Saturday, May 4, 2013

Preparedness and Response in the Arctic: The Opportunities and Challenges of Increased Marine Activity”

Written testimony of U.S. Coast Guard 17th District Commander Rear Admiral Thomas Ostebo for a Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard field hearing titled “Assessing U.S. Preparedness and Response in the Arctic: The Opportunities and Challenges of Increased Marine Activity”

Release Date: 
March 27, 2013
Anchorage, Alaska
Senator Begich and distinguished colleagues, thank you for the opportunity to join you today. I am pleased to discuss Coast Guard Arctic responsibilities and operations. This past summer we prepared for Arctic activity driven by the oil industry’s planned drilling operations in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas. Partnering closely with Federal, State, Local, and Tribal government partners, and working with industry as the regulated parties, the Coast Guard was ready for operations in the Arctic with Operation Arctic Shield. The lessons we learned this past year will inform our planning and strategy, to ensure we remain always ready to ensure the safety, security and stewardship of the emerging maritime frontier of the Arctic.

Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit (MODU) Kulluk Grounding-On-Going Investigation

The Coast Guard shares your concerns regarding the grounding of the MODU KULLUK on December 31, 2012, which highlights the rigors of operating in Alaskan waters. The Coast Guard last inspected the KULLUK on December 20, 2012. The Coast Guard inspected and certificated the newly constructed Offshore Supply Vessel AIVIQ on April 20, 2012.
In January, I directed a marine casualty safety investigation into the facts and circumstances surrounding the grounding of the KULLUK. Members of the Coast Guard’s Investigation National Center of Expertise are leading the investigation, coordinating with local Coast Guard commands, and utilizing the technical expertise of the National Transportation Safety Board and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement to examine all aspects of this vessel casualty. Furthermore, in order to provide timely feedback to the American public and the marine industry, the investigators have been authorized to make interim safety recommendations prior to the final release of the report.
As my investigating officer is still actively engaged in the investigation, it would not be appropriate to provide additional information at this time. As soon as the investigation is complete, and the final report is issued, I will ensure a copy is provided to you and your staff.
Additionally, in January I also referred the casualty investigation of the Drill Ship NOBLE DISCOVERER, also operating in Alaskan waters, to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for their review and potential follow-on action. Since the Coast Guard is actively assisting DOJ with the case, it would not be appropriate for me to provide information regarding this on-going investigation and I would refer any questions to DOJ.

The Coast Guard in Alaska and the Arctic Region

The Coast Guard has been operating in the Arctic Ocean since 1867, when Alaska was just a territory. Then, as now, our mission is to assist scientific exploration, chart the waters, provide humanitarian assistance to native tribes, conduct search and rescue, and enforce U.S. laws and regulations.
In Alaska, Coast Guard aircraft and vessels monitor more than 950,000 square miles off the Alaskan coast to enforce U.S. laws. We patrol an even larger area of the North Pacific Ocean to stop large-scale high seas drift netting and other illegal fishing practices, including foreign incursions into the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. We also conduct marine safety and environmental protection missions in the region.
To protect the Arctic environment, we are engaging industry and the private sector to address their significant responsibilities for pollution prevention, preparedness, and response. Recognizing that pollution response is significantly more difficult in cold, ice, and darkness, enhancing preventative measures is critical. Those engaging in offshore commercial activity in the Arctic must also plan and prepare for emergency response in the face of a harsh environment, long transit distances for air and surface assets, and limited response resources. We continue to work to improve awareness, contingency planning, and communications.
We are also actively participating in the Department of Interior-led interagency working group on Coordination of Domestic Energy Development and Permitting in Alaska (established by Executive Order 13580) to synchronize the efforts of Federal agencies responsible for overseeing the safe and responsible development of Alaska’s onshore and offshore energy.
While prevention is critical, the Coast Guard must be able to manage the response to pollution incidents where responsible parties are not known or fail to adequately respond. In 2010, we deployed an emergency vessel towing system north of the Arctic Circle. We have also exercised the Vessel of Opportunity Skimming System (VOSS) and the Spilled Oil Recovery System (SORS) in Alaskan waters, but we had yet to conduct exercises north of the Arctic Circle until this summer. Both of these systems enable vessels to collect oil in the event of a discharge, however, these systems have limited capacity and are only effective in ice-free conditions. As part of Arctic Shield 2012, we conducted the furthest northern deployment and testing of the SORS in the vicinity of Barrow.
Fisheries are also a concern in the region. The National Marine Fisheries Service, based upon a recommendation from the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council, has imposed a moratorium on fishing within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone north of the Bering Strait until an assessment of the practicality of sustained commercial fishing is completed. The Coast Guard will continue to carry out its mission to enforce and protect living marine resources in the high latitudes.
We are employing our Waterways Analysis and Management System to assess vessel traffic density and determine the need for improved aids to navigation and other safety requirements. We are also moving forward with a Bering Strait Port Access Route Study, in coordination with our international partners, which is a preliminary analysis to evaluate vessel traffic management and appropriate ship routing measures.
The Coast Guard continues to support international and multilateral organizations, studies, projects and initiatives. We are actively working with the Arctic Council, International Maritime Organization and their respective working groups. We are leading the U.S. delegation to the Arctic Council Oil Spill Task Force that is developing an International Instrument on Arctic Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response. We are also conducting joint contingency response exercises with Canada and we maintain communications and working relationships with Canadian and Russian agencies responsible for regional operations including Search and Rescue, law enforcement and oil spill response. We maintain bilateral response relationships with Canada and Russia, and last month we hosted representatives from the Russian State Marine Pollution Control Salvage and Rescue Administration to sign an expanded Memorandum of Understanding and Joint Contingency Plan to foster closer cooperation in oil spill response. We will continue to engage Arctic nations, international organizations, industry, academia and Alaskan state, local and tribal governments to strengthen our partnerships and inter-operability.
Our engagement with Alaska Native Tribes continues to be highly beneficial. Our continued partnership has made our operations safer and more successful. We are working hard to ensure tribal equities are recognized, and that indigenous peoples and their way of life are protected. We look forward to continuing to strengthen our partnerships with our Alaskan Native partners.
The Coast Guard continues to push forward and assess our capabilities to conduct operations in the Arctic. Since 2008, we set up small, temporary Forward Operating Locations on the North Slope in Prudhoe Bay, Nome, Barrow and Kotzebue to test our capabilities with boats, helicopters, and Maritime Safety and Security Teams. We also deployed our light-ice capable 225-foot ocean-going buoy tenders to test our equipment, train our crews and increase our awareness of activity. Additionally, each year from April to November we have flown two sorties a month to evaluate activities in the region.
Looking ahead over the next 10-15 years, the Coast Guard’s regional mission profile will continue to evolve. Increasing human activity will increase the significance and volume of maritime issues, such as freedom of navigation, offshore resource exploration, and environmental preservation. While summer sea ice is forecast to diminish further in the coming decades, the region will still be largely ice covered in the winter. Thus, ice will continue to present hazards even in the summer time.

