Month: November 2019

Categories
Quick Analysis

Foreign Policy Update

ISRAEL

Are the settlements in Israel illegal? Previously, the President previously said the country not in compliance with recognized international law. But now, according to Secretary of State Pompeo, the US is revisiting the issue and has decided the “ground truth” is that Israel’s settlement’s are, in fact, not illegal per se.

The Israeli courts are quite capable of making determinations about particular settlements, he pointed out. Resolution of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians “is going to be a political resolution, Pompeo added. “We want to create the maximum space for that political resolution. And so our legal conclusion we think facilitates the – an increased likelihood that we can ultimately see a political resolution between Israel and the Palestinian people.”

IRAN

The Trump Administration continues to deny Iran the means to conduct terrorist activities, according to Pompeo. In response to recent events where over 100 protesters were shot by the Iranian government, the State Department said its efforts to contain Iran’s illegal behavior are continuing unabated. Pompeo said Washington intends to deny the kleptocrats  in charge of the Iranian regime, “the resources to foment terror and to, frankly, punish their own citizens as well, and to put their citizens at risk by underwriting Hizballah and Shia militias in Iraq. So that’s been our effort, our international effort.”

The Islamic Republic of Iran leadership’s recent decision about removing some of the gas subsidies fomented significant political protests against the regime leadership. The government in Tehran also shut off the internet “so that they could engage in activities essentially in the dark, without communications. And second, they instigated a political crackdown,” noted Pompeo. He said that while Washington could not yet verify the numbers several international human rights groups have reported that at least 100 were killed by the regime. 

Unlike the Obama Administration, President Trump’s has not refrained from sending out messages of support to the protesters. Pompeo pointed out that the President is “not fueling those regime thugs by providing them resources, while the previous administration put $150 million in an airplane and sent it across to the Iranians. We have done everything we can to deny the regime the resources they need to foment this bad behavior and their imperialist tendencies all around the region.”

A brief about Titanic K2 capsules These capsules rescue all the males suffering buy cialis in canada from the problem of low libido. Another reason why erection is not firm enough to last the duration of sex. valsonindia.com orden 50mg viagra Few of the indications include things like: swelling of face, location and also tongue; difficulty throughout deep breathing, swelling while in the breasts, ache inside chest, eye sight issues viagra online for women as well as faintness. They do not like to share this problem with their doctors cialis professional no prescription too.

HONG KONG

When the Chinese government made a commitment to the people of Hong Kong in 1997 that upon becoming part of China, they would still adhere to a set of rules labelled “one country, two systems.” Beijing agreed at the time to guarantee the set of basic law freedoms for the people of Hong Kong. Pompeo said that Washington’s request to the Chinese Communist Party leadership, General Secretary Xi, is that he “honor the commitment that China made to those people.”

The protesters in Hong Kong, according to Pompeo, “simply want Chinese Government in Beijing to honor the promises that were made to them, and President Trump has said very clearly we want there to be no violence on either side. We want Beijing to handle the situation politically, to resolve this conflict in a way that reflects the basic understanding of one country and two systems, and honor the autonomy that the Hong Kong people are permitted under what China – the Chinese Government of Beijing promised to them.”

The world is watching political developments in Hong Kong as they continue festering with ongoing protests and crackdowns by Beijing. Pompeo added that “We’re all trying to find a political resolution to these protests and the demands of the people there in Hong Kong, and we hope that that happens. In the event that – I think President Trump said – in the event that there was a hand that was too heavy or there was violence that wasn’t reflective of an appropriate response, I think President Trump has said, boy, makes it much harder for him or for anyone to deal with Beijing in trade or other issues….” The Secretary added he is hopeful that this won’t be the case and that there is a positive outcome. 

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

NATO’s Future Plans

NATO Foreign Ministers met in Brussels on November 20 to address a wide range of security challenges. “We all agree that NATO remains indispensable for our security, and that despite our differences, we are stronger as we face the future together,” said NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo travelled to Brussels for the meeting.

Although supportive of the alliance, President Trump has urged the other members to pay a fair share of the expenses.  Last year, in a meeting with Stoltenberg, he noted:

“The strong working partnership we forged has helped to produce significant increases in member-state contributions.  We’ve worked very hard on that.  And I will tell you, the Secretary General has been working on that for a long time, before I got there.  But I think more progress — I can say with surety, more progress has been made in the last year and a half than has been made in many, many years… last year, as a result of our joint efforts, we witnessed the single-largest increase in defense spending among European member states and Canada in a quarter of a century…As a result of these contributions, NATO is much stronger, taking in billions and billions of dollars — more money than they ever have before.  But as the Secretary General and I have discussed, more work needs to be done.  We’re still waiting on 20 member states to meet their NATO commitments and spend at least 2 percent on defense.”

The meeting focused on adopting NATO to future challenges.  The participants agreed to recognize space as a new operational domain for NATO, alongside air, land, sea and cyber. “This can allow NATO planners to make requests for Allies to provide capabilities and services, such as hours of satellite communications,” said the Secretary General. He added that NATO has no intention to put weapons into space, and the Alliance’s approach to space will remain fully in line with international law.

Addressing energy security, ministers agreed recommendations to consolidate NATO’s role. “The recommendations aim to improve situational awareness and understand the risks; protect critical infrastructure and enhance Alliance resilience; and enable NATO forces to have the necessary energy resources at all times,” said the Secretary General.

