Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Military Justice and The Bradley Manning Verdict

A U.S. military court-martial has convicted Intelligence Analyst, Army Private Bradley Manning, on charges of espionage "...for leaking U.S. secrets to WikiLeaks, but found him not guilty of a more serious charge of aiding the enemy, a charge that could have carried a life prison sentence..." According to the "Voice Of America:"
"...Manning faced a total of 21 criminal charges in connection with his release of more than 700,000 U.S. documents to the anti-secrecy website. The documents included secret diplomatic cables and classified military reports from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan..."
Reportedly, the defense argued that Manning did not know that the information he leaked, would have wound up in the hands of "the enemy," and he was therefore acquitted of the principal charge, which could have given him the death penalty.

The verdict is the verdict, but I would be remiss if I did not point out that Bradley Manning was an intelligence analyst.  Not only does such a position require extensive security clearances, there are training requisites which require a person in that position to get extensive training on security matters, especially in the handling and processing of intelligence data. A foot soldier that is deployed is cautioned via briefings of "Operational Security (OPSEC) about not disclosing any information to families and relatives about deployment locations, destinations, mission purposes, etc.

It is highly unlikely that Manning was spared any training in security matters, given the access he had to intelligence information, so it is at the very least perplexing that he would be acquitted of the charge of "aiding the enemy."

Realistically he could not have convincingly invoked being ignorant of the fact that the information he disclosed might possibly wind up in the hands of U.S. enemies. But that is precisely what he did, and the Judge apparently bought it.

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

The Conflict Mongers (Part One)...

Conflict Mongers

You might have heard of the "agent provocateur," an agent whose mission is to covertly join an organizaion and make its members commit illegal acts in order to compromise the target organization, getting its members arrested, and sent to jail. But there is another agent, whose purpose is much broader, and in some cases encompasses and includes the Agent Provocateur.

Conflict Mongers specialize in creating conflicts. They get you and your friend to have a conflict. Joe, a conflict monger, who has worked to gain your confidence, tells your friend Bill, that you said Bill was an idiot. Then Joe comes to you and tells you that Bill made a pass at your wife. The result: You and Bill fight.

The Conflict Monger craft is not limited to personal relationships. Nations, political organizations, weapons dealers, international bankers, use Conflict Mongers to profit from the conflicts they create.

Weapons dealers incite two sides of a political equation to go to war, so that they can profit from arms sales to both sides.

International bankers can profit from such a conflict by financing both sides to go to war and then profit from the resulting "reconstruction" period after the war.

Financial and Capital manipulators will tamper with the stock market to create the rise and fall of stocks and bonds, and reap the benefit of that manipulation.

In the intelligence field, it is common to find on both sides of a political equation, Conflict Mongers working feverishly to create chaos inside the enemy camp. An organization with internal conflict is much easier to conquer or control, than one that can muster a united front against its enemies.

In an example much closer to home, you will see Conservative social network web sites, sometimes in conflict with each other. To the uninitiated it may seem that one side has attacked the other, and that the other is merely defending itself. Upon closer examination you might find, however, that a Conflict Monger has created a conflict between both sides, in order to destroy that web site or to destroy both web sites by "stoking the fires."

And one might have also experienced a web site's members in conflict amongst themselves. Again we may find a Conflict Monger agent at work.

While an "Agent Provocateur" would work to get a web site to publish copyrighted material in its blogs, post messages on the web site blogs or forums that included hate speech or threats of violence, and perhaps even go as far as to get one of its members to commit to doing something illegal, a Conflict Monger would go further and create antagonism within a group and even possibly between two or more groups with the aim of destroying the credibility of the group, or even to cause the group to cease to exist.

And there is nothing that says that the Agent Provocateur(s) and the Conflict Monger(s), might be one and the same, and is working to both, compromise the group by tricking it into doing something illegal, AND to create conflict between a web site's members and between different groups.

It is particularly difficult on the internet to know who is who, because the internet provides a degree of anonymity, and lends itself to such subterfuge. It is here that one has to remain alert to these "agents," because the internet, social networking sites, and related communications functions and devices are a major part of Conservative advancement within the last year.

After Obama succeeded in winning the 2008 election, his effort was heralded to have flourished via the internet and has been touted as a major influence in his victory. Although it might have had a significant impact, it pales in comparison to the evolution of Conservative efforts via the internet. Conservative advances via the internet have not received much attention in the National Socialist propaganda media, but without a doubt, Conservative organizational accomplishments dwarf the results of its opponents.

