Proactively “From the Sea”; an agent of change leveraging the littoral best practices for a paradigm breaking six-sigma best business case to synergize a consistent design in the global commons, rightsizing the core values supporting our mission statement via the 5-vector model through cultural diversity.
Fahim Ansari is accused of helping to plan the attacks in which 173 people were killed in November.
His lawyer, Ejaz Naqvi, has filed legal papers with Mumbai magistrate's court, claiming the "white woman" removed all his clothes and showed him pornographic films.
In the papers, he claims that three foreigners, including the woman, sexually abused him, causing him "severe itching and wounds" on his body, including his genitals.
Mr Ansari, a devout Muslim, claims this amounts to torture because it is against his religion, The Sun newspaper has reported.
Gal, did the CNO just say, "Everyone SHUT UP! You are free to give your opinion only after I tell you what it is."?
Internal and external pressures will be significant as we work our way through what will certainly be complex and challenging budget issues. We will stay aligned and keep our lines of communication open. Discussions and deliberations must take place only within the Department of the Navy and the Department of Defense. Those internal discussions are exactly that, internal. Pursuit of individual agendas or initiatives is unacceptable. You may likely be pulled into parochial discussions. Do not go there.
That's how I read it. Interesting .... being that I am not an O7 or above or a SES that the email was sent to - I guess that doesn't apply to me. Happy day.
What does that mean to the little baby-steps we have seen by the higher pay-grades here at USNI to actively, and effectively, engage in a two-way conversation - a real "Conversation with the Country?" With that email, Admiral Stavridis and VADM Harvey have been effectively ordered to keep their opinions to themselves until they are told what they are.
I perfectly agree with the "...once we leave this room ...." line of thought and tradition - I use it - in the right place and the right time as I see it. Maybe I am wrong on this, probably, but on this subject though; where has this line of thought brought us to in 2009? Is it appropriate in the areas the CNO describes? Legal and well within his authority; unquestionably. But is it perhaps not the best route to take at this fix?
I have been that dork sitting behind an Admiral, silently scribbling in a note-pad at the right tonal inflections. I have sat in the cars and the bars making sure everything runs on time, nothing stupid happens, and phones/blackberries are answered - and have kept my mouth shut and my ears and eyes open. I know how these "internal discussions" often go - and head-nodd'n to the guy that owns paper on you is the norm, not the exception. If you have seen a pack of wolves fuss over a carcass, then you know how those discussions go. You know your place in the pack and only fuss to your limit - and the Alpha always wins in the end.
In 2009 we have LCS, DDG-1000, LPD-17, ACS, and a few other jewels to look at and ask ourselves; in the last decade have we had too many hard questions, or too few? Have we been too self-critical, or too self-delusional? Do we work within a political system, or have we become part of it?
Another part of the email came to the fore;
Years from now we will look back and know that we were the fortunate few to have been privileged to lead our Navy at this important time.
I think of ADM Sims, MG Billy Mitchell and VADM Thomas F. Connolly; would our nation be better if they kept their conversations within DOD and DA/DON? Would they if they received such an email? Don't know - but it is something to ponder.
This is an interesting, and challenging, time for us all.
Read it all for the details, but these "Nine Principles" not only apply to Afghanistan - you could plan almost any operation using them.
Understand why we're there.Afghanistan is not now a sanctuary for al-Qaeda, but it would likely become one again if we abandoned it.
Know what we have to achieve.Success in Afghanistan does not require creating a paradise in one of the poorest countries on earth, but we cannot define victory down.
Understand our enemies and our friends. There is no such thing as “the Taliban” today. Many different groups with different leaders and aims call themselves “Taliban,” and many more are called “Taliban” by their enemies.
Commit to the effort. The consistent unwillingness of the U.S. government to commit to the success of its endeavors in Afghanistan (and Iraq) over the long term is a serious obstacle to progress.
Learn and adapt the right lessons. We cannot dismiss our extensive and painful experiences in Iraq, but we must recognize the differences between that country and Afghanistan.
Consider the human terrain. Pashtuns are not Arabs. They have different traditions, different tribal structures, different ways of resolving differences. One of the most important (and least remarked-upon) differences is that Iraqis fight in their cities and villages while Pashtuns, on the whole, do not.
Understand what we must do, can do, can't do. It is better, in general, for Afghans to take the lead in moving into or through Afghan towns, but this is not always as desirable as we might think.