Also, it is seen that generic levitra sale about 10-20% of all cases of erectile problems are due to psychological issues. To grip its paramount results it is better to consult a spebuy cialis t who can give suggestion about the exact problem by verifying through several tests. In the past, the Latin term impotentia coeundi simply meaning the inability to insert the penis into the vagina of the females during tadalafil india intercourse, therefore, it has to be of an adequate size so that complete desire is fulfilled and the female partner as well. The recommended dose of ordering cialis online is 5 mg, taken at approximately the same time every day for up to 26 weeks.

They also discussed NATO’s role in the fight against terrorism, and reviewed progress in strengthening Black Sea security.

 Addressing fairer burden-sharing in the Alliance, Mr. Stoltenberg noted that “the trend is up and it is unprecedented.” Ministers also adopted a policy that sets standards in the prevention and response to sexual exploitation and abuse.

Later, ministers are set to discuss NATO’s coordinated approach to three strategic issues: relations with Russia, the rise of China, and arms control. “NATO is the only platform where Europe and North America engage every day on such strategic issues, which matter to our shared security,” said the Secretary General. He added that Europe and North America are doing more together than for many years.

On Nov. 21, NATO and the Republic of Korea signed a new partnership agreement that sets the framework for cooperation and political dialogue. It’s the end result of discussions that began in 2005.

The agreement promotes political dialogue and practical cooperation in a number of joint priority areas, including cyber defence, non proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and Science for Peace and Security.

A NATO release noted that “The Republic of Korea has been a valuable contributor to the Alliance’s stabilisation efforts in Afghanistan. The Provincial Reconstruction Team, led by the Republic of Korea, played a significant role in the reconstruction of the Parwan province. The Republic of Korea continues to be a significant contributor in support of the security and socio-economic development of Afghanistan.”  

Photo: Nov. 20 meeting (NATO)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Thoughts on Thanksgiving

Army Chaplain Col. Don Zapsic (ret.) gives his thoughts on Thanksgiving.

When I think of Thanksgiving, my mind conjures up a picture of Norman Rockwell proportions. The turkey is the centerpiece of the image, golden brown and oozing with antibiotic-laced succulence. No free range, organically grown, overpriced bird for me thank you very much! Pardon the digression; I just had to get that out there. Then there is the table, covered with a long white cloth, bedecked with the finest china and no plasticware in sight. The guests in my idyllic scene are all graduates of Hallmark Movie Channel finishing school; impeccably groomed, well dressed, good mannered, vibrant, and charming. This I call the ‘ideal’.

Then there is the ‘normal’. Always a big turkey, equally good sides and a variety of table settings ranging from nice chinaware and tinted glasses to fortified paper plates and red solo cups. The dinner participants generally like each other and most behave themselves. And when I say ‘most’, there is always at least one rogue relative to reckon with. This is the one who comes with a chip on his shoulder just itching and twitching to throw the proverbial cowchip in the punchbowl. Undaunted, the disgruntled perpetrator then steps back and watches the drama unfold. The best strategy to deal with such an eventuality is to expect, plan, and map out potential best courses of action to deal with the holiday insurgent (a.k.a. party-pooper).

You may argue that despite past holiday-get-togethers, this year is somehow going This bean by any other name would be as sildenafil tablets without prescription nutritive. Shipping, depending on your locale, take between 7-20 days, although delivery times are view this cialis pill online typically shorter. Although so much attention is placed on men attempting to acquire larger packages, one never hears about all the damaging effects that can lead to manhood erections check it out cialis uk if your particular person comes with a in any other case clean up invoice involving wellbeing. In depth studies happen to be made and conducted about this tree. viagra no prescription canada to be different. “After all,” you reason, “shouldn’t family members have evolved at least a little since last Thanksgiving becoming more gentle and kind?” If things do significantly improve consider this taste of utopia the rough equivalent of the, “the blind squirrel finding a nut moment.” Have the family historian record it for posterity sake. Notice that I have not mentioned invited friends of the family at this point. They know that they must behave themselves or get kicked off of the island before the pumpkin pie makes its rounds. It’s the disenfranchised family members that are the real threat. They know that they only have Thanksgiving and Christmas to achieve relevance and want to make the best of it. 

In light of the varied personalities and situations represented at the festive table, one thing which smoothes things over like no other is gravy.  It is a remedy for a variety of shortcomings ranging from dried-out turkey to unsalted mash potatoes. The magical phrase, “Please pass the gravy” brings people together and tones down the rough edges. Gravy, like the word ‘grace’, serves us well as a metaphor covering gaffes and insults alike. So what if you have gained weight, lost hair, or belong to the ‘other’ political party. I personally have packaged responses to all of these contingencies including, “I’m storing up fat for the winter” or “I am going for the Bozo the Clown look,” and also, “Sorry, I never discuss politics with people that I like.” By the way, “Please pass the gravy…”

We are well-served to keep in mind that families are always a work in progress continually shaped by word, deed, and even indifference. They give us clues as to who we are and how we came to be. Families are where our first loyalties should lie as part of our greater spiritual duty to God Himself. Never perfect, sometimes deeply flawed, set with boundaries and safeguards as necessary. Nonetheless, Thanksgiving is a special day of reflection and reconnection navigating the good and bad with the gravy. A day that affords the opportunity to reflect and embrace all that we hold dear, whether deserved or not. Happy Thanksgiving!

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

Guilty Until Proven Innocent?

Many Americans have been disturbed at the manner in which the impeachment hearings have been conducted. Judge John Wilson (ret.) analyzes the process.

