront the reality in 2006 that many Islamic countries are electing conservative, "Islamist", and anti-American governments while non-Islamic countries are increasingly voting for Socialist or Marxist-Communist parties is a shock to many people in the West. Commonly linked to these democratic electoral transitions toward socialist/Marxist run or influenced governments are leftist insurgencies, some with strong indigenist aspects.
This essay primarily examines the latter; that is, the leftist-indigenist linkage tied to rising socialism and the relationship of both to insurgency. To download the entire document, please click here.
The document is in PDF format and requires Adobe Acrobat Reader to view.
You can download Acrobat Reader Here
This article originally appeared in The Forensic Examiner, the peer-reviewed publication of the American College of Forensic Examiners (ACFEI). It appears here with the permission of ACFEI.
For more information on ACFEI or The Forensic Examiner call toll free (800) 423-9737 or visit www.acfei.com.
Dr. David F. Ciampi, the author of this article, welcomes your comments at: email@example.com
The document is in PDF format and requires Adobe Acrobat Reader to view.
You can download Acrobat Reader Here
Terror In The Skys Again?
A true story by Annie Jacobsen
Reproduced with permission of WomensWallStreet.com
Click here to read this sobering account of a recent flight taken by Annie Jacobsen.
Letter of Support for the Homeland Security University College project - Click Here