The Coast Guard in Context of National Arctic Policy

U.S. Arctic policy is set forth in the 2009 National Security Presidential Directive 66/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 25. For the past four years, as we are today with Arctic Shield 2012, we have been conducting limited Arctic operations during open water periods. However, we face many challenges looking into the future. Some Arctic operations demand specialized capabilities and personnel trained and equipped to operate in extreme climates. Our assessments of the Nation’s requirements for operating in ice-laden waters will consider infrastructure requirements to support operations, and requirements for personnel and equipment to operate in extreme cold and ice.
Given the scope of these challenges, we have been conducting oil-in-ice research since 2010 to evaluate, develop, and test equipment and techniques that can be used to successfully track and recover oil in any ice filled waters, and have explored promising technologies, such as heated skimmers. The Coast Guard’s strategic approach is to ensure we pursue the capabilities in the future to perform our statutory missions so we can ensure the Arctic is safe, secure, and environmentally sustainable. This strategy is consistent with our Service’s approach to performing its Maritime Safety, Security, and Stewardship functions.

Conclusion

Arctic Shield 2012 was an appropriate plan to meet projected mission requirements this past year. Moving forward, we will continue building our strategy using a whole-of-government approach that will inform national dialogue and policy development for this critical region.
While there are many challenges, the increasingly open Arctic Ocean also presents unique opportunities. We look forward to working with the Congress on how our Coast Guard can continue to support our national Arctic objectives, protect its fragile environment and remain Semper Paratus – Always Ready in this new ocean.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to your questions.
Review Date: 
March 25, 2013
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/164984_192868410863996_155743323_n.jpg

Mushroom cloud over Damascus  
 Part of channel(s): Syria (current event)
5.5.2013 Damascus, Syria

From Russia Today after the Syrian Military made statements about the attacks;
"Strong blasts have hit the Syrian capital, according to media and eye witness reports. According to state TV a military research center was targeted. It also says that the explosions have been caused by an Israeli rocket attack.The blasts reportedly occurred in the area around Mount Qasioun in Damascus in the early hours of Sunday.

The area hosts a military research center in Jamraya, which came under Israeli attack earlier in January.

The Israeli Air Force conducted an airstrike on Syrian territory on Friday reportedly targeting a shipment of advanced missiles.

Video footage uploaded onto the Internet showed a massive ball of fire rising into the sky. RT could not immediately verify the authenticity of the video."




After making your selection below, copy and paste the above code.
Size: | start time seconds |
Plays: 15479 (Embed: 376)


Please, if you have any video of mushroom clouds like this coming from conventional bombs please share. I count 11/12 secondary explosions.
Read more at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=52c_1367710192#tekyHVrMXge6tjjE.99

Obama on hot-mic moment: I wasn’t “hiding the ball”

posted at 9:50 am on March 27, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

After a day of spin from the White House didn’t tamp down outrage over Barack Obama’s sotto voce conversation with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev, the President himself addressed the controversy.  Earlier today, Obama insisted that nothing he told Medvedev was out of the ordinary, and that he wasn’t “hiding the ball” on missile defense:
A defensive President Obama said Tuesday he wasn’t guilty of “hiding the ball” when an open microphone caught him pleading with the president of Russia to delay missile shield talks until after this year’s elections.
“The only way I get this stuff done is If I’m consulting with the Pentagon, with Congress, if I’ve got bipartisan support and frankly, the current environment is not conducive to those kinds of thoughtful consultations,” Mr. Obama told reporters at a nuclear security summit here. “This is not a matter of hiding the ball.” …
“I don’t think it’s any surprise that you can’t start that a few months before presidential and congressional elections in the United States, and at a time when they just completed elections in Russia, and they’re in the process of a presidential transition where a new president’s going to be coming in, in a little less than two months,” Mr. Obama said.
Er — riiight.  Here is the transcript once again from the conversation:
President Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.
President Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…
President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.
President Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.
“After my election, I have more flexibility.”  He’s not talking about Congressional elections.  He’s trying to get “space” from Putin, through Medvedev, in order to get himself re-elected.  And to get that space — in which Putin would presumably back off of his public comments on missile defense — Obama promised Russia “flexibility” on missile defense once he gets past “my last election,” and the last time voters can hold him accountable for his actions.
The White House continued to spin this as a demonstration of Obama’s commitment to nuclear disarmament and missile defense:
White House aides said the president was still “deeply invested” in the missile defense system.
Uh huh.  Here was Obama’s “deep investment” in this 2008 video from his campaign, in which he promised to “end misguided defense policies,” and one of the first topics mentioned is … missile defense:
I will cut investments in unproven missile-defense systems.
So when was Obama “hiding the ball”? Then or now?