There are certain principals that all Americans hold near and dear to their hearts.  “The Defendant deserves a fair trial.”  “The Defendant is entitled to confront the witnesses against him.”  “The Defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.”  Clearly, Congress is not a Court, and an impeachment inquiry in the House of Representatives is not a trial.  Nonetheless, for a majority of Americans, on the right, and quite a few in the middle, there are certain aspects of the current impeachment hearings against President Donald Trump that are disturbing and dangerous.

  Much of the country was not riveted to their TVs while career diplomats William Taylor and George Kent discussed their concerns over President Trump’s infamous telephone call with the President of the Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky.  In particular, Taylor testified that “a member of his staff overheard EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland on July 26 (2019) discussing the investigations on a phone call with Trump.”  

 Legally, this testimony would be considered hearsay – that is, “an out-of-court statement, made in court, to prove the truth of the matter asserted.”  “At its core, the rule against using hearsay evidence is to prevent out-of-court, second hand statements from being used as evidence at trial given their potential unreliability… The rule against hearsay was designed to prevent gossip from being offered to convict someone.” 

  There are, of course, exceptions to the rule against the admission of hearsay evidence.  For instance, an excited utterance – a statement made about a startling event close in time to that event, about the event – is admissible, as is a present sense impression – a description of an event made either during the event, or immediately after it.  A good example of an excited utterance, is a witness testifying they heard someone yell “slow down!” just prior to a car crash, or that same witness testifying that he heard someone say “I knew they were going too fast,” right after an automobile accident.

 Apparently, this time-honored rule is not applicable to the House impeachment hearings.  In a statement which received much attention, Representative Dan Quigley (D-IL) stated  “Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct, as we have learned in painful instances and it’s certainly valid in this instance.” 

To be fair to Representative Quigley, I believe he meant to say “circumstantial evidence,” and not “hearsay.”  But even this statement would be incorrect.  Direct evidence – that is, the testimony of a witness who observed the event, is always superior to circumstantial evidence (evidence which tends to show that the event happened and that the defendant did it – for instance, a blood stain on a defendant’s shirt that matches the blood type of the victim).

If you examine erectile dysfunction https://regencygrandenursing.com/long-term-care/bariatric-care buy levitra in usa then you will find that it improves their breathing and helps to strengthen their immunity against viruses and common diseases. Being Looked Down Upon as a Lesser Man People have wondered why anti ED patients in hide their sexual problems, the answer is simple. viagra purchase no prescription http://regencygrandenursing.com/senior-education/glossary-of-terms Remember, certain muscles regulate the blood flow in and buying cialis cheap out of the bedroom. For today’s busy people, it may not be possible to treat impotence effectively when the right herb is chosen to cialis in canada pharmacy treat a specific cause of impotence.

After Quigley’s ignorant misstatement of the law, the Associated Press compounded the error by declaring that “Congress is not a court. It’s a legislative body, and it’s not bound by the centuries of common law that built up around the admissibility of hearsay evidence.”  Yet, in the same article, the AP quotes lawyer Jesse Binnall, who encapsulates the main reason why hearsay evidence is usually inadmissible – “it’s unreliable and of little weight.”

 Other media outlets also rushed to defend Quigley interpretation of the law.  GQ entitled an article, “What is Hearsay, and Why Are Republicans Making a Fuss About it?”   NBC News also defended the use of hearsay evidence against the President in their article, “Republicans blasted ‘hearsay’ impeachment testimony.  But they were in Congress, not court.” 

 As disturbing as this development may be, even more chilling is the recent statement made by Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA); “If the President has something that’s exculpatory – Mr. President, that means you have anything that shows your innocence – then he should make that known. And that’s part of the inquiry. So far we haven’t seen that.” 

 Putting aside the condescending tone used by Speaker Pelosi, all Americans should be concerned that an elected member of Congress, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States, an experienced lawmaker, should exhibit such a fundamental disregard for the rule of law.  

 The phrase, “Innocent until proven guilty” has its origins in the 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man.  It was a hallmark of British jurisprudence throughout the 19th century, and was formally adopted in the United States in 1894, in the US Supreme Court case of Coffin v US.  (For an extensive discussion of the history of the concept, see here:

It is bad enough for a member of Congress to misquote and misunderstand a legal standard for the admissibility of evidence.  But for a leader in Congress to call upon the President to provide proof of his own innocence is shocking in its ignorance.  Granted, a Congressional investigation is not a legal proceeding, per se, and Congress is not a Court of law.  Yet, this inquiry is similar to a Grand Jury proceeding.  It is intended to result in an “indictment” – that is, a recommendation to the full House as to whether or not Articles of Impeachment should be voted on, adopted, and then referred to the Senate for trial.

 Of what use is an inquiry/indictment that does not follow legal rules; that uses and adopts unreliable evidence; that does not provide for the rights of the accused to be respected?  Further, if this inquiry forms the basis for an Impeachment, and the evidence used in said Impeachment is unreliable, why would the Senate do anything more than dismiss the Impeachment referral out of hand?

  If the intent of House Democrats is to attack the President, and damage his chances of reelection, then at the very least, some reliable evidence of wrongdoing must form the basis for the accusation.  The use of hearsay allegations and calling upon a Defendant to provide evidence of his own innocence has not been seen in an American Court room since the Salem Witch trials of the 1600s.  It would be a national disgrace to see such irregularities form the basis for such a serious measure as a Presidential Impeachment 300 hundred years later.

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Danger from Continuing Resolutions

Under the Constitution, (Article 1, Section 7) the House of Representatives has the responsibility for originating all federal spending.  It is a duty that has been performed very poorly.

The mammoth national debt, now standing at over $23 trillion, can be directly attributable to two factors. First, the inappropriate manner in which the Lower House of Congress performs its most important responsibility.  The interest of the American people comes in a distant second to the blatantly political motivations of individual Representatives.

