Saturday, July 03, 2010

I think I'll wear Orange today


My favorite Europeans are about now ... well ...
Don't call the Dutch underachievers anymore.

Not after the way the Netherlands rallied to upset five-time champion Brazil 2-1 in the World Cup quarterfinals Friday.

After waking themselves up at halftime, the title that has eluded the Dutch for all these years is now just two wins away.

"For 45 minutes we went full throttle," said Wesley Sneijder. "We were rewarded."

One of the shortest players on the field, Sneijder put the Netherlands ahead in the 68th minute on a header — a thrill so huge he ran to a TV camera, tapped the lens and stuck his face in for a close up.

"It just slipped through from my bald head and it was a great feeling," Sneijder said.

He was in the middle of the post-game party, too, as his teammates swarmed him when the final whistle blew. John Heitinga picked up Sneijder and slung him over his shoulder as Netherlands captain Giovanni van Bronckhorst, a Brazil shirt in hand, leaped up and rubbed Sneidjer's closely shaved head.

The result was a case of role reversal for both sides.

The top-ranked team in the world and one of the most impressive squads in the tournament until Friday, Brazil lost its composure after falling behind and defender Felipe Melo was ejected in the 73rd minute for stomping on the leg of Arjen Robben.

The Dutch made the championship match in 1974 and '78, lost both, and rarely have lived up to their talent in other World Cups. They did this time, helped by an own goal off the head of unfortunate Felipe Melo that brought them into a 1-1 tie in the 53rd.
I think Hans and Virginia are smiling today as well.

Just because it reminds me of how nice most of Western Europe looks ...

The Big Smear

I've been warning about this since I started this blog. The Left will try to do to us what they did to the Vietnam Generation - make us out to be damaged goods worthy of only pity.

They will smear us and try to marginalize us.

Don't let them. Don't support The Dry Land. The fact the USO is supporting this makes me want to throw up.

Friday, July 02, 2010

Fullbore Friday II: MOH Edition

BZ.
A soldier who served in Afghanistan could be the first living recipient of the Medal of Honor since the Vietnam War.

News outlets in and around Cedar Rapids, Iowa, have reported that Staff Sgt. Sal Giunta, who is from that area, is believed to be the soldier being considered for the nation’s highest valor award. Giunta is currently stationed in Vicenza, Italy.
...
Giunta’s heroic actions are chronicled in a new book titled “WAR,” by Sebastian Junger.

A specialist at the time, Giunta deployed with the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team for its June 2007 to August 2008 tour in Afghanistan.

According to Junger’s book, late on Oct. 25, 2007, Giunta and his fellow soldiers from B Company, 2nd Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment, were on their way back from a major operation when they are ambushed by the enemy.

Giunta was the fourth soldier from the front; Sgt. Josh Brennan was walking point, according to “War.”

The enemy fired machine-gun and small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades from such close range that the Apache attack helicopters overhead were unable to help the soldiers on the ground.

“First Platoon is essentially inside a shooting gallery,” Junger wrote. “Within seconds, every man in the lead squad takes a bullet. Brennan goes down immediately, wounded in eight places.”

As the battle progressed, Giunta “sees two enemy fighters dragging Josh Brennan down the hillside. He empties his M4 magazine at them and starts running toward his friend,” according to the book.

“Giunta jams a new magazine into his gun and yells for a medic. Brennan is lying badly wounded in the open and Giunta grabs him by the vest and drags him behind a little bit of cover.”

Brennan doesn’t survive surgery, Junger wrote.

Giunta later talks to Junger about his actions. “I did what I did because that’s what I was trained to do,” he told Junger. “I didn’t run through fire to save a buddy – I ran through fire to see what was going on with him and maybe we could hide behind the same rock and shoot together. I didn’t run through fire to do anything heroic or brave. I did what I believe anyone would have done.”
Greyhawk has more.

Time to redeploy Michael Steele

He is wrong on both tone, fact, and history. This is inexcusable. He should resign or be fired.

From William Kristol's open letter,
... speaking as RNC chairman at an RNC event,
"Keep in mind again, federal candidates, this was a war of Obama's choosing. This was not something that the United States had actively prosecuted or wanted to engage in." And, "if [Obama] is such a student of history, has he not understood that you know that's the one thing you don't do, is engage in a land war in Afghanistan?"
Here is the video from The Hill.


Politicizing this war based on false information makes him just as bad as the Leftist Moonbats.

Here are the facts; our present course in AFG was charted during the Bush Administration. Full stop.