 Barack Obama - Yes I Can Make Us Defenseless—Just Like Dec 7, 1941: http://youtu.be/kRGru2CPC4E via @youtube

One Congressman's Quest to Unearth Obama's Secret Deal with Russia

Reuters
John Hudson 1,374 Views Jun 7, 2012
In May, The Washington Post dismissed the conspiracy theories that President Obama has made a secret deal with Vladimir Putin after a hot mic moment with then-President Dimitry Medvedev as "another example of how facts no longer matter when it comes to politically sexy allegations." But that hasn't fazed Rep. Mike Turner, a Republican on the House Armed Services Committee. Embracing the kind of tactics you might see from the conspiratorial fringes of the right-wing blogosphere, the Ohio congressman and other Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee have been slowly building the case that Americans are being kept dangerously in the dark on the country's proposed missile defense system in Europe.  "This isn't a politically sexy allegation," Turner's communications director Tom Crosson tells The Atlantic Wire. "This is a fact."
What kind of facts are we talking about? The key one was the audio of the exchange between Obama and Medvedev captured at the March 26 global nuclear summit in South Korea:
Obama: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.”
Medvedev: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you . . .”
Obama: “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.”
Medvedev: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir,” meaning President Putin.
The exchange made a reasonably big splash (and launched a meme) in the press and forced the president to respond. “This is not a matter of hiding the ball," he said. “The only way I get this stuff done is if I’m consulting with the Pentagon, with Congress, if I’ve got bipartisan support and frankly, the current environment is not conducive to those kinds of thoughtful consultations."
That would appear to be that. But this morning, Turner's office launched its biggest case for the "secret deal" theory yet, which was accompanied by an ominous YouTube video titled  “Mr. President, time to tell Americans about your secret deal with the Russians.”

But the exchange is not the only thing Turner cites as proof of a secret deal. There's also this March 2 story in the Russian outlet Ria Novosti, in which Putin opens up about failed talks he had with the U.S. regarding missile defense.
“They made a proposal to us just during the talks, they told us: we would offer you this, this and that. We did not expect this, but I said: we agree. Please put it down on paper,” Putin said.
“We were waiting for their answer for two months. We did not get it, and then our American partners withdrew their own proposals, saying: no, it’s impossible,” he added.
He explained that those “proposals” included guarantees that the U.S.-NATO European missile shield would not be directed against Russia. For example, Russian specialists would be allowed to carry out round-the-clock monitoring of the anti-missile components, and their radars systems would be cemented so that they were directed exactly at Iran and “were technically unable to turn towards Russia.”
While the interview suggests some negotiations took place between the U.S. and Russia regarding the missile defense shield, it does not suggest that a final agreement was ever sealed. It also doesn't prove that a pending deal exists between Putin and Obama. But that isn't preventing Turner from insisting a deal definitely exists.
"The issue of the president's secret deal with the Russians is not one open to interpretation," Turner said on the House floor last week. "This is not an issue of my opinion that there is a secret deal, you can look up Mr. Putin's interview on March 2, 2012 and he says his response was 'we agree.'"
Stoking the flames a bit more, Turner's Monday press release lays out all the events U.S. and Russian officials have met, suggesting that a missile defense plot continues to be secretly hammered out.

Far be it from us to hinder anyone's quest for greater government transparency. But we must admit it's a little odd that this issue, above anything else, is the source of the congressman's attention especially given that there is no sign the president is going to give further attention to the months-old issue. When the hot mic incident first arose in March, Mitt Romney told talk show host Hugh Hewitt this would be a major campaign issue. “The mainstream media may try and put this to bed, but we’re going to keep it alive and awake. And we’re going to keep hammering him with it all the way through November.” When asked if Turner was playing up the issue in light of the president's re-election campaign, Crossan rejected the idea. "We're not asking this because it's a campaign issue, we're asking this because it's a national security issue," he said. "Americans have a right to know what the president has planned for them."
Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments or send an email to the author at jhudson@theatlantic.com. You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.