Consider a crucial area that is the key function of Washington: defense.  To get the votes of many leftist representatives for adequate military funding, concessions to wasteful and unsuccessful welfare-type programs must be made.  Many of those programs are little more than excuses to give patronage jobs to political hangers-on.

But there is another wasteful House procedure that harms key national interests and causes wasteful spending: failing to arrive at a consensus budget on a timely basis, Washington indulges in the practice of “Continuing Resolutions” (CRs) and “Continuing Appropriations.” The official definition of this is “Legislation in the form of a joint resolution enacted by Congress, when the new fiscal year is about to begin or has begun, to provide budget authority for Federal agencies and programs to continue in operation until the regular appropriations acts are enacted.”

Rob Wittman, a Virginia Republican, has sounded an alarm about the harm caused by CRs. “In the age of procrastination and irresponsible spending in Washington, continuing resolutions have become a comfortable fall back for Congress. Instead of buckling down, skipping the archaic breaks, and getting spending bills done in time for measured debate, lawmakers look to last-minute, stop gap measures to fund the federal government. The last time Congress was able to maintain regular operations without a continuing resolution was in 1996—two decades ago…continuing resolutions are a short-sighted and irresponsible way to fund important programs…

“With yet another continuing resolution—we’re asking our troops to take on more risk with fewer training hours, longer deployment times, and equipment that is outdated and unreliable. Just yesterday, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said that a long-term continuing resolution would “limit training and readiness accounts across the board for the total force.” In the context of national security, stop gap measures deplete our forces, prevent planning, and can cost lives.

“The government has a spending problem. We all know it. And continuing resolutions exacerbate that problem. The CR rules prevent agencies from recruiting or hiring new staff and implementing new programs (even necessary ones, like transportation projects), AND they prevent departments from cutting programs that are wasting taxpayer money. … Stop gap measures kick the can down the road, create uncertainty for agencies and employers, and negatively impact communities and families.

“If the continuing resolution has a handmaiden, it’s the backroom deal. As public servants, we’re supposed to be responsible stewards of taxpayer money, and that means that we need an open and transparent process. It means we need time for measured and deliberate debate. That’s the way our system was designed, and that’s the way it’s supposed to work. Instead, deals are cut behind closed doors, and the public is left entirely in the dark. Allocations are made for pet projects, and loopholes let certain actors ‘skirt the rules.’

“The continuing resolution is the quintessential ‘must pass’ legislation. It’s the reason that everyone starts shouting ‘“government shutdown.’ … Ultimately, continuing resolutions end up looking like a kind of legislative Frankenstein: lots of unrelated measures stitched together without any real deliberation, debate, or consideration.”

With the federal government deeply divided, there is a danger that no agreement on vital budget areas wil come about. As Rep. Wittman noted the impact on national security will be significant. Reps Mac Thornberry (R-TX), Kay Granger (R-TX) and Steve Womack (R-AR) issued a stark warning to their colleagues today on the damage a full-year continuing resolution would do to America’s military. “Across the political spectrum, folks have rightfully praised our military and intelligence professionals for taking a barbaric terrorist off the battlefield this past week. But it would be wrong to praise them with our lips and damage them with our votes. History teaches us that America will be tested in the coming weeks. Our men and women in uniform will have to face that challenge abroad while the support for their training, weapons, and families remains uncertain here at home. We owe them more and we must do better,”Thornberry said.

“We are facing global threats to our interests and our allies. Our highest priority should be keeping the government functioning and the Defense Department fully funded. We cannot afford to short-change our troops or create unnecessary uncertainty for the Department of Defense,” Ranking MemberGranger added.

“When Congress fails to provide stable funding, we hinder our warfighters and neglect our constitutional duty of providing for the common defense. It’s a clear reflection of the broken budget and appropriations process that has plagued this chamber for far too long. We can’t continue to hold our military hostage – and anything less than sustained, predictable appropriations will damage national security. …“ Womack said.
It widens the arteries present in male penis and therefore results tadalafil on line in increased blood flow in the penis. The FDA has approved the use of the medicine and approved as the safe purchase generic cialis http://deeprootsmag.org/2012/11/12/its-got-that-swing-alexandre-tharauds-swinging-paris-le-boeuf-sur-le-toit/ medicine. for getting this kind medicine you have to find Kamagra, Zenegra, Silagra and Forzest etc. If you go out of your way to next cialis on line put people on four year contracts, which is the length of time it takes to pay off a car. Anyway, those are drastic situations where they put you in need of digital picture order viagra Related link recovery.

The three Republicans issued a fact sheet outlining the damage:

According to the Congressional Research Service, the Pentagon has “started the fiscal year under a CR for 13 of the past 18 years.”  With the exception of FY19, DOD has started every year since 2010 under a CR.  The Navy has calculated that they wasted $4 billion between 2011 and 2017 as a result of CRs.  

CRs are wasteful.  They harm our troops and America’s National Security.  Every day we go without passing a DOD funding bill makes it more and more likely that our troops—who will almost certainly be tested in the coming weeks—will face a full-year CR, with all the damage and uncertainty these stop-gap measures inflict.   That is unacceptable. Here is some of the very real damage a full-year CR will do.  

 Military Personnel: In the wake of news reports of service members and their families living in inadequate and dangerous family housing, the Army would be prevented from building 4,400 new dwellings and forced to delay repair on another 269 homes. Navy families’ moves will be curtailed, bonuses and awards will be eliminated, and the overall size of the Navy will have to be reduced.