Have a good plan.Adding more troops to a failing strategy rarely works.
Prioritize efforts. While the situation in Afghanistan is indeed deteriorating, it would be wrong to rush forces out of Iraq this year in response.
Nice write-up by the WSJ on some of the unsung heroes of this war - what we call in the Navy EOD.
"That's how people get killed," he said.
The words were barely out of his mouth when a violent explosion erupted in front of his windshield. The vehicle out front had struck a bomb.
...and their trusty steed....
Sgt. Spencer and his men eat, work and sleep inside their 13-foot-tall armored vehicle, a Buffalo MPCV built by Force Protection Inc., a South Carolina company. The truck is their home away from home. Photos of family members line the dashboard. A crate of Rip It, an energy drink, sits between the two front seats. The cabin is strewn with hunting magazines, Pringles containers and Christmas cookies.
For nearly all of human history, everyone in the world had brown eyes. Then, between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago, the first blue-eyed baby was born somewhere near the Black Sea.
For some reason, that baby's descendants gained a 5% evolutionary advantage over their brown-eyed competitors, and today the number of people with blue eyes tops half a billion.
"What does it mean?" asked Hawks, who studies the forces that have shaped the human species for the last 6 million years.
Nobody knows. It is one of the questions about evolution that persist 200 years after the birth of Charles Darwin, whose birthday will be celebrated worldwide Thursday.
Go use the potty, get a fresh cup of coffee, and then go visit John Hawks website.
The Anglosphere is the core of Western freedom. The seed for that core has been the increasingly uncommon Common Law that came from England and then the United Kingdom.
Without freedom of thought - and the freedom to insult and be insulted - all the rest is just vanity.
You can mark this down.
Dutch Right-wing politician and controversial anti-Islam campaigner Geert Wilders has been refused entry to the United Kingdom despite being invited to visit by a member of the House of Lords, the British parliament’s upper chamber.
Mr Wilders, who was due to go to London this Thursday, received a letter today, 10 February, from the British ambassador to the Netherlands telling him that he was not welcome, reportedly because his visit would constitute a threat to public order.
Mr Wilders responded to the decision in fighting mood, telling Dutch media that he still intended to travel to London:“I’ll see what happens at the border. Let them put me in handcuffs.”
Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen’s response was also firm. He contacted his UK counterpart, David Miliband, by telephone and voiced his dissatisfaction that a member of the Dutch parliament - Geert Wilders is in fact also the leader of a political grouping, the Freedom Party - has been prohibited from entering a fellow European Union member state.
BZ to the Dutch. Fight them for the freedom they so easily throw away.
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the Secretary of State is of the view that your presence in the UK would pose a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat to one of the fundamental interests of society. The Secretary of State is satisfied that your statements about Muslims and their beliefs, as expressed in your film Fitna and elsewhere, would threaten community harmony and therefore public security in the UK.
You are advised that should you travel to the UK and seek admission an Immigration Officer will take into account the Secretary of State's view. If, in accordance with regulation 21 of the immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006, the Immigration Officer is satisfied that your exclusion is justified on grounds of public policy and/or public security, you will be refused admission to the UK under regulation 19. You would have a right of appeal against any refusal of admission, exercisable from outside the UK.
Yours sincerely,
Irving N. Jones
On behalf of the Secretary of State for the Home Department
A good thing?
Lord Nazir Ahmed, a Muslim member of the House of Lords (Labour), had threatened to mobilize 10,000 Muslims to prevent Mr. Wilders from entering the British Parliament. Lord Ahmed boasted in the Pakistani press that the cancellation of Mr. Wilders' visit was "a victory for the Muslim community."
Freedom of thought lost to thugocracy - "a victory for the Muslim community."
I won't confirm, deny, promote, laugh, giggle, destroy, or harumph it.
I can't stand rumors, but sometimes they are fun. The only reason I am going to make a post out of this anon commentfromByron's post is that it sounds like a fun talking point - and it comes from a, ahem, "DC Area" IP address - and that is as good a reason as any to find a reason to get a USN centric post out.
Quote in full:
FF(X) based on Bertholf is basically a done deal. You heard it here first.
Forget everything in that comment but the part in bold.
Here is the your tasking; BERTHOLF FF(G): Good idea or bad? If you are told to make it happen - how do you modify?