Obama deal with Russia, missile defense, Iran, DPRK threats

Editor’s Note – In 2009, in an unprecedented sligh to former Eastern Bloc nations now aligned with the west, President Obama cancelled the Bush era plans to install permanent missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic in an attempt to ensure that future Iranian capabilities could be defended against. Why such appeasement to Putin – and no return on the deal?
The problem is, and is still short sighted in most calculations by pundits, Iran and North Korea are steadfast and loyal allies, and it is likely that the DPRK has been performing rocket and Nuke tests that could be of mutual use to both countries. is what the DPRK doing now part of a more global effort. “What if its not about North Korea” solely?
From the New York Times in September of 2009:
President Obama scrapped his predecessor’s proposed antiballistic missile shield in Eastern Europe on Thursday and ordered instead the development of a reconfigured system designed to shoot down short- and medium-range Iranian missiles.
In one of the biggest national security reversals of his young presidency, Mr. Obama canceled former President George W. Bush’s plans to station a radar facility in the Czech Republic and 10 ground-based interceptors in Poland. Instead, he plans to deploy smaller SM-3 interceptors by 2011, first aboard ships and later in Europe, possibly even in Poland or the Czech Republic.
Obama added:
“President Bush was right that Iran’s ballistic missile program poses a significant threat,” Mr. Obama said. But he said the new assessment of the Iranian threat required a different system using existing technology. “This new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on proven systems and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack than the 2007 European missile defense program,” he said.
Buy now, with the North Korean threat looming, that phase has also been canceled, the mobile technology is now also nixed in favor of Pacific defenses (Also from the NY Times this March):
The United States has effectively canceled the final phase of a Europe-based missile defense system that was fiercely opposed by Russia and cited repeatedly by the Kremlin as a major obstacle to cooperation on nuclear arms reductions and other issues.
Russian officials here have so far declined to comment on the announcement, which was made in Washington on Friday by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel as part of a plan to deploy additional ballistic missile interceptors to counter North Korea. The cancellation of some European-based defenses will allow resources to be shifted to protect against North Korea.
Hagel announced that batteries would be placed elsewhere, upgraded, and/or renewed in Alaska and on Guam: (From Business Insider)
The placement of missiles in Guam is just one of many recent military mobilizations. An advanced radar rig and two Aegis-class destroyers have sailed to the western Pacific in response to missile movements on the west coast of North Korea.
Also, the Pentagon has plans to put missile batteries in Alaska to mitigate the extended range of North Korea’s newest rocket, semi-successfully launched in December. Though analysts doubt the rocket has adequate guidance systems, the notional range is enough to reach Alaska.
Stay tuned, today was the day the DPRK gave as the time for foreigners to leave the Korean Peninsula, and that missile tests were to be conducted, read on what may be behind a lot of these movements according to Congressman Mike Turner (R) Ohio:

Congressman: I was right, Obama made a secret missile deal with Putin

Posted By John Hudson – Front Page Magazine

Is the Obama administration’s new missile defense initiative a direct response to North Korean threats — or the culmination of a secretive deal between Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin to scale back America’s defense apparatus?
According to Congressman Mike Turner, the administration’s cancellation of the final phase of a missile defense system in Europe on Friday is vindication of his warnings about Obama’s “secret deal with the Russians.”
“We watched the president state to Medvedev that he would have greater flexibility after the election,” Turner told Foreign Policy on Sunday night. “Putin later announced the terms of the agreement. You’d have to conclude that there was a deal.”
The Ohio Republican was referring to a “hot mic” exchange between Obama and then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev at a nuclear security summit in South Korea last March. “After my election I have more flexibility,” the president told Medvedev, referring to ongoing discussions about missile defense. “I understand,” replied Medvedev. “I transmit this information to Vladimir.”
Since the incident, the administration has steadfastly denied ever plotting a secret deal with Putin. Additionally, on Friday, when the Pentagon announced the cancellation of some Europe-based defenses as part of a reallocation of resources to protect against North Korea, Pentagon spokesman George Little rejected the notion that the plan had anything to do with Russia. “The missile defense decisions Secretary Hagel announced were in no way about Russia,” he said.
But Turner said his warnings had been vindicated, and went on to lament that the president’s “secret deal,” which he referred to matter-of-factly, elicited no apparent concessions from Russia.
“The problem with the president’s secret deal with the Russians is we never understood what we were going to get out of it,” Turner told FP. “The president clearly has abandoned the shield that the Russians opposed and we’re left with the U.S. having greater exposure to North Korea and Iran without any benefit.”
In the wake of the hot mic incident last March, a number of Republicans, including GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, joined Turner in criticizing the president. But after a spate of White House denials, the issue died down. On Sunday, Republicans even spoke favorably of the president’s realignment of missile defenses against North Korea. “I think it’s really good that we’re taking those precautionary measures to make sure that they cannot do damage,” Tennessee Senator Bob Corker said on Fox News Sunday. Michigan Congressman Mike Rogers told CNN that “this is something that we have to take seriously.”
But Turner has never lost sight of the so-called “secret deal” between Obama and Putin.
In June, he delivered an address on the House floor, saying “the issue of the president’s secret deal with the Russians is not one open to interpretation.” His office then issued a press release featuring a spreadsheet that documented the various events at which U.S. and Russian officials had met, suggesting the continuation of secret missile negotiations.
He also released a video that spliced together clips of himself repeating the words “secret deal” on the House floor:

On Sunday, Turner pledged to “call for hearings in the Armed Services Committee” to increase scrutiny of the “secret deal.” When asked if he believed the entire North Korea realignment was a White House red herring to implement the alleged deal, Turner said “it’s certainly possible.”
Rejecting Turner’s allegations, White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden reiterated that the president’s decisions on this matter had nothing to do with Russia. “They were made based on technological developments and an increased threat of ballistic missiles from North Korea,” she said.

DEW Line stations in the Aleutian Islands in Alaska

Did Barack Obama Give the Russians British Nuclear Secrets?