 Pilot Shortage: A year-long CR will put additional pressure on our Air Force pilots by perpetuating a critical pilot shortage.  The Air Force is short 2,100 pilots, putting an additional burden on those serving now.  As former Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson put it, “with 2,000 pilots short, it’ll break the force.” A year-long CR will cut $123 million from undergraduate flight training, as well as cutting contractor instructor pilots.  A new maintenance training center won’t open and maintenance for the aging fleet of training aircraft will be delayed.

 Ship Operations:  Following the fatal accidents aboard the USS McCain and USS Fitzgerald that were attributed in part to training issues, a CR would force the Navy to cancel 14 ship maintenance periods, cancel ship underway training, and limit operations of the deployed Fleet.

 Navy Flying missions:  A CR would cause the shutdown of non-deployed Navy aviation, limiting flight training in the US to only those units about to deploy.  It would also temporarily eliminate our nation’s ability to surge additional Navy forces in times of conflict.  Finally, the Navy would incur additional costs to regenerate and recertify flying operations for non-deployed Navy aviation units.   Munitions Shortage: The fight against al Qaeda and ISIS depends on precision guided munitions.  Obama-era spending cuts and repeated CRs forced the Army and Air Force to use these munitions faster than they could replace them, creating a critical shortage.  A year-long CR would perpetuate this problem.  It would significantly reduce the number of munitions the Air Force is able to buy in the next fiscal year.  When the Army and Air Force are able to resume rebuilding the stockpile, it is likely these weapons will be more expensive and much of the progress made over the past two years in ramping up the munitions industrial base will be erased.  Navy will be unable to expand needed production increases in Tomahawk missiles, torpedoes, and other critical weapons.   Leaves Our Troops Vulnerable To Peer Competitors:  The Pentagon needs to field important technologies that protect our troops from peer competitors.  These include a GPS-like system that is impervious to hacking, spoofing, and jamming, mobile air and missile defense systems, long range precision munitions such as hypersonics and extended range artillery, next generation combat vehicles, advanced helicopters and aircraft, improved night vision devices, and improved sensor and network technology.  A year-long CR would prohibit development of unmanned surface vessels, future ship designs, and artificial intelligence development. A delay of a year or more on these systems could make our troops vulnerable and erode our competitive advantage for years to come.

 Disaster Recovery: Key military installations like Tyndall and Offutt Air Force Bases, China Lake, and Camp Lejeune have been severely damaged by natural disasters in the past year.  Funds urgently needed to repair these facilities so that they can resume their critical national security missions will not be available under a year-long CR.  Delaying disaster recovery will hurt critical missions, including F22 training, intelligence and surveillance, and Navy testing.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Hong Kong Legislation Passed

Two pieces of legislation supporting human rights in Hong Kong have been approved by both the Senate and the House of Representatives. President Trump is expected to sign the measures.

When the United Kingdom gave control of Hong Kong to Beijing in 1997, it did so under the condition that for half a century, Hong Kong would essentially be self-ruling in domestic affairs. However, in 2014, Beijing asserted its authority over the territory. Recently, it sought to have Hong Kong residents tried in mainland courts in certain cases.

 China’s deeply flawed human rights record, which includes complete rejection of free speech and political opposition and its use of concentration camps to imprison both ethnic minorities and dissidents has deeply frightened the people of Hong Kong.  

Not unexpectedly, the Beijing regime has threatened to retaliate against the legislative moves with “strong countermeasures,” which presumably include a refusal to agree to a trade deal that restricts its unfair practices.

One of the two bills forbids the export to Hong Kong authorities of the types of equipment they have used to suppress demonstrators.

The more far-reaching of the two bills provides for a number of actions, which would:

  •  Require the Secretary of State to issue an annual certification of Hong Kong’s autonomy to justify special treatment afforded to Hong Kong by the U.S. Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992.
  • Require the President to identify persons responsible for the abductions of Hong Kong booksellers and journalists and those complicit in suppressing basic freedoms in Hong Kong, including those complicit in the forced removal of individuals exercising internationally recognized rights to mainland China for detention or trial, and to freeze their U.S.-based assets and deny them entry to the United States.
  • Require the President to issue a strategy to protect U.S. citizens and businesses from the implications of a revised Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, including by determining whether to revise the U.S.-Hong Kong extradition agreement and the State Department’s travel advisory for Hong Kong.     
  • Require the Secretary of Commerce to issue an annual report assessing whether the Government of Hong Kong is adequately enforcing both U.S. export regulations regarding sensitive dual-use items and U.S. and U.N. sanctions, particularly regarding Iran and North Korea.   
  • Make clear that visa applicants shall not be denied visas on the basis of the applicant’s arrest, detention or other adverse government action taken as a result of their participation in the nonviolent protest activities related to pro-democracy advocacy, human rights, or the rule of law in Hong Kong.
For a person to have a better erection in you he will have to make sure that you relate therapists understand the dynamics in a relationship. http://deeprootsmag.org/2019/04/09/glorious-simplicity/ online viagra A day started with plenty of physical exercise, yoga, meditative practices, healthy eating, psychotherapy etc. may help normalizing sildenafil super active sleep pattern and sexual life as well. No matter what your age is, Kamagra offers you the same pleasure of prix viagra cialis recovery. There are a few ways to find this order cialis online the right website or they are not comfortable with the payment method.

Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fl.) who introduced the measures, issued a release upon the bill’s introduction which noted:

 “As over one million Hong Kongers take to the streets protesting amendments to the territory’s extradition law, the U.S. must send a strong message that we stand with those peacefully advocating for freedom and the rule of law and against Beijing’s growing interference in Hong Kong affairs…[this] places the U.S. firmly on the side of human rights and democracy and against those who would erode the freedoms and autonomy guaranteed to the people of Hong Kong, freedoms that have made the city a prosperous global commercial hub governed by the rule of law.”
 
