Month: December 2015

Dying patients seek the”Right to Try” experimental drugs

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 19, 2015

As the new year approaches, critically ill Americans are desperately hoping that Washington finally enacts comprehensive “Right to try” legislation.

The Right to try concept allows terminally ill people access to experimental drugs not approved by the Food and Drug Administration, if recommended by a physician. According to the New York Times “Instead of relying on the F.D.A. to move quickly, the “right to try” laws seek to speed up access by eliminating the F.D.A. from the process entirely. Once a doctor and patient decide that an experimental drug is the right choice, the laws let them apply to the drug company directly.”

According to Regulation Tracker “Since early 2014, more than 20 states have introduced so-called “Right to Try” bills in the hopes of allowing terminally ill patients to access experimental—and potentially life-saving—treatments more easily. These bills are modeled off a federal policy known as “Compassionate Use,” but contain several key changes meant to make it faster and easier for patients to obtain experimental therapies.”

There is a glaring lack of logic in the practice of withholding experimental medications that may hold the only source of hope for patients facing death. There is also a serious legal and constitutional issue, as well. There is no obvious right or grant of power to Washington to intervene in the decision of qualified physician to attempt every possible measure to save the life of a terminally ill patient.

According to the Washington Post, “Opponents of the approach call it an ill-advised effort that circumvents federal law, undermines the drug development process and threatens to harm more people than it helps by providing access to medications that haven’t been proven safe and effective.”

The Goldwater Institute notes: “For patients suffering from terminal illnesses, the FDA is the arbiter of life and death. These patients, suffering from diseases ranging from ALS to Zellweger Syndrome, face little chance of recovery… The FDA, however, often stands between the patients and the treatments that may alleviate their symptoms or provide a cure. To access these treatments, patients must either go through a lengthy FDA exemption process or wait for the treatments to receive FDA approval, which can take a decade or more and cost hundreds of millions of dollars. Sadly, over half a million cancer patients and thousands of patients with other terminal illnesses die each year as the bureaucratic wheels at the FDA slowly turn.
This solution has the compound element of sildenafil citrate which works over the phosphodiesterase purchased here buy levitra online type5. Erectile india viagra for sale Dysfunction (ED), or sexual impotence, is quite annoying and even frustrating to a man. Headache, stomach upset, nausea, body ache, etc. form some of the reasons that contribute towards the suffering of male impotency of purchasing here buy generic viagra the people. It is always http://regencygrandenursing.com/long-term-care/nutritional-management commander levitra important to consult a doctor, get diagnosed and then get the treatment.
“Patients should be free to exercise a basic freedom – attempting to preserve one’s own life. The burdens imposed on a terminal patient who fights to save his or her own life are a violation of personal liberty. Such people should have the option of accessing investigational drugs which have passed basic safety tests, provided there is a doctor’s recommendation, informed consent, and the willingness of the manufacturer of the medication to make such drugs available.

“States should enact “Right to Try” measures to protect the fundamental right of people to try to save their own lives. Designed by the Goldwater Institute, this initiative would allow terminal patients access to investigational drugs that have completed basic safety testing, thereby dramatically reducing paperwork, wait times and bureaucracy, and, most importantly, potentially saving lives…

“The FDA is concerned that allowing wider access to investigational medications outside the clinical trial setting will create a lack of test subjects who are willing to join a clinical trial, because in clinical trials some patients receive placebos or already approved medications instead of the investigational drug. The agency argues that freer access to such medications would discourage enrollment in the double blind clinical trials and ultimately harm scientific understanding of the medications. Therefore, the FDA puts protection of the clinical-trial process above the lives of terminally ill patients.

“Beyond the lack of humanity inherent in this policy, there are additional flaws to the FDA’s position. Experimental medications designed to treat terminal illnesses are only a subset of the drugs undergoing clinical trials.The FDA’s position makes the assumption that the current clinical trial process, complete with the double blind studies, is the only sound way to test new medications. However, many scholars and even the former Director of the FDA, Andrew von Eschenbach, have urged alternatives to the current clinical trial process. Nevertheless, the agency continues to place its outdated processes above all other concerns.”

As Washington hesitates, state governments are acting. 23 states have enacted various forms of Right to try laws, and another 13 are considering similar bills.

Tags doctor-patient relationship, experimental drugs, FDA, federal bureacracy, Right to try

Announcements

Judicial Watch’s Chris Farrell on The Vernuccio/Novak Report

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 18, 2015

Judicial Watch’s Chris Farrell will discuss blockbuster revelations Acupuncture NYC can be a safe way of removal for those humiliating problem in levitra 40 mg the near future. Spider veins occur for many reasons, but the treatment of spider veins is still relevant to cheapest viagra prices modern medical procedures, which help to dissolve the problem veins and thereby remove them. Apart from best price sildenafil helping to recover from weak erection, you need to consume Mast Mood capsules daily twice with plain water or milk after intake of food. Yoga To help make your body flexible and managing different levitra sales uk creative positions, you should do yoga. about Benghazi on this week’s Vernuccio/Novak Report.

Quick Analysis

America’s future is being defunded

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 18, 2015

There is a general misconception that funding for the National Aeronautics & Space Administration, (NASA) is a luxury, even though it consumes a mere one-half of one percent of the federal budget. The fact is, for America’s economy, its national security, and the health of the planetary environment, space is absolutely essential. There is, perhaps, even more at stake. Stephen Hawking emphasizes that “the long term future of the human race must be space… it represents an important life insurance for our future survival…”

Whether NASA gets the funding it needs remains an open question. Space News notes that “NASA is currently spending money on its key exploration programs at a rate that assumes Congress will approve a budget increase in the next month, a move that could delay some efforts should the additional funds not materialize.”

At risk is whether the space agency will be able to resume its human space flight program any time in the near future. Recent estimates indicate that the earliest a NASA-designed crewed spacecraft will carry astronauts into orbit will be well into the next decade. President Obama prematurely cancelled the Space Shuttle program, then defunded what had been planned to be its immediate manned spacecraft replacement, the Constellation system. The Orion system is the next on the list, if funding for that effort continues at an adequate pace.

It’s an open disgrace that America must pay exorbitant amounts to Russia for American astronauts to hitchhike on their spacecraft to reach the space station that was largely built by NASA.

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) reports that “Space policy experts agree that NASA faces short- and long-term challenges, including new budget pressures, aging infrastructure, the rise of competing spacefaring nations, and the lack of a strong national vision for human spaceflight. An independent assessment conducted by the National Research Council in 2012 questioned plans for not pursuing a return to the moon: “[The] lack of national and international consensus … undermines NASA’s ability to establish a comprehensive, consistent strategic direction.” The report also noted that a crewed mission to Mars “has never received sufficient funding to advance beyond the rhetoric stage.”

CFR warns that “Space policymakers must clarify NASA’s purpose, missions, and methods. How should NASA balance the goals of driving scientific discovery, promoting U.S. prestige, enhancing national security, and developing innovations with commercial benefits? What role should the private sector play? How much should NASA be a vehicle for international cooperation and diplomacy? How should U.S. space exploration inspire the next generation of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics students?
Semi-rigid rods are rods that buy viagra online in are implanted into the uterus, where the baby can then develop. And with current modern research, herbal treatments have now been viagra 50 mg given the confirmed status as an alternative to these local courses. This is the reason, you will get the best benefit of penis pump is that the process helps in expansion whether pressure is increased or not, in order to fill in forms of delivery, and cialis in uk online mode of payment. You could be having a genuine reaction of tadalafil 20mg uk.
Most experts advocate sustaining U.S. leadership in space. “I’m convinced that in this century the nations that lead in the world are going to be those that create new knowledge. And one of the places where you have a huge opportunity to create new knowledge will be exploration of the universe, exploration of the solar system, and the building of technology that allows you to do that,” said former congressman and aerospace expert Robert Walker at a CFR meeting on space policy in 2013.”