This morning I was reading an article that, even by the standards of National Review Online, was particularly hyperbolic and hysterical. Arthur Herman strongly dislikes Barack Obama, strongly dislikes Russia, and especially dislikes how the former has handled the later. Obama hasn’t just done a bad job, Herman argues, he’s basically been treasonous in doing so. The article, Romney’s Russian Reset, although possessed of a pleasantly alliterative title, is for the most part perfectly standard-issue conservative agitprop, boring and poorly-written dreck of the sort that is produced by the cartload.
Herman’s article did, however, contain one thing that was extremely interesting, an accusation against Barack Obama and the manifest failure of his Russia policy with which I was not previously familiar. I’ve bolded the important bit:
Three years later, we see what “RESET” really meant.
It meant cravenly abandoning our allies Poland and the Czech Republic on missile defense for Eastern Europe, in order to get a nuclear-arms-reduction treaty that reduced our nuclear arsenal while leaving lots of loopholes for Russia. It meant handing over nuclear secrets belonging to our ally Great Britain and offering Moscow top-secret information about our own missile-defense technologies.
I am, by this point in time, all too familiar with conservative complaints about “the reset” having read a great number of them. Indeed I’ve poured over so many critiques of the reset, and become so familiar with its alleged failures and faults, that I feel pretty confident in my ability to rapidly produce an attack against the reset myself. It’s not hard, you see, because basically anything the Russians do, regardless of how long they’ve been doing it or their reasons for doing so, is actually a result of the reset. Are Russian bureaucrats thieving and stealing? Blame the reset! Are the Russians selling weapons to the Syrians? Blame the reset! Is the Russian government opposed to the latest “humanitarian” intervention? Blame the reset! Whatever the Russians do, whenever they do it, wherever they do it, with or against whom they do it, it’s all a result of the reset and that damn plastic button Hillary Clinton handed Sergey Lavrov.
Before reading Herman’s article, though, I had never heard anything about how Obama supposedly handed over British nuclear secrets to the Russians. And when I say never, I mean never. Not once had I encountered that particular complaint, and I read quite a lot about US domestic politics and even more about US-Russian relations. Indeed, although it sounds like a cheap cliche, I literally spat out my coffee when I read Herman’s allegation that Obama had betrayed the British to the Russians: it seemed to be only marginally more credible than an allegation that Obama was secretly in league with the illuminati.
Virtually every other allegation contained within Herman’s attack on Obama was distressingly familiar, so I figured that he must have based this particular complaint on something. Pudits, even very bad ones like Herman, almost never invent things out of whole cloth: making stuff up is an exceptionally dangerous thing for a political writer to do, and there usually some basis, however flimsy or implausible, for an accusation.
Well after some intensive Google searches it turns out (shockingly) that Herman’s accusation is basically a load of nonsense, nonsense that is based off of a February 2011 Telegraph story that was itself based on information from Wikileaks:
A series of classified messages sent to Washington by US negotiators show how information on Britain’s nuclear capability was crucial to securing Russia’s support for the “New START” deal.
Although the treaty was not supposed to have any impact on Britain, the leaked cables show that Russia used the talks to demand more information about the UK’s Trident missiles, which are manufactured and maintained in the US.
Washington lobbied London in 2009 for permission to supply Moscow with detailed data about the performance of UK missiles. The UK refused, but the US agreed to hand over the serial numbers of Trident missiles it transfers to Britain.
First of all, I think it’s ironic, in a sad sort of way, that someone writing for a magazine whose contributors have called for Julian Asasnge’s assassination is using Wikileaks as a reliable source. However, let’s focus on the “secret” that Obama supposedly revealed. Now it turns out that the information that was given to the Russians is arguably required not only by the new START treaty, but by the old one as well (i.e. a treaty that was in effect before Obama was even elected to the state senate in Illinois, much less became president). But let’s ignore that. Let’s imagine that the only reason that specific language about nuclear weapons transfers, the language that supposedly sold out the British, made its way into the treaty was the personal malevolence of Barack Obama. Let’s even imagine that, as he gave the order to include this language in the treaty*, Obama laughed maniacally, announced to a shocked group of assistants “perfidious Albion will never recover from the wound that I have just inflicted on her,” and then started to sing the Russian national anthem.
What did the Russians gain, what “secrets” of the British nuclear program were revealed to them by Obama’s treachery and deceit? The flight characteristics of the Trident missile? Entry angles for Tridents that have been launched by submarine? Information on which Russian cities and facilities the British target? Technical details about the British submarines carrying the missiles that might aid in their detection? Nope, none of those things. Serial numbers. Even in the worst possible telling of the story, even if we take a relentlessly anti-Obama view on all of the information that we know, the Russians gained information about the number of nuclear weapons possessed by the British. In the decidedly unlikely event of a Russian-British nuclear war, the Russians wouldn’t be able to know where the United Kingdom’s missiles were coming from, they wouldn’t know where these missiles were going, and they wouldn’t be able to shoot the missiles down. They would simply know how many the British possessed (something the Brits are supposed to tell the Russians anyway, but whatever). The benefit this provides the Russians is…oh right, it doesn’t actually benefit them in any conceivable way.
Has there ever been a more spurious allegation against Barack Obama? He might have told the Russians how many missiles the British have? That’s really supposed to be some sort of damning indictment of his foreign policy acumen? It takes quite a lot to shock me these days, but I am truly appalled that National Review allowed such a sloppy and ludicrous allegation to be published. Barack Obama has done a lot of things with which reasonable people can disagree, but betraying the nuclear secrets of our close ally is not one of them.