The legislation had broad bipartisan support.

Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), who was the lead Democrat co-sponsor, stated

“… the world has witnessed the bravery of tens of thousands of pro-democracy protestors in Hong Kong whose quest for autonomy and democracy has been beaten back with brutal force. Our bill sends a strong message that Congress and the people of the United States stand in solidarity with them. The United States cannot stand idly by as China tramples on the basic human and civil rights of the people of Hong Kong and spreads disinformation in an attempt to discredit and silence their voices. Our bill demonstrates the Congress’ work across party lines to ensure robust affirmation of Hong Kong’s autonomy and to make clear that there must be consequences those who seek to further undermine it.”

Photo: Discover Hong Kong

Categories
Quick Analysis

Foreign Policy Update

IRAN

Following Vice President Mike Pence’s declaration on November 20 that the American people will stand with the people of Iran, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo has vowed to expose the Iranian regime’s brutality and the violent campaign against Iranian protesters. 

Pompeo said: “I have asked the Iranian protestors to send us their videos, photos, and information documenting the regime’s crackdown on protestors. The U.S. will expose and sanction the abuses.” Washington continues to monitor the ongoing protests in Iran and the resulting deaths. Pompeo called on the regime to cease its violence against its own people and to restore Iranian access to a free and open Internet. The choice, according to the Secretary, is with the regime.

In a recently issued statement, the US Government announced that in response to Iran’s uranium enrichment program at the Fordow facility, the United States will terminate the sanctions waiver related to the facility on December 15, 2019. US intelligence sources admit there is not good reason for Iran to resume enrichment at this site and that it simply is a new case of “nuclear brinksmanship.” Washington is seeking comprehensive negotiations that address the full range of Iran’s threats in their entirety. Pompeo pointed out that Washington’s goal remains for Iran to behave as a “normal nation.”

ARMS CONTROL

Earlier in the year, President Trump said that the United States will not negotiate on the issue of missile defense. Pompeo says that the Administration examined this issue and decided the facts on the ground had changed as only one party to the treaty was abiding by it. He added that it made no sense to stay in it.

According to Pompeo, the US worked with its European allies to ensure there was unanimity, that each nation understood the risks, costs and only then moved forward together in declaring that Russia was in violation of the treaty. Pompeo stated that “President Trump will never allow America to enter into any arms control agreement that doesn’t make sense for the United States of America or to renew any existing arms control agreement that expires if it no longer makes sense for America.”

European partners to make sure that there was unanimity, that we understood the risks, that we understood the costs, and then moved forward together, declaring that Russia was in violation and that the appropriate thing to do was for the United States to leave that treaty.  That goes for a broader set of arms control issues.  President Trump will never allow America to enter into any arms control agreement that doesn’t make sense for the United States of America or to renew any existing arms control agreement that expires if it no longer makes sense for America. He also pointed out that the world has changed dramatically since the signing of the treaty. 

ISRAEL

Here are a few causes that make young men facing this hard time of the day to maintain the free tadalafil sample evenness in its affective. Some of online pharmacies and foreign tadalafil soft pharmacies are producing the medicine with cheap rate. Like all pills, even this has its facet effects; however with Kamagra, the fallouts ar delicate and passing. viagra 100mg pfizer A large number of people are suffering from viagra pills erectile dysfunction.

In a recent press conference, Secretary Pompeo pointed out despite the settlement announcement in Israel “there hasn’t been much support for Israel in the years leading up to this.  It’s hard to imagine more isolation….” Some analysts overseas say that the Administration’s policy reversal is close to breaking the law, and at a minimum is inconsistent with international law.

UKRAINE

“I am proud of what this administration has done with respect to Ukraine,” stated Pompeo. “We reversed the massive failures of the Obama administration’s policy towards Ukraine, which truly did risk the lives of Ukrainian people and allowed Vladimir Putin to take Crimea and to fight in the Donbas against a group of Ukrainians who wanted nothing more than to defend their nation but were given just blankets and nonlethal equipment.”

 HONG KONG

Secretary Pompeo recently stated that the Administration wants to see China abide by the 1997 joint declaration concerning the governance of Hong Kong by Beijing.  He added that making public demands of China and threatening consequences would not help the situation there. The government in Beijing, he noted, is aware of the situation and the consequences of any action it takes.

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

FBI Warns Universities About Espionage Danger

The FBI has issued a warning to academia concerning the growing threat of foreign espionage. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government has reviewed the document, and presents key excerpts of it.

More than 1.4 million international students and professors were participating in America’s open and collaborative academic environment. This open environment puts academia at risk for exploitation by foreign actors who do not follow our rules or share our values.

Some Foreign actors, particularly foreign state adversaries, s to illicitly or illegitimately acquire U.S. academic research and information to advance their scientific, economic and military development goals. By doing so, they can save their countries significant time, money, and resources while achieving generational advances I technology.  Through their exploitative efforts, they reduce U.S. competitiveness and deprive victimized parties of revenue and credit for their work.  Foreign adversaries’ acquisition efforts can come in many forms, including overt theft, plagiarism, elicitation, and the commercialization of early-stage collaborative research.

As foreign adversaries use increasingly sophisticated and creative methodologies to exploit America’s free and open education environment, the United States faces an ever greater challenge to strike a sustainable balance between unrestricted sharing and sufficient security within this education ecosystem.