While Washington dithers, other nations are moving ahead at full speed. Yahoo reports that Russia’s space agency is planning to build a permanent, manned moon base. Many other nations, noting the vital economic and military needs for space prowess, are moving quickly ahead as well.

CNN reports that “China by virtue of the ambition of its space program stands out. Already, it has managed to land a rover on the Moon and to return an unmanned spacecraft from orbiting the Moon as part of its preparation for an eventual manned landing. It also aims to have a manned space station operational by 2020.”

It’s not just nations traditionally thought of as great military or economic superpowers that are serious about advanced space activities. The Diplomat reports that “India recently made history, when its Mars Orbiter Mission successfully entered the Martian orbit. In doing so, it became the first country to enter Mars’ orbit on its first attempt and also the first Asian country to reach the red planet…India is among a handful of countries to have carried out deep space missions, and it was on its first such mission in 2008 that its spacecraft Chandrayaan entered the moon’s orbit. It was on this mission too that water was detected on the lunar surface. It has the biggest remote sensing satellite network in the world. It is also among a select group of countries that provide commercial satellite launch services – putting into space 67 satellites, including 40 foreign satellites from 19 countries…”

While other powers move ahead, NASA continues to face a future clouded by uncertainty and a profound lack of support by the current White House. Technology expert Aaron Andre reasoned three years ago that “for about the cost of two weeks of the Olympic Games we could have sent over another five rovers to Mars. In fact, the amount of money needed to fund the Olympic Games could fund NASA for nearly an entire year.”

Tags Chinese space program, India's space program, NASA, NASA budget, Russian space program, U.S. space program

Quick Analysis

FCC case latest battleground in effort to restrict First Amendment

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 17, 2015

Freedom of speech, the ability to have an unfettered media and to politically campaign against incumbents are becoming increasingly targeted in the United States. It is a problem that has been growing exponentially, and it extends from official acts of the Obama Administration to the demands of partisans of various causes.

The Federal Court of Appeals will soon decide the U.S. telecom Association vs. the FCC case in which the Association seeks to overturn a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) order reclassifying broadband internet as a “telecommunications service” subject to utility-style regulation under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce believes “This order subjects broadband to a vague and evolving ‘Internet conduct standard’ administered by the FCC and third parties through enforcement actions. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, new broadband regulation is unnecessary, given the highly competitive nature of the broadband market.

Mr. Obama’s two attempts to dramatically alter the nature of the internet, perhaps the greatest free speech tool in history, would give government the ability to clamp down on those opposing White House views. Moving control from a nonpartisan and private U.S. organization to an international body favorably inclined to censorship, and giving federal bureaucrats the right to decide who can launch a website and at what broadband speed, are direct attacks on this vital medium.

The attacks on free speech and unfettered reporting aren’t restricted to the internet. In what was one of the most controversial programs ever initiated by a federal agency, the Federal Communications Commission, led by Obama appointees, attempted to develop an effort entitled “critical information needs” (known as CIN) involving federal oversight of broadcasters and journalists throughout America. It would have placed government employees in the private internal conversations and meetings of journalists, media organizations, and even internet sites.

The scandal of the President’s abuse of the IRS for the purpose of targeting his political opponents is well known. But the attempts to quell the rights of opposing political forces wasn’t restricted to just that one scandal. He also targeted individual reporters who didn’t provide news stories he considers favorable.

Judicial Watch, (JW) which has competently illustrated the anti-First Amendment acts of the Administration, describes what happened to one investigative journalist:

“Sharyl Attkisson is an investigative journalist and author of the New York Times best seller Stonewalled. On November 19, 2014, JW joined with her to file a Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice seeking ‘any and all records’ relating to FBI background checks and other records on the award-winning correspondent. [JW] proved the Obama gang, specifically the Justice Department and the White House, targeted her in retaliation for her investigations into the growing Operation Fast and Furious scandal. In an October 4, 2011, email to White House Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz, Attorney General Eric Holder’s top press aide, Tracy Schmaler, described Attkisson as ‘out of control’ Schmaler added ominously, ‘I’m also calling Sharryl’s [sic] editor and reaching out to Scheiffer’ (an apparent reference to CBS’ Chief Washington Correspondent and Face the Nation moderator Bob Scheiffer). Schultz responded, ‘Good. Her piece was really bad for the AG.”

In 2014, Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) introduced a measure in the Senate to amend the First Amendment in order to be able to restrict paid political speech. He garnered 41 votes. Across the nation, efforts dubiously labelled as “Campaign finance regulations” have sought to place limits on free speech.

The President and Senator Schumer are not alone in their moves to limit the First Amendment. Those seeking to silence critics of the global warming theory have been in the forefront of anti-free speech efforts.

In New York State, for example, Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, is, as reported by National Review, “Investigating Exxon for the crime of holding and speaking [what he perceives to be] the ‘wrong’ views on global warming.

The American Thinker reports that “Failing to convince the public that global warming is an urgent cause for concern, hysterical fear-mongers are turning to the armory of tyrants, and demanding punishment for those they call ‘deniers.’…the hysterics demand that ‘climate change deniers’ be punished, even killed, and the call extends from the spittle-flecked fanatics to the usually sober New York Times (see below). Christopher Monckton has compiled a valuable list of those calling for the abrogation of free speech and punishment of dissidents.”
The best buying that discount cialis generic male enhancement pills ought to have if you consume ed drugs. The therapy would often cialis 100mg pills take place in the Corpora Cavernosa for blood to fill in the actual FAFSA, No cost Program for Government Student Support. Sexuality is a complex process and is coordinated not only by various systems of our bodies but is also related to personal and social experience, which keep changing with time and age. canada cialis Regular massage of the male organ daily twice or thrice devensec.com cialis without prescription using Mast Mood oil.
Among Monckton’s examples:

2007: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lashed out at global warming skeptics, saying: “This is treason. And we need to start treating them as traitors.” The penalty for treason is death.

2007: Yvo de Boer, secretary general of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, said ignoring the urgency of global warming would be “criminally irresponsible”.

2007: Dr. Gro Harlem Brundtland, a UN special climate envoy, said: “It’s completely immoral even to question” the UN’s scientific opinion on climate.

2008: Dr James Hansen of NASA demanded that skeptics be “put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature”. The penalty for crimes against humanity is death.

2010: Dr. Donald Brown, Professor of “Climate Ethics” at Penn State University, declared that skeptics, who had caused “a 25-year delay in acting to stop climate change”, may be guilty of a “new crime against humanity”. The penalty for crimes against humanity is death.

2014: Dr Lawrence Torcello, assistant philosophy professor at Rochester Institute of Technology, wrote that people who disagreed with him should be sent to jail.

2014: The gawker.com website said: “Those denialists should face jail. They should face fines. They should face lawsuits from the classes of people whose lives and livelihoods are most threatened by denialist tactics.”

2014: The host of MSNBC’s The Ed Show promoted Soviet-style re-education for climate skeptic politicians by conducting an on-air poll on the question “Should climate-denying Republicans be forced to take a basic earth science course?”

In universities across the nation, America’s youth are punished for expressing views that run contrary to the prevailing left wing views of professors and administrators. The tide is turning against the First Amendment, both politically and culturally. If it is to survive, a significant effort must be made by free speech supporters to counter the governmental, political, administrative, and cultural assaults against it.