* the treaty language was actually negotiated by professional staff at the State Department and the Russian Ministry of Foreign affairs, but whatever

ATF Creates New Program To Spy On Anyone Who Owns A Gun

AUTHOR Joshua Pundit
The same Federal Bureau that did such a sterling job providing Mexican drug cartels with illegally purchased firearms and shipping them across the border in the ‘Fast and Furious’ operation has a brand new project.
According to a notice posted by the agency on FedBizOpps.gov, entitled “Investigative System” they’re seeking corporate contractors to help create what they describe as a ‘massive’ new data base system on private citizens they deem worthy of surveillance.
The new system is to be used by ATF staff “to provide rapid searches on various entities for example; names, telephone numbers, utility data and reverse phone look-ups, as a means to assist with investigations, and background research on people, assets and businesses.”
The proposed system will utilize “a number of internal databases as well as external sources to provide timely and relevant information and intelligence products to law enforcement agencies at the federal, state and local levels.”
The system “provides a means to rapidly check records across the country” and is “necessary in assisting investigators, agents and analyst to find people, their assets, relatives, associates and more.”
And it will allow ATF to “obtain exact matches from partial source data searches such as, incomplete social security numbers, address, VIN numbers, etc.”
http://scottystarnes.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/government_spying1.jpg
Keep in mind that the data entered into this database isn’t necessarily on criminals, or even people suspected of a crime. And there are no court orders or warrants involved.
The database can cover a ton of private information for anyone the ATF – or the Obama Justice Department, who controls ATF – feels like putting into the system, for reasons they needn’t disclose to anyone.
Like the drones, it’s all about control.
One of the applications is obvious, and the ATF being used as the Federal Agency involved is a clue. Universal background checks aren’t legal under federal law yet, and neither is gun confiscation. The new system is an extra-legal tool that could facilitate both when the time is right, perhaps in response to a White House declared ‘national emergency’ that involves new, sweeping powers to the occupant of the Oval Office.
Sort of like what Hitler did with the Reichstag Fire.

A New Declaration of Independence

If America were to regain its sanity and once again become fit to govern itself, the irresponsible Marxist we are asked to regard as a president would be removed from office immediately. Bobby Powell lists a few of the reasons:
Unfortunately it appears that Americans are now outnumbered within their own country’s borders by parasites and left-wing pod people. Restoring constitutional government is not going to be easy.
On a tip from dan.A New Declaration Of Independence: Impeach Obama Now: http://youtu.be/XclKrZC4jok via @youtube

Navy's Electromagnetic Motors for Aircraft Carriers (EMALS). New "Energy Weapons". New Energy technology. (Pictures I captured of shipment)

I captured pictures of a truck traveling through Knoxville, Tennessee at 5:45 PM 3/8/13 with an obvious military shipment.  I wondered what the contents of the boxes could be.  Were they filled with part of that 2 billion ammo purchase?   
Here are the pictures I captured of the shipment.   The truck had a Texas license plate, but the truck was on I-40/I-75 heading west.   
military electromagnetic motors/Energy weapons shipment



military electromagnetic motors/energy weapons shipment

Military Electromagnetic motors/energy weapons shipment


I got an up close of the writing on the boxes to try and figure out what the shipment was.

After doing a couple of searches I found out the shipment is Electromagnetic motors for the Navy's aircraft carriers.   They are replacing the steam catapult/arresting systems on aircraft carriers with electromagntic motors.  The new motors will be able to catapult any type plane from a carrier and recover it.  They are "EMALS" for short reference.


The Navair acquisition guide about the electromagnetic motors in pdf form

The guide above is how I figured out what the shipment was in the first place by reading and earching for  the code meanings of the up close code written on the crates.  One search  I used was "code PMA 251" from the boxes.   That is how I came up with the discovery of them being electromagnetic motors.  


Here is a website from the Navy with pictures/schematics and fact sheet about their purchase of Electromagnetic motors. 


Computer-generated design of a complete one-wire Advanced Arresting Gear system schematic.











Here is information of "how it works" 

Portions:

As the Navy’s project manager for the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS), Sulich’s task is to move the newest catapult technology from development at the research facility to ships at sea. A key instrument in the transition is the 1:12-scale model of an electromagnetic catapult, bolted to the concrete floor inside the lab. In place of a ship’s deck, the model is embedded in a knee-high metal casing about 60 feet long, with a narrow slot a few inches deep that runs along the top. An aluminum block rests snugly in one end of the slot. If an aircraft were part of the model, its nose wheel landing gear would be attached to the aluminum block. When the power is turned on, a wave of electromagnetic force silently shoots the aluminum block to the opposite end of the model at a speed of 60 mph. After a few keystrokes on a computer, the electromagnetic wave travels in reverse, gently returning the aluminum block to its starting position.

As the 21st century dawns, steam catapults are running out of steam. Massive systems that require significant manpower to operate and maintain, they are reaching the limits of their abilities, especially as aircraft continue to gain weight. Electromagnetic catapults will require less manpower to operate and improve reliability; they should also lengthen aircraft service life by being gentler on airframes.



From the Defense media network site I found an article about the military going "electric" compared to nuclear for many reasons, including "new electric weapons/lasers."