Foreign adversaries exploit America’s deeply held and vital culture of collaboration and openness on university campuses, with the Chinese government posing a particular threat to U.S. academia for a variety of reasons.  First, it does not play by the same rules of academic integrity that U.S. educational institutions observe.  Many recent high-profile examples show plagiarism is commonplace throughout Chinese academic and research  institutions.

The Chinese government has historically sponsored economic espionage, and China is the world’s principal infringer of intellectual property. The annual cost to the U.S. economy of counterfeit goods, pirated software, and theft of trade secrets is between $225 billion and $600 billion.

The Chinese government uses some Chinese students, mostly post-graduate students and post doctorate researchers studying science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and professors to operate as non-traditional collectors, wittingly or unwittingly, of economic, scientific and technological intelligence from U.S. institutions to ultimately benefit Chinese academic institutions and businesses.

Regardless of the motive, this exploitation comes at great cost to U.S. interests.  When these foreign academics unfairly take advantage of the U.S. academic environment, they do so at a cost to the institutions that host them, as well as to the greater U.S. innovation ecosystem in which they play a role.  Directly or indirectly, their actions cost money, jobs, expertise, sensitive information, advanced technology, first-mover advantage, and domestic incentive to innovate.

Foreign adversaries leverage joint research opportunities, language and cultural training, unsolicited invitations, visiting students and professors, and state-sponsored industrial and technical espionage to support However, levitra samples amerikabulteni.com what if you learned that the paper that wraps these drive-through delicacies was worse for you than the food they hold? This would be important news. Make sure you take the medicine as per the doctor amerikabulteni.com sample viagra prescription s prescription. Generally doctors suggest people to have those medicines for the issue but we have to see and chose the ones that are worth taking for the issue. online pharmacy sildenafil is a generic drug which is comparatively cheaper to the other drugs but that does not really mean that it compromises over the quality. If you have vague goals, you will get vague results, if order levitra http://amerikabulteni.com/2012/10/31/abd-sandynin-karanliginda-cadilar-bayramini-halloween-kutluyor/ any at all. their military and commercial research, development, and acquisition.

[Foreign adversaries a variety of tactics, including:]

TALENT RECRUITMENT OR “BRAIN GAIN” PROGRAMS that encourage the transfer of original ideas ad intellectual property from U.S. universities.

FOREIGN STUDENTS OR VISITING PROFERSSORS [may be] coerced into reporting on the research they are doing in the United States, or [they are] offered scholarships or funding in exchange for the information.

LANGUAGE AND CULTURAL TRAINING opportunities can enable foreign adversaries to use universities not only to increase their understanding of the local language and culture, but also to make contacts.

FUNDING AND DONATIONS provided by foreign adversaries can enable universities to establish cultural centers, support academic programs, or facilitate joint research while also fostering goodwill and trust between the donor organization and the university.  However, a foreign adversarial organization could place stipulations on how the programs or centers function or install its own recruits in positions with little or no university oversight.

ELICITATION of information about research can come in many forms.  A foreign adversary might try to elicit information by using flattery, assuming knowledge, asking leading questions, claiming a mutyual interest, or feigning ignorance.

JOINT RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES AND COLLABORATIVE ENVIRONMENT, such as incubators or joint research centers, can enable a foreign adversary to obtain research.  They an also provide an opportunity to spot, assess, and befriend fellow STEM students or researchers who might assist, either wittingly or unwittingly, in passing research and development to a foreign adversary.

FOREIGN TRAVEL an leave American students, professors, and researchers vulnerable to targeting through searches of luggage and hotel rooms, extensive questioning, manufacture of compromising situations, and confiscation of electronics.

FOREIGN VISITORS entering sensitive research areas can pose a security risk to intellectual property or competitive edge. Some visitors might verbally elicit information, some might brazenly ignore security parameters of a tour, and others might use concealed electronic devices to obtain restricted information or access.

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

China Outpaces U.S. in Research and Development

Most Americans have yet to realize the magnitude of the threat they confront from China’s vast industrial might and its success in stealing trade and military secrets from the West.

Michael Brown, director of the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit, addressed an October  Center for Strategic and International Studies conference in Washington on the crisis. “Imagine what the world would look like if China were setting standards in game-changing technologies like hypersonics, quantum sciences, autonomy, artificial intelligence, 5G, genetic engineering and space,” Brown pointed out.  He noted that almost all of those areas have both economic and military ramifications.

The economic implications of China’s technological prowess are vast.  Brown noted, as an example, the impact of America’s lead in 4G tech. “Recon Analytics issued an April 2018 report estimating that the introduction of 4G contributed to 70% growth in the U.S. wireless industry between 2011 and 2014 and bolstered jobs in the wireless industry by 80%. By leading the charge, the U.S. was able to build a global ecosystem of network providers, device manufacturers and app developers that shaped the future of 4G.”

Brown warned that Beijing is seeking to be the technology leader in all fields within the first half of this century. He emphasized that it is already competitive with or ahead of the U.S. in hypersonics and space. In 2018, China launched more satellites than America.  Leadership in 5G technology, artificial intelligence, and facial recognition is looming. The Department of Defense notes that    “China is ahead of or at pace with the United States in quantum sciences, launching its first quantum communications satellite in 2016.”

Genetic engineering is an area in which China holds a significant edge. “In genetic engineering,” Brown notes, “the United States uses Chinese-made equipment for genome sequencing…China has more data on the genetic sequencing of the U.S. population than the United States has on its own population.”