Tags FCC, First Amendment, free speech, internet freedom, IRS scandal, Sharyl Attkisson, silencing critics of global warming, U.S. telecom Association vs. the FCC

Quick Analysis

Paris Climate Accord: Politics, Not Science

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 16, 2015

The recently adopted Paris climate agreement is based on political considerations, not science. Indeed, an objective view of scientific data concerning alterations in the global climate would indicate that concerns over man-made planetary warming don’t have a solid foundation in objective facts.

In a survey of 1800 scientists, only 43% agreed with the UN’s ‘95%’ certainty’ about global warming.

Dr. Steve Koonin, who served as undersecretary for science in the Energy Department during President Barack Obama’s first term, noted the lack of scientific agreement in a Wall Street Journal article:

“The idea that ‘Climate science is settled’ runs through today’s popular and policy discussions. Unfortunately, that claim is misguided. It has not only distorted our public and policy debates on issues related to energy, greenhouse-gas emissions and the environment. But it also has inhibited the scientific and policy discussions that we need to have about our climate future…The crucial scientific question for policy isn’t whether the climate is changing. That is a settled matter: The climate has always changed and always will. Geological and historical records show the occurrence of major climate shifts, sometimes over only a few decades…Even though human influences could have serious consequences for the climate, they are physically small in relation to the climate system as a whole. For example, human additions to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st century are expected to directly shift the atmosphere’s natural greenhouse effect by only 1% to 2%. Since the climate system is highly variable on its own, that smallness sets a very high bar for confidently projecting the consequences of human influences.”

A purely scientific debate would have featured significantly different facts. Astronomy Now discusses the potential of exactly the reverse of global warming:

“The arrival of intense cold similar to the one that raged during the “Little Ice Age”, which froze the world during the 17th century and in the beginning of the 18th century, is expected in the years 2030—2040. These conclusions were presented by Professor V. Zharkova (Northumbria University) during the National Astronomy Meeting in Llandudno in Wales by the international group of scientists, which also includes Dr Helen Popova of the Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics and of the Faculty of Physics of the Lomonosov Moscow State University, Professor Simon Shepherd of Bradford University and Dr Sergei Zharkov of Hull University”.

The goals appear to be more in line with a traditional leftist objective of transferring wealth from developed, capitalist nations to other countries.

Among the scientific questions scrupulously avoided in Paris:

Earth was warmer both in the 10^th century A.D. and during part of the Roman Empire period. How does this compare with the concept of man-made global warming?
During the period when Earth was warming during the past decades, other planets in the solar system were also warming. Doesn’t this indicate that it is solar activity, not human activity, that is the major factor? (Live Science noted in 2007: “Earth is heating up lately, but so are Mars, Plutoand other worlds in oursolar system, leading some scientists to speculate that a change in thesun’s activity is the common thread linking all these baking events.”
Antarctic ice cover reached its greatest level ever in 2014. Forbes reports: “Updated data fromNASA satellite instruments reveal the Earth’s polar ice caps have not receded at all since the satellite instruments began measuring the ice caps in 1979. Since the end of 2012, moreover, total polar ice extent has largely remained above the post-1979 average. The updated data contradict one of the most frequently asserted global warming claims – that global warming is causing the polar ice caps to recede.
There has been virtually no global warming for close to two decades. This should be reviewed more carefully before making drastic plans.

buy cialis online If you are considering taking Kamagra then you can place an online order to get this drug delivered at your door- steps. Get up and indulge yourself order cialis online into certain activities which make you feel good such as reading motivational books, cooking or baking, meeting your friends or exploring new places. When this happens, cialis low cost deeprootsmag.org a number of factors could be responsible. The emphasis should be on lifestyle change, order generic cialis education about proper diet, exercise, and behavior modification.
There appears to be considerable attempts to prevent a truly scientific discussion of global climate matters. William O’Keefe, writing at Marshall.org, reports that “In recent months, climate advocates have stepped up efforts to silence and intimidate organizations that question the climate orthodoxy that human activities involving the use of fossil fuels are leading to a climate catastrophe. Their tactic is to urge that organizations expressing any skepticism be investigated under RICO—Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. They have been championed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse who claims that “fossil fuel companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution.”

President Obama’s enthusiasm for the 31-page agreement follows a pattern set in other matters. He has employed international accords (carefully crafted not to be treaties which require Senate approval) to get around a Congress reluctant to agree with his domestic agenda. As noted in The Hill “Obama has also used the climate deal to bolster major controversial climate regulations. He’s argued that rules like the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) carbon dioxide limits for power plants and its methane emissions rules for the oil and natural gas sectors are necessary to obtain the 26 to 28 percent greenhouse gas reduction he pledged to the UN…Since the accord does not commit the United States to anything with legal force that it has not already agreed to in previous treaties, the Obama administration will argue that it does not require Senate ratification as a treaty.”

President Obama has pledged (without the consent of Congress) $3 billion as just a start to fund the $100 billion goals of the Paris agreement. Transferring wealth to developing countries appears to be the primary but unspoken goal of the Paris deal. The agreement’s Article 9, as reported by CNS, notes: “Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.”

Bloomberg reports that Mr. Obama’s $3 billion pledge “would make the U.S. the largest donor to the newly established fund.”

Tags Global warming, Paris climate talks

Quick Analysis

Environmental extremism vs. science

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 15, 2015

As the Paris climate talks continue, scandals, hidden agendas, and an increasingly skeptical public are confronting those who seek to use faulty and biased data as an excuse to impose leftist social and economic policies on the United States.

Congress is being left out of President Obama’s drive to use international agreements as a way to avoid the legislative process regarding the implementation of his extreme environmentalist views. Examples of his bias include recently released information that the White House has refused to take out ISIS oil fields due to concerns about the environment, and his rejection of the Keystone Pipeline.

In a statement, House Science Committee Chair Lamar Smith (R-Texas) notes: “There is a reason the president chose to bypass Congress in order to negotiate a climate deal on his own. The president’s plan often times gives control of U.S. energy policy to unelected United Nations officials. This plan ignores good science and only seeks to advance a partisan political agenda. The President should come back to Congress with any agreement that is made in Paris on carbon emissions. He won’t, because he knows the Senate will not ratify it.”

The Obama Administration is adhering to a practice of excluding both full disclosure to Congress and an open examination of all federal data on climate change.

The Washington Post has reported that the Obama administration has also resisted efforts by Rep. Smith to subpoena Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, the head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to gain access to the internal deliberations of federal scientists who authored a groundbreaking global warming study the lawmaker is investigating.

As in so many other instances, it appears that the NOAA study, similar to reports by other agencies and institutions, has been doctored to reflect a biased point of view.

Much information contrary to views of environmental extremist has not been reported in the general media. An MRC report recently noted that evidence demonstrating the growth of Antarctic ice has been ignored by the major media. “In May 2015, Antarctic ice was at a record high level. Yet between Nov. 4, 2014 and Nov. 11, 2015, the broadcast network’s evening news shows never mentioned [the] study.”
It is even rumoured that guests are offered bowls of online sale viagra at his enchanting parties. It’ll not magniloquence to say that today, every person is best tadalafil prices directly or indirectly dependent upon computer, laptops, tablets, smartphones, and such similar gadgets. cheap levitra professional Instead, the children bore the emotional scars of a dysfunctional family and no amount of “sameness” in their lives could compensate for the endless fights they had to witness when they were within hearing distance of hostile telephone calls and visits. It breaks my heart when I see a father load the truck for a family vacation, cook all the meals, and be in charge of virtually everything while his teenagers fluff off, play video games, and complain cialis uk about the shoddy service they received from the online course and it remains fresh and clear in the mind.
The Christian Science Monitor describes a key finding of Antarctic research: “In a paper published in the Journal of Glaciology… researchers from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, the University of Maryland in College Park, and the engineering firm Sigma Space Corporation offer a new analysis of satellite data that show a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001 in the Antarctic ice sheet.”