The decisive argument for electric drive was that a new generation of weapons, in prospect but hardly yet in service, might need massive amounts of electric power: electric lasers, other directed energy weapons, and rail guns.
 There were other interesting possibilities, too. In the past, ships actually used three different kinds of power: prime power for propulsion, driving propellers; auxiliary electric power; and hydraulic power taken from pumps generally driven more or less directly by the prime mover. Electric power is relatively easy to control using electronics; hydraulics and propeller shafts are far more difficult to control in this way. If everything in a ship was electrically powered, it could be controlled electrically, and the electric controls could, in turn, be controlled by computers. That would include damage control devices such as pumps and vents and even watertight doors.
 The new carrier goes a step further. Her electromagnetic catapult is a kind of low-velocity rail gun. In addition, she has electromagnetic arresting gear – the energy of a landing airplane is converted into electric power instead of being dissipated as heat, as in the past. As in a hybrid electric car, this energy is stored and can be applied to the ship’s power needs. Making the catapult electromagnetic simplifies the ship’s design and arrangement, because it does away with considerable piping and with the steam accumulators under a conventional steam catapult




Here is the procurement order from the Navy for the Electromagnetic motors.


GENERAL INFORMATION

Notice Type:
Presolicitation
Posted Date:
October 11, 2012
Response Date:
Oct 26, 2012 11:59 pm Eastern
Archiving Policy:
Automatic, 15 days after response date
Archive Date:
November 10, 2012
Original Set Aside:
N/A
Set Aside:
N/A
Classification Code:
17 -- Aircraft launching, landing & ground handling equipment
NAICS Code:
336 -- Transportation Equipment Manufacturing/336413 -- Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing


:
N00019-12-R-0109
:
Presolicitation
:
Added: Oct 11, 2012 5:00 pm
The Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) intends to enter into sole source negotiations and subsequently award a Fixed Price Type Order to General Atomics, located in San Diego, CA under Basic Ordering Agreement, N00019-11-G-0003. This order is for the procurement of materials for the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) in support of United States Navy Carrier Vessel Nuclear (CVN) Ship 79. These materials have long manufacturing lead times and will be inserted into higher assemblies, as part of a future contracting action, into the EMALS and AAG CVN 79 shipsets. THIS IS NOT A REQUEST FOR COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS. This acquisition is being pursued on a sole source basis under the statutory authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304(c)(1), as implemented Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.302-1, only one responsible source and no other supplies or services will satisfy agency requirements. Unless stated herein, no additional information available. Requests for the same will be disregarded. A determination by the Government not to compete this effort is solely within the discretion of the Government. GENERAL INFORMATION: General Atomics, the designer and developer of the EMALS and AAG systems, is the only source possessing the requisite system knowledge, engineering expertise, and technical data necessary to provide the required materials. Subcontracting opportunities should be sought directly from General Atomics Small Business Liaison Officer, Andres Lara, phone 858-455-3076, Andres.lara@ga.com. There is no commitment by the Government to issue a solicitation, make an award, or be responsible for any money expended by interested parties before award of a contract for the effort described above. Information provided herein is subject to change and in no way binds the Government to solicit for or award a contract.



An article written last August 2012 - about the EMALS on Defense Industry Daily implied it was still in the design stages, from the way I read it. 
As the US Navy continues to build its new CVN-21 Gerald R. Ford Class carriers, few technologies are as important to their success as the next-generation EMALS (Electro-MAgnetic Launch System) catapult. The question is whether that technology will be ready in time, in order to avoid either costly delays to the program – or an even more costly redesign of the first ship of class.

Because it’s such a big change, it’s a critical technology if the US Navy wishes to deliver its new carrier class on-time and on-budget, and fulfill the CVN-21 program’s cost-saving promises. If EMALS cannot deliver on time, or perform as advertised, the extensive redesign and additional costs involved in adding steam catapult equipment throughout the ship could easily rise to hundreds of millions of dollars.

Launches have begun, and the 2nd phase of EMALS aircraft compatibility testing is scheduled to begin in 2012. Engineers will continue reliability testing through 2013, then perform installation, checkout, and shipboard testing, with the goal of shipboard certification in 2015.

Seems to me, considering I got pictures of the electromagnetic motors in the process of shipment, they are ahead of schedule.  

Almost as diverse as the electromagnetic spectrum itself, directed-energy weapons span a wide range of incarnations.
Among the simplest forms are inexpensive, handheld lasers that fill people's field of vision, inducing a temporary blindness to ensure they stop at a checkpoint, for example. Some of these already are used in Iraq.
Other radio-frequency weapons in development can sabotage the electronics of land mines, shoulder-fired missiles or automobiles — a prospect that interests police departments in addition to the military.
A separate branch of directed-energy research involves bigger, badder beams: lasers that could obliterate targets tens of miles away from ships or planes. Such a strike would be so surgical that, as some designers put it at a recent conference here, the military could plausibly deny responsibility.
The flexibility of directed-energy weapons could be vital as wide-scale, force-on-force conflict becomes increasingly rare, many experts say. But the technology has been slowed by such practical concerns as how to shrink beam-firing antennas and power supplies.
Military officials also say more needs to be done to assure the international community that directed-energy weapons set to stun rather than kill will not harm noncombatants.





Why am I putting this type mundane information on the blog?   

There are three reasons.