Fullbore Friday

From our bud Derb - a reminder, in a quote from a few years ago.
When the barrage lifts

... , July 1, is the ... anniversary of the first day of the Battle of the Somme, the bloodiest day in the history of the British Army. They took 60,000 casualties, of whom nearly twenty thousand were killed.

The Tommies were to get out of their trenches and advance across No Man's Land towards the enemy trenches. This maneuver was to be preceded by an artillery barrage on the enemy lines.

The following is from Paul Fussell's 1975 classic The Great War and Modern Memory:

Every day still the Times and the Telegraph print the little "In Memoriam" notices — "Sadly missed," "Always in our thoughts," "Never forgotten," "We do miss you so, Bunny" — the military ones dignified by separation from the civilian. There are more on July 1 than on other days, and on that date there is always a traditional one:
9th AND 10th BNS., K.O.Y.L.I. — To the undying memory of the Officers and Men of the above Battalions who fell in the attack on Fricourt (Somme) on July 1, 1916. "Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts."
B.H. Liddell Hart, who was in the 9th Battalion of the King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry, explains. Just before the Somme attack, "the officers assembled in the headquarters mess, in a typical Picardy farmhouse. Recent strain between the commanding officer and some of the others led to an embarrassing pause when the senior company commander was called on to propose a toast to the C.O. On a sudden inspiration, he raised his glass and gave the toast with the words: 'Gentlemen, when the barrage lifts'."

The battalion attacked with some 800 men. Twenty-four hours later its strength was 80 men and four officers.





To understand the British military from Churchill to today - you need to know the Somme. As Churchill said,
..it was at Somme, the hinge of popular opinion on the nature of war changed and forever altered our perceptions of war.

Thursday, July 01, 2010

Overdue; let's break the seal at last ...

Good. Very good.
The Pentagon has recommended that the White House consider awarding the Medal of Honor to a living soldier for the first time since the Vietnam War, according to U.S. officials.

The soldier, whose nomination must be reviewed by the White House, ran through a wall of enemy fire in Afghanistan's Korengal Valley in fall 2007 in an attempt to push back Taliban fighters who were close to overrunning his squad. U.S. military officials said his actions saved the lives of about half a dozen men.

Diversity Thursday

Could Diversity have been part of Fowler's problems? No, you say! Well, let's look at just a bit of the report.
41. NAVINSGEN Concern. In August/September 2008, the hosted a group of senior female Sailors and a few female officers at a Women’s Labor Day Retreat in quarters. The purpose of this 3-day event was to foster exchanges of ideas and information on issues impacting women in the Navy. During the Retreat, expended $1,613 (including $289.50 for the service of alcoholic beverages) on a combination of catered meals in quarters and restaurant meals. The Superintendent approved this event as beneficial to accomplishing the mission of USNA.

42. ASN(FM&C) Comments and Analysis. There is no evidence of any relationship between the mission of USNA and the hosting of a retreat for a few select senior female service members to discuss issues impacting women in the Navy. There is no evidence that the resolution of women’s issues and fostering diversity falls within the duties of the or that the retreat was an appropriate way of handling these duties. Moreover, a retreat with catered meals and alcohol for the attendees does not appear, based on the information provided, to be reasonably justified as necessary to carry out those functions.

43. VADM Fowler’s Written Comments.
Navy Leadership expects the Naval Academy to lead on many issues involving the advancement of women in the officer corps. The Academy has spent significant resources to be the example of how gender relations should be taught and conducted at the Academy and by extension throughout the Navy. Congressional testimony by experts credits our Sexual Assault programs to be the best among America’s universities. The funds in question here were, therefore, expended because they were necessary to carry out part of the Academy’s function to advance women in the officer corps. As one of the in our Navy, my has been very involved with women’s history month, women’s symposia, and women’s policy for many years. is often asked by the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy or the Chief of Naval Personnel to attend or lead efforts to improve the mission readiness of women in our Navy.