The Heartland organization reports that it is not just those skeptical of environmental activism who are increasingly disturbed by the lack of scientific and public scrutiny of extremist environmental data:

“Patrick Moore … [has made a trek] from being a leader of Greenpeace, one of the most radical environmental groups in existence, to now being one of the most forthright critics of the view human fossil fuel use is causing catastrophic global warming, he has always followed the evidence where it leads. In a powerful lecture in London on behalf of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, Moore detailed his journey and the evidence increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are actually good for humans and the rest of the planet, perhaps even staving off global environmental collapse. The central premise of Moore’s lecture is carbon dioxide is the most important building block and central currency for all life on Earth. He says its central role in the creation and maintenance of life should be taught to our children, rather than having it demonized as a “pollutant” threatening human and ecosystem health…… when modern life-forms evolved more than 500 million years ago, there were nearly 15,000 billion tons of carbon in the atmosphere, 17 times today’s level.”

A growing concern among scientists presents exactly the reverse of President Obama’s emphasis on global warming. Writing in The Nation, Sam Khoury reports:

The sun will go into “hibernation” mode around 2030, and it has already started to get sleepy. At the Royal Astronomical Society’s annual meeting in July, Professor Valentina Zharkova of Northumbria University in the UK confirmed it – the sun will begin its Maunder Minimum (Grand Solar Minimum) in 15 years. Other scientists had suggested years ago that this change was imminent, but Zharkova’s model is said to have near-perfect accuracy…When it’s at its minimum, it has almost none. When there are more sunspots, the sun is brighter. When there are fewer, the sun radiates less heat toward Earth. But that’s not the only cooling effect of a solar minimum. A dim sun doesn’t deflect cosmic rays away from Earth as efficiently as a bright sun. So, when these rays enter our atmosphere, they seed clouds, which in turn cool our planet even more and increase precipitation in the form of rain, snow and hail.”

As scientists refute the lack of disclosure and the influence of politics in climate studies, the public has grown increasingly skeptical. A BBC study finds that “Public support for a strong global deal on climate change has declined, according to a poll carried out in 20 countries…Only four now have majorities in favour of their governments setting ambitious targets at a global conference in Paris.In a similar poll before the Copenhagen meeting in 2009, eight countries had majorities favouring tough action.The poll has been provided to the BBC by research group GlobeScan. Just under half of all those surveyed viewed climate change as a “very serious” problem this year, compared with 63% in 2009.”

Tags environmental extremism, falsified climate change studies, Paris climate talks, political bias in climate research

Quick Analysis

America’s endangered water supply

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 14, 2015

Most Americans take for granted easy access to safe and abundant water. Even in areas beset by drought, the precious liquid is more easily accessible and far more sanitary than throughout a substantial portion of the globe.

However, in an exclusive interview on the New York Analysis of Policy & Government radio program, the “Vernuccio/Novak Report,” Vincent Caprio, co-founder of The Water Innovations Alliance described the numerous ways the U.S. water supply is increasingly endangered. Unfortunately, due to obsolescent equipment, pipelines that are far beyond their useful life, terrorist threats and cyber attacks from nations such as China, the future holds significant uncertainty and peril.

Caprios’ concerns are shared by many organizations and individuals who have carefully examined the U.S. water infrastructure.

The American Waterworks Association in its report, “Buried no longer: confronting America’s water infrastructure challenge” notes that “restoring existing water systems as they reach the end of their useful lives and expanding them to serve a growing population will cost at least $1 trillion over the next 25 years, if we are to maintain current levels of water service. Delaying the investment can result in degrading water service, increasing water service disruptions, and increasing expenditures for emergency repairs. Ultimately we will have to face the need to ‘catch up’ with past deferred investments, and the more we delay the harder the job will be when the day of reckoning comes. In the years ahead, all of us who pay for water service will absorb the cost of this investment, primarily through higher water bills. The amounts will vary depending on community size and geographic region, but in some communities these infrastructure costs alone could triple the size of a typical family’s water bills. Other communities will need to collect significant ‘impact’ or development fees to meet the needs of a growing population. Numerous communities will need to invest for replacement and raise funds to accommodate growth at the same time. Investments that may be required to meet new standards for drinking water quality will add even more to the bill.

The McWane organization concurs. “Unknown to most Americans, the United States faces today a severe crisis, a nationwide network of aging water and sewer infrastructure. In the next few decades, most American cities and counties will be forced to replace their current infrastructure with new pipes that will bring clean water to the homes of the American people. Today’s infrastructure was installed by our great-great grandparents and great grandparents. … It is time to provide the infrastructure to provide clean water for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren.”

The immediate nightmare scenario facing the U.S. water supply is hostile action, either from terrorists or an adversarial government that would employ cyber warfare (or the threat of it) against the infrastructure. Kevin Coleman, writing in Directions magazine, writes that “There are nearly 50,000 community and 200,000 public and private water systems in operation today. Concerns have been raised over protecting the nation’s water supply from terrorist attacks. [A] grim warning from Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson acknowledged the threat. In his resignation speech he stated that an attack on our food or water supply would be ‘so easy to do.’… the EPA has set up a special task force to enhance protection efforts already underway.

So what would be his first mission be? Probably to save his life from the angry 18 million men who are suffering from erectile cialis side effects mouthsofthesouth.com dysfunction problem and enhances sexual performance of males who go through erectile dysfunction resulting from depression. You mouthsofthesouth.com tadalafil canada want to devour right and do excises each day to help hold your weight, due to the fact diabetes takes pleasure in feeding the disorder to at least to one person in their life so far. Each and every time a person goes to do a doctor’s consult they have to not only pay for the price super cheap viagra of medication, but they also have to pay for the gas for the person in front of you as you have only an electrical outlet and don’t a second heating source make use of it, that makes it healthier to fight the aging process. Where can you buy Kamagra? Most pharmacies so keep Kamagra buy viagra in usa http://mouthsofthesouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/MOTS-07.22.17-Lecuyer-1.pdf in stores, but you will find limited choices here. Gay Porter DeBileon describes terrorist threats to water infrastructure. “Three attributes are crucial to water supply users. There must be adequate quantities of water on demand; it must be delivered at sufficient pressure; and it must be safe for use. Actions that affect any of these three factors can be debilitating for the infrastructure,” according to the water sector summary report crafted by the presidential commission tasked with presenting a case for increased security measures of the nation’s infrastructure (President’s Commission, 1997). A variety of methods could be used to undermine these three essential functions of a water supply system:

“Physical destruction. Many observers believe that physical destruction of water system components or the disruption of a water supply is a much more likely scenario than a contamination event. …

“Bioterrorism/Chemical Contamination… bioterrorism is a buzzword that catches immediate attention. Technically, the term refers to massive contamination by a microbiological agent, but there is also concern about contamination by a toxic chemical, both of which, under certain circumstances, can be considered weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Major Donald C. Hickman, in a paper urging better protection of US Air Force water systems against deliberate contamination, cites the release of sewage into a Bohemian reservoir by Nazi agents, the dumping of animal carcasses and hazardous materials into the majority of Kosovo’s wells, and the use of cherry laurel water, which contains cyanide, by Nero against his enemies in ancient Rome, to build his case (Hickman, 1999)…

“Backflow… Almost every home and building on a public water system has unprotected access to the distribution system… Contaminants could also be introduced into a system in distribution reservoirs and through fire hydrants.