One- I would love to know what the new "energy" weapons are that can run off electromagnetics.  Could this shipment even be "new energy" weapons?  It does say the technology can be applied to the police department too.  The shipment is early compared to when it is suppose to be available (2015)

Two - Are these electromagnetic motors also able to be used outside of an aircraft carrier for "Energy" weapons in the U.S.?  Is this part of the preparations for possible civil unrest in the U.S?  I ask because they are already being shipped, yet an article said not until 2015 for installation. (they are going somewhere)

Three - The military is able to create and manufacturer magnetic motors, yet we hear there is no real "free" energy of magnetics for the people and their energy needs.  So is there actually the technology out there, yet it is not being created for the people as a whole?

Why can't electromagnetic engines be created for all of us to use?  As you read various articles about it, you will see the electromagnetics could even power submarines instead of them being nuclear.   The motors could even be mounted on the outside of the submarine.

Isn't it time for all of us to get this type technology on a smaller scale?  We could all have our own little power plants.


Another point of this article..  When you see something of interest on the highway - take a picture, odds are you can figure out what the shipments are through a little research on the net, which can lead to some very interesting discoveries.










Tennessee State Militia/Guard has stopped DHS armored Vehicles from Kentucky - Russians with DHS Eagle uniforms

UPDATE - 3/11/13 9:00 pm - My investigation and first hand reports of Russians in E. Tn and much more, during my trip over the weekend to Gatlinburg, Tennessee. 

 Tennessee State Militia/Guard.
The various units of the Tn. State Guard are listed here. 

Let me explain the Tennessee State Guard first.   22 Governors got together last year and created State Militia/Guards that can not be federalized as the National Guards can be.  They also did this due to the Federal government taking the equipment from the National Guards and sending it over to Iraq and Afghanistan.  When the Governors have requested the equipment back for the state the Federal government has said "It is too expensive to bring back."  The states have had to do without equipment for any emergencies of the individual states.

3/5/13 9:14 am - Correction: The Tennessee State Guard has been around for a few years.

The governors decided they would form their own State Militias/Guards that can not be controlled by the federal government at any time and they are strictly under the State control along with all the equipment purchased.

The person who contacted me, did so due to my article about the DHS armored vehicles and the picture I took of one when I was in Kentucky. 

Here are the pictures I took.

Armored DHS vehicle in Kentucky

Armored DHS vehicle in Kentucky
_____________________________________________________________________________
Edit - 7:00am 3/8/13 - I have edited the content that was here, due to people getting in trouble about releasing this information.  Even though it is a State Government entity it is still a government entity and they are very upset this information was released to me.  I have taken off the email contents and references.  But I stand by the information of Russian DHS personnel transporting these vehicles.  Truth gets people upset when they would prefer for it to be hidden.
_____________________________________________________________________

They told me that the uniforms were not typical DHS uniforms but they had Eagles on their sleeves and it was stressed these were different DHS uniforms than regular ones.   The Russian/Eastern troops were not armed that were in the DHS uniforms and they were very polite to the State Militia.  They were stopped from coming into Tennessee.  This person told me that in Gatlinburg, Tennessee people are reporting being questioned and stopped by DHS that are Russian.


I wrote about how I found out the Smoky Mountains are part of the UN last year, as most of our National Parks, including the Grand Canyon, Statue of Liberty, etc. after I saw a plaque (took pictures of it) at Newfoundland Gap last year.

 I have to wonder if Russian UN/DHS troops are now being placed around the Smoky Mountains.

I have researched and found what could be the Military installation that the armored vehicle came from pictured in the area of Kentucky, I saw them.   It is The Bluegrass Army Chemicals installation of 14600 acres.    That installation has 523 tons of Nerve Chemical weapons.   It is also a possible FEMA camp.  It has a very strange layout.  All of that information is in the video.

Video about the Russian Troops, DHS vehicles, 22 State Guard/Militias, Kentucky Chemical Depot/FEMA camp?, UN Biospheres:







Fox News story about Obama signing an agreement with Russia in 2011 and the Russian training in Colorado last year.

Portion of article:


The training is the result of a U.S.-Russian agreement signed a year ago. The objectives are to create a basic relationship between the two nations' militaries and to build an understanding about how each other's military works, including communications, Osterholzer said.
That knowledge is vital in joint military and humanitarian operations such as anti-terrorism measures and disaster relief, he said.




Pictures from the Russians training last year in Colorado are on this forum and this page at the bottom. 


Edit to add, thought - 3/5/13 7:41 Am - If the U.S. government plans on having Russian DHS troops, due to not caring about the U.S. citizens to handle the people for any unrest, due to them not believing U.S. citizens troops will follow orders to disarm the people or doing what they think needs to be done.  They haven't thought this out completely.  

They were shocked that after Sandy Hook all guns and ammo went flying off the shelves, from my understanding they were not expecting that, they expected the opposite.   

They believe the Russians will shoot the people without hesitation?  Well it goes the other way too.  The U.S. citizens will not hesitate to shoot any Russian soldier that comes to their doors or tries to disarm the people.   Remember it goes both ways... no hesitation on either side to shoot the other.  The law abiding citizens of the U.S. will stand by their Freedom and Rights and will definitely stand by those rights against foreign DHS troops. 

Edit to Add:  3/8/13-  First hand account of Russian Troops in Asheville N.C. 


Edit to Add: 3/9/13 - Pictures I captured of a military shipment going through Knoxville on 3/8/13 - Electromagnetic motors/energy weapons. 

Update 3/11/13 10 am est - I investigated all of this myself this past weekend.  I am writing the article and all the first hand account information I found.  Some of it is shocking.  I will link it here when I am done.  So check back for the new article at a later point.