With the support of CNP and CNO’s special assistant for diversity, my volunteered to hold a in own home over a weekend with who volunteered to pay their own way to the event. There was no lodging cost for this event since opened home on a weekend for them to stay. Most of the attending had disappointments with the Navy, and this group of midshipmen, enlisted, and officers, shared their experiences in a relaxed environment to discuss the issues on their hearts.
The end goal was to encourage females to stay in the Navy and seek senior leadership roles in the Navy. The women left with a renewed sense of engagement. Two went on Individual Augmentation and one is negotiating to stay in the Navy and come to the Naval Academy as Senior Enlisted Leader.
44. NAVINSGEN Conclusion. We commend the and the Naval Academy for their commitment to women’s issues and this novel approach to sorting through them for the benefit of the individuals involved and the Navy; however, we are not convinced that the same result would not be achieved without these expenditures. We view the incurrence of these expenses as simply desirable, not necessary. We agree that retention is an implicit mission of every Navy leader and organization, but believe that it can be pursued without unnecessary entertainment expenses and without service of alcoholic beverages. Therefore, the use of gift funds was not justified.
Arrggghhhhh!!! Diversity is thick as fleas in this IG report. Just go to page 58 for more.
175. DOD and Navy guidance is that NAF funds are to be used exclusively for the general welfare of the beneficiary population of the NAFI, in this case the Brigade of Midshipmen and the active duty population of USNA. NAF funds are not authorized to be used for “programs and initiatives that support the overall mission of the Naval Academy,” as the Superintendent asserted [after the fact] in his NAF policy memorandum of February 2009. That assertion is born of the misperception that DOD and Navy guidance on such expenditures does not apply to USNA. Recruiting is an authorized function of USNA and integral to its mission, but it is not something that can be categorized as being for the general welfare of the Brigade of Midshipmen and the active duty population of USNA. Therefore, NAF funds may not be spent on recruiting.
176. While the underlying rationale for the Destiny contract was to provide products that would improve recruiting of minorities in order to meet CNO diversity goals, there is a NAF connection in that one of the Destiny products was also a replacement video for the one being shown at the Visitor’s Center, a NAF operation. Therefore, NAF funds reasonably could be expended for that video, but not for other video products exclusively classified as recruiting tools, such as the TV spots. To the extent that NAF funds were expended for these recruiting products, they were misspent, in violation of DOD and Navy NAF policy. The amount of NAF funds expended on the project overall was $3,694,952; however, we did not attempt to determine what portion of that total represented the amount misspent, as that would require an extensive cost-accounting audit of the contract.

Improper Advance Payments
177. Mr. Parsons and had no authority to pay Destiny more than $1 million in advance of the execution of a contract between the Government and Destiny for video production services. Doing so put the Government at risk and without written contractual recourse, should Destiny have failed to deliver. Per 31 USC § 1501, the recording of a Government obligation requires a valid contract. Likewise, disbursements to vendors require contracts, invoices, and certifications, and they are not made unless justified by those underlying documentary requirements. In this case, Mr. Parsons simply ordered up the payments via e-mail, and made the payments, because Mr. Parsons told him to and because he knew they were in support of something that was a very high priority with the Superintendent. By making these improper payments, they violated 31 USC § 1501, because there was no valid contract to obligate the Government. As well, they violated the basic obligation of public service in that they failed to “protect and conserve Federal property [NAF funds]” and misused those funds “for other than authorized activities.” [5 CFR § 2635.101(b)(9)]

Unauthorized Commitments
178. Allowing Destiny to come aboard USNA and film for two weeks without benefit of a valid contract created an unauthorized commitment, which is prohibited by DOD and Navy NAF contracting regulations and by the Standards of Ethical Conduct [5 CFR § 2635.101(b)(6)]. Resolution of such violations requires issuance of a valid contract, if justified by a ratification process. In this instance, a contract was issued, but without benefit of having been justified by a formal ratification process. Again, as with the advance payments, the Government was placed at risk, with no written contractual recourse. As well, there is some question as to whether the Government entered into a “valid contract” with Destiny, as no person authorized to bind the Government contractually in the amount of the contract ever signed an agreement with Destiny.

179. When Mr. Parsons negotiated a $980,000 addition to the Destiny contract and authorized Destiny to do the work without benefit of a valid contract modification, that, too, was an unauthorized commitment. In this instance, there was no ratification process and no contract modification was ever issued. Yet, when Mr. Parsons sent e-mails directing payments to Destiny, made those payments, too, without benefit of a valid contract modification. These payments were also made in violation of 31 USC § 1501, as no valid contract modification existed to obligate the Government.

Other Contract Shortcomings
180. USNA’s NAF contracting function is a seat-of-the-pants operation, and Mr. Parsons’ and warrants, if they had them, should be revoked. No one will ever know if the cost of the Destiny contract was reasonable, because the “contracting officer” made no effort to make that determination. He signed the contract because Mr. Parsons told him to sign it. He didn’t ensure a legal review, because Mr. Parsons told him the JAG said it was good to go. The contract that was signed by . was a commercial contract, which did not incorporate any standard Government clauses, as DOD and Navy NAF procurement policy require for NAF contracts. At the time he signed the contract, procurement authority was limited to contracts of $25,000 or less. When Mr. Parsons separately negotiated an additional $980,000 of work for Destiny, the contract was never modified to incorporate those requirements, yet also made those payments.
While I am at it, being that all the sports obsessed football-uber-alles guys are running up and down the blogosphere with foam-flecked emotional diatribes that Fowler's problems had nothing to do with football .... I have decided to return fire.