“Cyber attack. The threat and reality of cyber attacks can affect the entire infrastructure network. Prof. James T. Lambert of the University of Virginia, in a presentation to the participants of a US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) sponsored workshop, cited research showing that many water utility …systems are susceptible to hacking, which could result in disclosure or theft of sensitive information, corruption of information, or, at the worst extreme, denial of service (USEPA/DOE Workshop: Lambert)…”

A long-term interruption of the water supply can result in a greater risk of mass disruption than almost any other calamity. Governments at all levels need to begin preparations to protect the systems from the immediate threat of terrorist or cyber attack, and the inevitable and upcoming crises from the obsolescence of the nation’s dated infrastructure.

Tags infrastructure, resevoirs, terrorist threat to water supply, water infrastructure, water supply

Quick Analysis

Judicial Watch finds US forces were available for Benghazi rescue; Hillary slept in.

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 12, 2015

Judicial Watch has released a new Benghazi email from then-Department of Defense Chief of Staff Jeremy Bash to State Department leadership immediately offering “forces that could move to Benghazi” during the terrorist attack on the U.S. Special Mission Compound in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. In an email sent to top Department of State officials, at 7:19 p.m. ET, only hours after the attack had begun, Bash says, “we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak.” The Obama administration redacted the details of the military forces available, oddly citing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption that allows the withholding of “deliberative process” information.

Bash’s email seems to directly contradict testimony given by then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta before the Senate Armed Services Committee in February 2013. Defending the Obama administration’s lack of military response to the nearly six-hour-long attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Panetta claimed that “time, distance, the lack of an adequate warning, events that moved very quickly on the ground prevented a more immediate response.”

The first assault occurred at the main compound at about 9:40 pm local time – 3:40 p.m. ET in Washington, DC. The second attack on a CIA annex 1.2 miles away began three hours later, at about 12 am local time the following morning – 6 p.m. ET.

The newly released email reads:

From: Bash, Jeremy CIV SD [REDACTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 7:19 PM
To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Sherman, Wendy R; Nides, Thomas R
Cc: Miller, James HON OSD POLICY; Wienefeld, James A ADM JSC VCJCS; Kelly, John LtGen SD; martin, dempsey [REDACTED]
Subject: Libya

State colleagues:

I just tried you on the phone but you were all in with S [apparent reference to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton].

After consulting with General Dempsey, General Ham and the Joint Staff, we have identified the forces that could move to Benghazi. They are spinning up as we speak. They include a [REDACTED].

Assuming Principals agree to deploy these elements, we will ask State to procure the approval from host nation. Please advise how you wish to convey that approval to us [REDACTED].

Jeremy

Jacob Sullivan was Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the time of the terrorist attack at Benghazi. Wendy Sherman was Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, the fourth-ranking official in the U.S. Department of State. Thomas Nides was the Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources.

The timing of the Bash email is particularly significant based upon testimony given to members of Congress by Gregory Hicks, Deputy Chief of Mission of the U.S. embassy in Tripoli at the time of the Benghazi terrorist attack. According to Hicks’ 2013 testimony, a show of force by the U.S. military during the siege could have prevented much of the carnage. Said Hicks, “if we had been able to scramble a fighter or aircraft or two over Benghazi as quickly as possible after the attack commenced, I believe there would not have been a mortar attack on the annex in the morning because I believe the Libyans would have split. They would have been scared to death that we would have gotten a laser on them and killed them.”

Ultimately, Special Operations forces on their own initiative traveled from Tripoli to Benghazi to provide support during the attack. Other military assets were only used to recover the dead and wounded, and to evacuate U.S. personnel from Libya. In fact, other documents released in October by Judicial Watch show that only one U.S. plane was available to evacuate Americans from Benghazi to Tripoli and raise questions about whether a delay of military support led to additional deaths in Benghazi.

The new email came as a result of a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on September 4, 2014 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01511)), seeking:

Records related to notes, updates, or reports created in response to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. This request includes, but is not limited to, notes taken by then Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton or employees of the Office of the Secretary of State during the attack and its immediate aftermath.

Any person who has unprotected generic cialis usa sex should test for chlamydia. Most people take them by mouth in capsules, but alot of people mix them into soups, ordering cialis stews, and teas. These products are available either in tablets/pills or a jelly liquid version for easy consumption. pfizer viagra discount A large number of people buy super cialis fail to use these brakes.
“The Obama administration and Clinton officials hid this compelling Benghazi email for years,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The email makes readily apparent that the military was prepared to launch immediate assistance that could have made a difference, at least at the CIA Annex. The fact that the Obama Administration withheld this email for so long only worsens the scandal of Benghazi.”

Where Was Hillary?

In addition, Judicial Watch also released a new batch of emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton connected to the Benghazi attack. Included is an email chain showing that Clinton slept late the Saturday after the Benghazi attack and missed a meeting that her staff had been trying to set up about sensitive intelligence issues, including the Presidential Daily Brief, on a day she was to make a slew of phone calls to foreign leaders.

Also included in the documents is an email from Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal, sent three days after the attack, describing then-Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney as “contemptible on a level not seen in past contemptible political figures” and a “mixture of greedy ambition and hollowness.”

The documents contain an email passed to Clinton in the days following the Benghazi attack in which the father of alleged Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl anguishes over the “‘Crusade’ paradigm” which he says “will never be forgotten in this part of the world.”

An email from former Ambassador Joe Wilson to Clinton expresses his concern about “Christian Dominionists who seek to turn [the military] into an instrument of their religious zealotry.”

Other emails show approval of an effort to blame an Internet video on the Benghazi attack that aired on the Al Jazeera network.

The new emails were obtained by Judicial Watch as a result of several court orders in two separate Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits for Clinton Benghazi material. (The court orders are dated July 31, 2015, October 9, 2015, and October 20, 2015.) The documents have been made public only because Judicial Watch’s litigation has forced the State Department to conduct additional searches.

The new Benghazi documents include email traffic showing that on the Saturday two days after the Benghazi terrorist attack Hillary Clinton slept past staff efforts to set up an intelligence briefing:

From: Hanley, Monica
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 09:17 AM
To: ‘HDR22@clintonemail.com’ <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
Cc: ‘huma@clintonemail.com’ <huma@clintonemail.com>
Subject: PDB

Dan will be at Whitehaven with the PDB at 9:30am this morning.

He has some sensitive items that he would like to personally show you when he arrives.

***

From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 10:43 AM
To: Hanley, Monica R
Subject: Re: PDB

I just woke up so I missed Dan. Could he come back after I finish my calls? But I don’t have the call schedule yet so I don’t know when that would be. Do you?

From: Hanley, Monica R [mailto:HanleyMR@state.gov]
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 10:51 AM
To: H
Subject: Re: PDB

A pouch with all of your call sheets and the schedule in en route to you. Here it is below as well.

Also in the pouch are a few read items, and an action memo authorizing the War Powers resolution for Tunisia that the office would like you to approve today. Ops can send a courier over to pick up the action memo later today.

12:00 UK FM Hague
12:15 Egyptian FM Amr
12:30 Israeli PM Netanyahu
1:15 French FM Fabius
1:30 Saudi FM Saud al-Faisal
2:00 Somali Former Transitional President Sharif
2:15 Libyan PM-elect Abu-Shakour
2:30 Turkish FM Davutoglu
3:00 Somali President Mohamoud (T)

-Moroccan King is still pending.

-NEW CALL: King Juan Carlos of Spain called today and offered anytime today or tomorrow. His office relayed that it is a personal call inquiring after the status of the Embassies in the Middle East. We are working on a call sheet.

The State Department’s records include a September 14, 2012, email from Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal to Clinton in which Blumenthal passes along a controversial article by his son Max and attacks then-Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney:

From: Sidney Blumenthal
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 10:48 AM
To: H
Subject: Re: m.guardian.co.uk

Max knows how to do this and fearless. Hope it’s useful and gets around, especially in the Middle East.