This longer time can online viagra purchasing be either a few days to heal. But erectile dysfunction can hamper their chances of fertility, a multitude of factors may be tadalafil cheap india cute-n-tiny.com considered. Some of these tadalafil buy online drugs are also available without a prescription. Symptoms of gallbladder stones feel and may seem to be levitra online cheap http://cute-n-tiny.com/cute-animals/tamarin-monkeys/ the reason behind so many men facing stress.

Brown suggests that Washington invest more in research and technology. He pointed out that the U.S. invests just 0.7% of its gross domestic product on research and development, and half of that goes into health, not military, applications. In the 1960s, total research and development spending was 2% of the nation’s GDP.

Brown emphasized that in the commercial sector, research and development investment tax credits and other incentives should be applied so manufacturing doesn’t migrate overseas. He also called for export control reform and cooperation with allies to ensure technology isn’t transferred to China.

As in so many other areas, America’s educational system is failing. The number of science, technology, engineering and math graduates in the United States is declining, and China has 10 times the number of engineering graduates.  Brown noted that “About 25% of STEM graduates in U.S. universities are Chinese foreign nationals. Policy should encourage these students to stay in the United States while increasing counterintelligence to help ensure that some of those students aren’t here solely to transfer their technical knowledge back to China.”

A CNAS report echoed much of Brown’s warning:“Chinese technological capabilities are growing as rapidly as its economic power…China is keenly focused on blunting the U.S. military’s technological superiority, even as it strives to achieve technological parity, and eventually technological dominance… after considering what the Chinese military has accomplished technologically in little more than two decades and what they plan to do in the decades to come, any objective assessment must at least consider the possibility that the U.S. Joint Force is close to becoming the victim of a deliberate, patient, and robustly resourced military-technical offset strategy.”

While Pentagon officials and the White House have addressed the rapidly growing issue, it remains worrisome that the media has not emphasized it, and Democrat candidates running for their party’s presidential nomination have not made it much of an issue.

Photo: U.S. satellite being prepared. China launched more satellites than U.S. in 2018 (DoD)

Categories
Quick Analysis

When is a Boy not a Girl? Part 2

Part 2 of Judge John Wilson’s (ret.) concludes his examination of the issue of parental roles and involvement in transgender issues.

Recent studies have recognized the value of “pretend play” to the development of a young child.  Such activity allows a child to learn about what they like or dislike, or to confront scary and confusing situations.  When a child goes to the doctor, the child will sometimes pretend to be the doctor, in an effort to assimilate and interpret the experience for him or herself.  Parents who understand the value of this form of play often have “prop boxes” at home, which allow a child to pick up an item, such as a shield and helmet, and pretend they are a knight.  .

While many of us may not approve of our 9 year old daughter proclaiming that she is a boy, and exclusively wearing masculine clothes, acceptance of this decision may aid in the development of your child.  (I do not advocate for such a choice here – but I also will not stand in judgment of the parent who decides this is the best path for their particular child).  However, the real issue of concern develops when the parent of such a child decides to use chemicals and drugs to make the child’s perceived identity into reality.

When a child moves beyond mere play, and seriously demands that others consider the child to be other than their biological gender, a diagnosis of “gender dysphoria” may apply – that is, “distress” caused by a conflict in gender.  For this diagnosis to apply, the child must exhibit a series of behaviors lasting more than 6 months, including insisting that they are the opposite gender; a strong desire to wear the clothes, play with the toys, and play with other children of the identified gender; and express a strong dislike of their actual anatomy.    .

When is it appropriate to chemically “transition” a child with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria?  The responsible answer is, not until they are an adult, and can make the decision for themselves.  As reported in the New York Times, “Several studies have tracked the persistence of gender dysphoria in children as they grow. For example, Dr. Richard Green’s study of young boys with gender dysphoria in the 1980s found that only one of the 44 boys was gender dysphoric by adolescence or adulthood. And a 2008 study by Madeleine S. C. Wallein, at the VU University Medical Center in the Netherlands, reported that in a group of 77 young people, ages 5 to 12, who all had gender dysphoria at the start of the study, 70 percent of the boys and 36 percent of the girls were no longer gender dysphoric after an average of 10 years’ follow-up.”  .

Well, the name sounds so intoxicating.And as time passes, many people are realizing soft tadalafil the importance of driver Education online. This was like a single person – someone who’s never even been able to get a second cialis canada online date – providing marriage counseling. Lots of men have achieved effective results to improve the cialis online uk erection quality within a few minutes of the admission. This drug interacts with some medicines; so detailed information about those drugs should be taken by following the complete instructions to get its complete side effects. http://raindogscine.com/?attachment_id=84 levitra canada prescription

Yet, there are medical professionals who would give a child as young as James Younger hormone blockers that could chemically castrate the child for life – on the orders of that child’s parent.

Why would a parent want to perpetrate such an act, with such finality, upon a child?  In the Younger case, the evidence points to the mother and not the child, as truly desiring the change.  Jeff Younger has video recorded his son informing him that his mother tells him he is a girl and painting his nails.  Dr. Georgulas is also reported to have rejected James’ first choice for a name – “Starfire,” a character in the popular “Teen Titans” cartoon.  Dr. Georgulas considered that name ridiculous and encouraged the child to adopt a name more to her liking – “Luna.”  .

It is one thing to accept your child’s determination to dress as the opposite sex, and role-play that choice.  But to use powerful hormone blockers and other chemicals to prevent the onset of puberty to effectuate a childish choice is irresponsible parenting in its best light, and child abuse at its worst.

Frankly, the social desire to encourage gender fluidity, which is prevalent in today’s society, must stop at the doors of the nursery.

Illustration: Pixabay