With facts. From the IG report.

First, our buddy from the WaPo, Dan de Vies give a good Executive Summary,
It didn't occur to me until I interviewed a 2010 academy graduate late Tuesday that many of the questionable (or merely questioned) expenses involved football.
...
Here are a few of the many passages in the report that reference football:

". . . the complainant alleged that senior USNA staff members improperly received large numbers of complimentary tickets to home football games for their personal use . . . "

" . . . At home football games, USNA hosted up to 100 Sailors and Marines, each of whom received an emblematic ball cap, which ranged in price from $9.95 to $15.95 . . . "

" . . . The expenditure of $157,000 to purchase an 18-wheel tractor trailer truck for USNA's football team . . . "

" . . . Annual expenditures of $400,000 or more for USNA sponsored Tailgate events at football bowl games over the past six years . . . "

The academy's defense rests, in part, on the notion that the football program a) is beloved and b) generating considerable revenue.

(Little-known fact: a lot of big football programs lose money.)

Many of the expenses were deemed appropriate by naval investigators, who stopped short of judging whether they were excessive. Others, including many of the transactions involving the off-the-books account, were found to be "extravagant and wasteful."

The midshipman who called me would not speak for attribution, because he remains attached to the academy. He said he and his classmates enjoyed the lavish tailgate parties but came to realize "that a lot of money was being spent on the football team."

He said the Mids were particularly rankled by reports of annual steak dinners for the team, a privilege not shared by the rest of the brigade.

"When people saw extravagant spending for a special group, as opposed to the brigade as a whole, we started asking questions," he said. "We'd like to have steak dinners, too."
Here are some of the un-edited bits quoted without commentary - just a small part. Do a search of the report for "football" and you will be flooded. I think this is enough though. If you need more, here it is.
129. Given that the NAF Contingency Fund was unauthorized and improper, all of the expenditures of funds deposited to the account were also improper on their face. Further, notwithstanding the arguments of Messrs. Parsons and to the contrary, we do not agree that all of those expenditures legitimately could have been paid with NAF from NABSD’s normal operating accounts. Many would have been classified as misuses of NAF, and others, even if technically justifiable, were extravagant and wasteful. The primary argument against them is they are contrary to DOD and Navy NAF policy established pursuant to 10 USC § 2783 in that they were for the benefit of individuals or groups (e.g., NABSD employees, Deputy for Management and other senior USNA personnel, NAAA employees, football coaches’ wives and families, NAGA members, etc.), rather than for the general benefit of the beneficiary population of NABSD’s mission, the Brigade of Midshipmen and the active duty population of USNA.

130.
The relationship between the NAAA and USNA makes it difficult to maintain the proper arms-length relationship that is required between a Government entity and a private, non-Federal entity. In the matter of the handling of sponsorship funds raised by NAAA, the overarching Navy guidance on NAF sponsorship funds was ignored. For NABSD to have accepted the NAAA payments as sponsorship funds directly, written agreements, legal reviews, appropriate disclaimers, etc., were required. None of those requirements, however, were met. Therefore, the NAAA payments should have been treated as gifts to the Navy, and given the size of each check, they should have been processed for acceptance by the Undersecretary of the Navy.

131.
The impropriety of the NAAA payments was further compounded when their intended purpose, i.e., the offsetting of expenses incurred by NABSD for putting on Midshipmen Tailgates at bowl games, was ignored and they were diverted to the many other uses documented above in the recitation of the facts of this allegation. Add to this a clear violation of the Miscellaneous Receipts statute, which occurred when Government funds in the form of the NAAA payments were deposited in a bank (the NFCU) and spent at the direction of , generally with the knowledge and approval of Mr. Parsons. While we do not question that these individuals always had what they believed were the best interests of the Navy, USNA, and NABSD and its employees in mind, they nonetheless acted in a reckless and irresponsible manner.
Who warned you about the dangers of the Diversity Industry and D1 Football OCD? It can cost you more than just your good name.
Whether Naval Academy Superintendent Vice Adm. Jeffrey L. Fowler, a target of a federal investigation into an improper slush fund, can retire with all three stars on his collar remains to be seen, the Navy's chief spokesman said yesterday.

Fowler is slated to step down in early September, and Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates is to review his case and "determine grade" of retirement, said Rear Adm. Denny Moynihan, the Navy's top public affairs officer.
You're welcome.
UPDATE: You can find Professor Bruce Fleming's latest thoughts via an interview he did at WYPR here.