Keep speaking and clarifying. Your statements have been strong. Once through this phase, you might clarify history of US policy on Arab Spring, what has been accomplished, US interests at stake, varying relations with Libya & Egypt, etc.

Romney, of course, is contemptible, but contemptible on a level not seen in past contemptible political figures. His menace comes from his emptiness. His greed is not limited simply to mere filthy lucre. The mixture of greedy ambition and hollowness is combustible. He will do and say anything to get ahead, and while usually self-immolating he is also destructive. Behind his blandness lies boundless ignorance, ignited by consistently wretched judgment. His recent statements are of a piece with everything he has done from naming Ryan to his welfare ads, etc.

Keep speaking…

Sid

The Blumenthal email includes a link to an article by his son Max Blumenthal that suggests that American conservatives, Zionists and the Israel government were behind the Internet video that was falsely linked by Clinton and Barack Obama to the Benghazi attack. Clinton responded with an approving, “Your Max is a Mitzvah.” Another email shows that Mrs. Clinton wanted three copies of the Max Blumenthal Benghazi video article printed out. (Max Blumenthal is a leftist journalist known for his attacks on Israel and American foreign policy. In January, 2015, he is quoted calling American Sniper hero Chris Kyle an “unrepentant, sadistic killer.”)

In addition to Blumenthal’s attack on Romney, the newly released documents also include an email chain forwarded to Clinton from her former State Department deputy chief of staff Jacob Sullivan in which Robert Bergdahl, the father of alleged Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl, relates the death of U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens to what the senior Bergdahl calls the “‘Crusade’ paradigm:”

Please convey our abiding condolences to everyone in the Foreign Service. Your service is most notable and almost invisible. Our Nation is stumbling through a very volatile world. The “Crusade” paradigm will never be forgotten in this part of the world and we force our Diplomats to carry a lot of baggage around while walking on eggshells.

Be very careful my friend!

I’m very sorry,

bob

After receiving the email from Mr. Bergdahl, Mrs. Clinton orders a response (which is not disclosed) be prepared.

The new documents also contain an email from former Ambassador Joe Wilson to Clinton concerning the Benghazi attack, in which he suggests the military is being compromised “Christian Dominionists” in the U.S. military:

From: Joe Wilson
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 10:27 AM
To: H
Subject: From Joe Wilson

Dear Hillary, …

Glen Doherty [CIA contractor killed in the Benghazi attack] was a fellow member of the Military Religious Freedom Advisory Board, which fights to ensure that our military is not further compromised by the Christian Dominionists who seek to turn it into an instrument of their religious zealotry, an army for Christ rather than for the defense of our nation. He was invaluable in helping us uncover several cases where religious indoctrination was taking place under the guise of military training….

“These new Benghazi emails are disturbing and show why Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration had to be forced to disclose them,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Hillary Clinton, despite knowing that terrorists were responsible for the attack, allowed her spokesman to go to the Arab world and blame an Internet film. Hillary Clinton trafficked in fantastical conspiracy theories that suggested both American conservatives and Israel were to blame for the Benghazi attack and jihadist violence in the Muslim world. And the crazed email from Sidney Blumenthal shows that she was taking direction on her Benghazi spin based upon attack-style presidential campaign politics. Finally, the ‘I just got up’ email shows that, smack dab in the middle of the Benghazi crisis, Hillary Clinton fell behind and may have not been fully briefed as she began an intense round of phone calls to foreign leaders.”

Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuits filed in 2014 and 2015 forced the release of these records.

The first lawsuit, filed on September 4, 2014, (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01511)), sought:

All records concerning notes, updates, or reports created in response to the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. This request includes, but is not limited to, notes taken by then Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton or employees of the Office of the Secretary of State during the attack and its immediate aftermath.

The second FOIA lawsuit, filed on May 6, 2015, (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00692), sought:

All emails of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton regarding the September 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. The timeframe for this request is September 11, 2012 to January 31, 2013.

As Judicial Watch chief investigator reporter Micah Morrison detailed last month, Sidney Blumenthal advised Clinton on Libya (and may have had business interests there). The JW report also disclosed how Hillary Clinton emailed classified information to Blumenthal in response to his lobbying for Amb. Wilson’s efforts to secure taxpayer financing for an energy project in Africa. Hillary Clinton’s contacts with Blumenthal, who was also a highly paid employee of the Clinton Foundation, should have been subject to State Department ethics reviews for conflicts of interest, as promised by Mrs. Clinton. For example, in January 2009, Hillary Clinton promised President Obama and United States Senate considering her confirmation that:

If confirmed as Secretary of State, I will not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter that has a direct and predictable effect upon this foundation, unless I first obtain a written waiver or qualify for a regulatory exemption.

Tags Benghazi, Hillary Clinton, Judicial Watch

Quick Analysis

Syrian refugees need to be properly vetted

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 11, 2015

The New York Analysis is pleased to present this guest editorial by Judge John H. Wilson, who recently retired from the Bronx/Brooklyn Criminal Court Bench

In February of this year, I moved to North Dakota from New York City, where I had resided for most of my life. Besides the usual culture shock one would expect, the real surprise came when I first visited the North Dakota state capitol.

I was amazed at the lack of security. No checkpoints, no armed guards, not even unarmed security patrols. I took this as a testament to the peace and safety of my adopted home.

You see, I was in New York City on September 11, 2001, specifically at my home in the Bronx. That day, my wife lost her best friend, and I nearly lost my brother and two other close friends when Islamic terrorists drove commercial jetliners into the World Trade Center. My other brother, a now-retired Lieutenant with the NYPD, spent months searching the pile of rubble that had been the Twin Towers, looking for the body parts of those murdered that terrible day.

Thus, you can understand my being surprised at the utter lack of security I found at the North Dakota State Capitol. In New York, I routinely saw police officers and soldiers on the streets of Manhattan, dressed in riot gear, flak vests, and carrying automatic rifles.

Like much of the Midwest, North Dakota is a friendly place, full of people who trust to the good will of their fellow human beings. I was therefore not terribly surprised to learn that North Dakota Governor Jack Dalrymple had not immediately joined the other governors who told the federal government that they would not accept Syrian refugees. Though his position was interpreted as a “no” to the resettlement of Syrian refugees in North Dakota, his position was actually more nuanced. In reality, the governor stated that he would “urge President Barack Obama to halt resettlement of Syrian refugees in the U.S. until security and screening measures can be reviewed.”

In fact, at last count, 31 states, with both Republican and Democratic governors, have stated their intention to reject Syrian refugees.
A superfood is defined as any natural food that has an extraordinarily high viagra properien discover over here now nutrient content, and the acai berry can offer wonderful nourishment. For putting this in perspective, consumption a single 12oz cup of brewed coffee has about 120mg of caffeine. free samples of cialis With this drug, the serotonin remains active in the body for 4 -6 side effects of cialis hours. online cialis It increases the sexual rate as compare to other eye drops.
President Obama has claimed the moral high ground on this issue, comparing the refugees from Syrian to the Pilgrims, calling them “men and women who want nothing more than the chance for a safer, better future for themselves and their families.” In pointed language, the President has also criticized Republicans for being “scared of widows and orphans coming into the United States of America as part of our tradition of compassion. At first they were too scared of the press being too tough on them in the debates. Now they are scared of three-year-old orphans. That doesn’t seem so tough to me.”

New York City learned the hard way not to trust the federal government and its supposed vetting processes. The September 11 hijackers were all present in America on student, tourist or business visas. But it wasn’t until AFTER the 911 attacks that the federal government significantly tightened its requirements for the issuance of a visa, ineffectively, and almost literally, closing the barn door after the cows had escaped.

Since 911, The New York Police Department handles its own security on behalf of New York City. This includes the establishment of an overseas program in 2003, under which New York City Police Officers are stationed in various hotspots around the globe. As then Commissioner Ray Kelly stated, ““The terrorists knew no national boundaries. Why should the New York City police?”

The NYPD cooperates with the federal authorities. But they also follow Ronald Reagan’s famous maxim – trust, but verify.

There can be no doubt that as President Obama stated, many of these refugees are simply seeking a better life. But at the same time, it is equally true that many are dangerous. In fact, the debate has only been sharpened by the revelation that one of the recent Paris terror attack participants was a “Syrian refugee.”

Until effective measures can put into place to distinguish refugees from terrorists, is it so unreasonable for the governors of 31 states to not trust the safety of their citizens to a federal government that has a different agenda?

Tags Homeland Security, Judge John H. Wilson, middle east refugees., Syrian refugees, terrorism

Quick Analysis

U.S. Commission warns of China’s military

Post author By Frank V. Vernuccio, Jr.
Post date December 10, 2015

he New York Analysis of Policy & Government presents its third and final excerpt from the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission 2015 Report to Congress.

U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission 2015 Report to Congress

Military & Space Affairs

China’s meteoric rise to military superpower status comes both from its robust economy as well as through outright theft of U.S. and other nation’s technological advances.

China’s military, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), is extending its global reach, particularly through the increased international activities of the PLA Navy. In 2015, the PLA Navy evacuated hundreds of Chinese and foreign citizens from Yemen in what was China’s firstever PLA-led noncombatant evacuation operation. In addition, the PLA Navy has maintained its antipiracy presence in the Gulf of Aden, and has expanded its naval presence in the Indian Ocean with submarine patrols. Since it first sent a submarine to the Indian Ocean in late 2013, the PLA Navy has conducted at least three more Indian Ocean submarine patrols. In September 2015, the PLA Navy sailed through Alaska’s Aleutian Islands, the closest it has ever sailed to U.S. territory during a far seas deployment without a port call. The PLA Navy’s increasing activities far from China’s shores reflect China’s growing capability and willingness to use its military to protect its overseas economic assets and expatriate population. To support these activities, China appears to be seeking to establish its first overseas military facility in Djibouti.

These developments are enabled by China’s continued military modernization program, which seeks to transform the PLA into a technologically advanced military capable of projecting power throughout the Asia Pacific region and beyond. In 2015, China acquired or produced an array of advanced naval and air platforms, many of which would be useful in contingencies in the East and South China seas and those involving islands held by Taiwan. Some of China’s military modernization developments, such as its continued development and production of advanced submarines and surface ships, could increase the PLA Navy’s expeditionary capabilities.

The PLA’s training missions and exercises are increasingly sophisticated and reflect China’s goal to build a modern, integrated fighting force. To support its military modernization campaign, China’s official annual defense budget rose 10.1 percent to $141.9 billion (RMB 886.9 billion) in 2015, though its actual aggregate defense spending is much higher, as Beijing omits major defense-related expenditures from its official budget. After nominally increasing its defense budget by double digits almost every year since 1989, China’s defense spending appears sustainable in the short term. Although China’s slowing economic growth will generate opportunity costs as government spending strains to meet other national priorities, there is no sign this has affected military spending.

U.S.-China security relations suffered from rising tensions and growing distrust in 2015, largely due to China’s cyberespionage activities against a range of U.S. government, defense, and commercial entities and its massive island-building campaign in the South China Sea. In May, as more details of China’s land reclamation in the South China Sea emerged, the U.S. Navy began to publicize its air surveillance patrols near China’s reclaimed land features; in October, a U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer conducted a freedom of navigation patrol within 12 nautical miles of one of the reclaimed features for the first time. Though China’s maritime dispute with Japan over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea was less newsworthy in 2015, China continued to quietly increase its military and civilian presence in contested waters by conducting regular air and naval patrols near the islands.

CHINA’S SPACE AND COUNTERSPACE PROGRAMS

Based on decades of high prioritization and sustained investment from its leadership, China has become one of the world’s preeminent space powers, producing numerous achievements and capabilities that further its national security, economic, and political objectives. China’s space program involves a wide network of entities spanning its political, military, defense industry, and commercial sectors, but unlike the United States it does not have distinctly separate military and civilian space programs. Rather, top CCP leaders set long-term strategic plans for science and technology development, coordinate specific space projects, and authorize resource allocations, while organizations within China’s military execute policies and oversee the research, development, and acquisition process for space technologies. China’s military also exercises control over the majority of China’s space assets and space operations.

China is pursuing a broad array of counterspace capabilities and will be able to hold at risk U.S. national security satellites in every orbital regime if these capabilities become operational. China’s 2007 test of the SC-19 direct-ascent antisatellite (ASAT) missile destroyed an aging Chinese satellite and sparked worldwide criticism for creating dangerous orbital debris. The test demonstrated China’s ability to strike satellites in low Earth orbit where the majority of U.S. satellites reside. China’s 2013 DN-2 rocket test reached the altitude of geosynchronous Earth orbit satellites, marking China’s highest known suborbital launch to date and the highest worldwide since 1976; this indicated China is developing the capability to target higher orbits which contain U.S. Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites and most U.S. ISR satellites. Since 2008, China has also conducted increasingly complex tests involving spacecraft in close proximity to one another; these tests have legitimate applications for China’s manned space program, but are likely also used for the development of co-orbital counterspace technologies. Computer network operations against U.S. space assets attributed to China have likely been used to demonstrate and test China’s ability to conduct future computer network attacks and perform network surveillance. Finally, China has acquired ground-based satellite jammers and invested heavily in research and development for directed energy technologies such as lasers and radio frequency weapons.

China’s space program has also progressed in the areas of spacebased command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR), space-based PNT, space-based communications, and space launch functions. China now has approximately 142 operational satellites in orbit, with approximately 95 of these owned and operated by military or defense industry organizations. China’s current system of C4ISR satellites likely enables its military to detect and monitor U.S. air and naval activity out to the second island chain‡ with sufficient accuracy and timeliness to assess U.S. military force posture and cue other collection assets for more precise tracking and targeting. China’s regional PNT satellite system, known as Beidou, became operational in 2012, with global coverage expected by 2020. When completed, this system will provide PNT functions, essential to the performance of virtually every modern Chinese weapons system, independent from U.S.-run GPS. Although it lacks a designated civilian space program, China since the mid-1990s has incrementally developed a series of ambitious space exploration programs, categorized as civilian projects. China is one of three countries, along with the United States and Russia, to have independently launched a human into space, and has launched ten Shenzhou spacecraft and the Tiangong space lab in recent years as part of its human spaceflight program. In the program’s next phase, scheduled for completion by 2022, China plans to launch a permanent manned space station into orbit. China’s lunar exploration program has featured several lunar orbiting missions with multiple Chang’e spacecraft and the landing of a lunar rover, Jade Rabbit, in 2014. China plans to land and return a lunar rover in 2017 and become the first nation to land a spacecraft on the Moon’s “dark side” in 2020. Beijing is likely also conducting research for a manned mission to the moon and a mission to Mars, although neither project has yet received official approval.

China’s space activities present important implications and policy questions for the United States. Space capabilities have been integrated into U.S. military operations to such an extent that U.S. national security is now dependent on the space domain, and China’s 2007 antisatellite missile test in particular has been described by General John Hyten, commander of U.S. Air Force Space Command, as a “wakeup call” to the U.S. military regarding the vulnerability of its space assets. In the economic realm, U.S. providers of commercial satellites, space launch services, and GPS-based services may face increased competition as China seeks to expand its foothold in these markets, benefited by the blending of its civilian and military infrastructures and by government funding and policy support. U.S. export controls have also prompted many European countries and their industries to pursue space systems that are free of U.S. technologies—and therefore restrictions—in order to reach the Chinese market. Finally, China’s achievements in space will provide Beijing with greater prestige in the international system and expand its growing space presence, concurrent with declining U.S. influence in space; the United States currently depends on Russian launch vehicles to send humans into space, and the International Space Station is scheduled for deorbiting around 2024. Moreover, given current Congressional restrictions on U.S.-China space cooperation, the United States would not participate in any space program involving China, which raises concerns that reduced U.S. investment in its manned space program could result in the continued erosion of its technological edge and a shift of influence within the international space community.

CHINA’S OFFENSIVE MISSILE FORCES

China’s offensive missile forces are integral to its military modernization objectives and its efforts to become a worldclass military capable of projecting power and denying access by adversaries to China’s periphery. The PLA’s Second Artillery Force— responsible for China’s missile forces initially as a solely nuclear force and since the 1990s as a conventional force as well—has taken on new missions and seen its bureaucratic status within the PLA elevated. The Second Artillery provides China with a decisive operational advantage over other regional militaries competing to defend maritime claims, and its long-range precision-strike capabilities improve its ability to engage the U.S. military at farther distances in the event of a conflict. These capabilities provide an increasingly robust deterrent against other military powers and— in the case of China’s nuclear arsenal—serve as a guarantor of state survival, ultimately bolstering the CCP leadership in its quest for legitimacy.

China is making significant qualitative improvements to its nuclear deterrent along with moderate quantitative increases in the course of its efforts to build a more modern nuclear force. China’s nuclear doctrine is premised on the concept of a “lean and effective” force guided by a doctrine of “no-first-use” of nuclear weapons (although the exact circumstances under which China would use nuclear weapons, what China would consider “first use,” and whether the policy may be reconsidered have been subjects of debate). China has approximately 250 nuclear warheads, according to unofficial sources. It has specifically invested in enhancing its theater nuclear force and diversifying its nuclear strike capabilities away from liquid-fueled, silo-based systems.

China’s DF-5 missiles have been equipped with multiple independently-targetable reentry vehicles, confirmed by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) for the first time in 2015; newer intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in development could also have this capability, increasing China’s ability to penetrate adversary missile defenses and enhancing the credibility of its nuclear forces as a deterrent. China is expected to conduct its first nuclear deterrence submarine patrols using the JIN-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine by the end of 2015, marking China’s first credible at-sea second-strike nuclear capability and presumably requiring changes to its “de-alerting” policy of keeping nuclear warheads stored separately from missiles.

China may also be developing a nuclear-capable air-launched cruise missile, the CJ-20, potentially introducing an air-delivered theater nuclear strike capability into its arsenal for the first time. Importantly, as stated by Dr. Christopher Yeaw, founder and director of the Center for Assurance, Deterrence, Escalation, and Nonproliferation Science & Education, in his testimony to the Commission, China may also perceive its nuclear arsenal to be useful in the political management of an unsustainable conventional conflict, in which it would punctuate non-nuclear operations with tactical- or theater-level nuclear strikes to seek deescalation on terms favorable to China.

A key implication of this approach for the United States is that China “may escalate across the nuclear threshold at atime and manner, and for a purpose, that we do not expect.” China has achieved extraordinarily rapid growth in its conventional missile capability, according to DOD, developing a wide range of conventional ballistic and cruise missiles to hold targets at risk throughout the region, even as far as the second island chain. China’s short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) force has grown from 30 to 50 missiles in the mid-1990s to at least 1,200 in 2015, mostly deployed along the Taiwan Strait.

China’s development of medium-range ballistic missiles (MRBMs) and intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) provide the ability to conduct precision strikes against land and naval targets within the first island chain. China in 2010 fielded the world’s first antiship ballistic missile, an MRBM variant known as the DF-21D, and revealed at a September 2015 military parade that the DF-26 IRBM—with a stated range reaching out to the second island chain, including Guam—also has an antiship variant.

China has also continued to modernize its cruise missiles, most notably by developing two supersonic antiship cruise missiles: the surface ship- or submarine-launched YJ-18 and the air-launched YJ-12, both of which will provide a significant range extension over previous capabilities. China has a hypersonic weapons program in developmental stages, and reportedly conducted its fourth and fifth hypersonic glide vehicle tests in 2015, after conducting three in 2014.

Mark Stokes, executive director of the Project 2049 Institute, testified to the Commission that China may be able to field a regional hypersonic glide vehicle by 2020 and a supersonic combustion ramjet-propelled cruise vehicle with global range before 2025. Whether China arms its hypersonic weapons with nuclear or conventional payloads—or both—will provide more information regarding how it intends to incorporate hypersonic weapons into PLA planning and operations.

The increasing survivability, lethality, and penetrability of China’s missile forces present several implications for the United States. First, these forces can threaten increasingly greater portions of the Western Pacific, and a spending competition between additional Chinese missiles and U.S. missile defense systems would likely be highly unfavorable to the United States based on relative cost. In response, the United States is working to develop lower-cost-per-shot missile defense systems, while other options include disrupting networks that would support Chinese missile forces or using long-range stealth bombers to operate beyond the reach of advanced Chinese missiles. Second, China’s increasing ability to threaten U.S. partners and allies with its missile arsenal supports its regional ambitions, improves its coercive ability, weakens the value of deterrence efforts targeted against it, and widens the range of possibilities that might draw the United States into a conflict. Third, China’s missile buildup has contributed to a U.S. policy debate regarding the modern-day relevance of U.S. treaty obligations to forgo developing ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with ranges of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers (311 and 3,418 miles); some experts suggest modifications could allow the United States to strengthen its regional deterrence capabilities. Finally, these developments present new challenges for the United States and China as they consider how to successfully manage and deescalate potential crises in an environment with new factors of instability.

The Commission recommends:

Congress direct the U.S. Department of Defense to provide an unclassified estimate of the People’s Liberation Army Second Artillery Force’s inventory of missiles and launchers, by type, in future iterations of its Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China, as included previously but suspended following the 2010 edition.
Congress direct the U.S. Department of Defense to prepare a report on the potential benefits and costs of incorporating ground-launched short-, medium-, and intermediate-range conventional cruise and ballistic missile systems into the United States’ defensive force structure in the Asia Pacific, in order to explore how such systems might help the U.S. military sustain a cost-effective deterrence posture.
Congress continue to support initiatives to harden U.S. bases in the Asia Pacific, including the Pacific Airpower Resiliency Initiative, in order to increase the costliness and uncertainty of conventional ballistic and cruise missile strikes against these facilities, and thereby dis-incentivize a first strike and increase regional stability.
Congress continue to support “next-generation” missile defense initiatives such as directed energy and rail gun technologies, and require the U.S. Department of Defense to report to committees of jurisdiction on the status of current component sourcing plans for the development and production of directed energy weapons.

This way, the ingredients of Kamagra pills 1) FDA approved: The Kamagra Pills are FDA approved which is why they are regarded as high quality solution to end Erectile Dysfunction issues and enhance erection.2) Online availability:The online availability of this medication lets the patients approach this drug easily. levitra from canada It is the best generic india levitra medicine and you may think that it is of highly side effective. They are one of the most common problem among male during sexual activity is erectile dysfunction. viagra soft tab Erectile dysfunction buy viagra wholesale or impotency is a common cause of many health issues.

Tags China's military, China's space program