The National Socialists cannot claim a result of nearly two million participants in the Washington D.C. demonstrations, nor the "rapid deployment" of Conservatives to a call to action at the steps of the Nation's capitol, when Michelle Bachman organized a "House Call" earlier this year.

The combination of the internet social networking, along with Talk Radio, and the Conservative forums on Fox News has created a formula that is serving at this time, Conservative causes and purposes.

This makes Conservative efforts a major target of its opponents. Just as the White House chose to attack Fox News, because it would not give in to the National Socialist agenda, It would be foolish not to expect infiltration and attempts at disruption of Conservative Social Networks, web sites, and blogs.

It might not be easy to spot an Agent Provocateur or a Conflict Monger, but if one is alert, one might discover such a culprit busily at work in your group by observing the following.

1. Understand the efforts and purpose of the group or web site that you join.

2. Observe the communication of its members. Which member's communication does not align to the purposes of the group?

3. Which member does not abide by the stated, published rules or policy of the group?

4. Which member is communicating negatively against other members, without just cause?

5. Which member is carrying on a "whispering campaign" about other members or the web site.

6. One of the best ways to "show up" or expose Conflict Mongers is to create an organization or group that strictly adheres to its purpose, and promotes and advances those purposes accordingly. Anyone who deviates from the purpose can be noticed or can become obvious by being the one whose actions show that he is in conflict with the organization and its purposes. "Ye shall know them by their deeds." Sound familiar?

7. And then there is that one member that just does not understand, and is constantly asking you to explain things to them, doesn't seem to be able to get with the program, or needs to be "baby-sat." While there may be novices, who do need a certain amount of attention, how hard can it be to be a Conservative? One either is or isn't. One tells them to get with the program: Educate them with references and keep them in your radar. But be wary. That member might just have another agenda.

8. One might also know "the connections" of a member to members of the oppostion. While there might be a professional connection, to what extent does that association affect their affiliation to your group?

9. Take notes. If someone says or does things that do not align to the purposes of your group, note them down. These may show up later in another venue on another web site being promoted by someone under a different name. These notes can become a "trail of illogic" that might lead you to thwart an attempt to disrupt your activities.

10. Take responsibility for your self and your group. The success of Conservative Groups is the result of the actions of its members. It is YOU who are responsible for your group, and you can make a significant difference in its success.

11. If a conflict does arise, and/or if one is in full swing already, do not promote it or advertise it. This only feeds the conflict and detracts from your group's agenda or cause. The more you repeat information about the conflict, the more you promote or enhance it. Figure out a way to handle it quickly, resolve it, identify the Conflict Monger, and get on with your work.

It is important to know also what is a Conservative, a Liberal, a Socialist, a Libertarian, a Rino, a Moderate, a Blue Dog Democrat, and an Independent. The differences are significant.

Around the time of the 2008 election, many so-called Conservative Social Networks were created, and while these served as the basis for the eventual flourisihing of a flurry of Conservative activity on the internet, some of the original web sites advertised as being "Center-Right" sites, seeking to create a coalition of members ranging from "moderate" Republicans to Conservative stalwarts.

Since that time the differences in the various factions have become more obvious, particularly in the national political arena, and membership has shifted within and between those groups. Accordingly members of the opposition have capitalized on the differences between the groups to cause friction.

The point of this article is not to promote the "umbrella" or "big tent" idea of a broad based coalition of "center-right" groups to defeat the National Socialist Democrats. It is to alert Conservative Groups to the situation that their groups might be attacked from within as well as from outside of the group by Conflict Monger agents, seeking to cause discord with the intent of rendering their efforts ineffective.,

Principled Conservatives, who will not compromise on core issues simply for the sake of obtaining a vote in favor of a particular issue, and who refuse to make "deals with the devil" will prosper by continuing to build and further establish grass-root efforts, magnifying and expanding the causes of the Conservative Cultural Revolution, and work to point out the exact differences that will create our Renaissance of Freedom.

It is not only prudent to say, "THIS is what we stand for," and demand that those purposes be promoted, preserved and advanced, it is necessary to our survival as a nation that we make it clear that the folly of the issues of other groups, their political correctness, their lack of a foundation of Life based on moral and ethical principles, will result in a deterioration of their cultures, as is evident today across this country and throughout the world.

It is optimum to point out our PURPOSES, which define us, and what those purposes are based on, and to use this as a flag and a rallying point. The gray area of "coalition," of political correctness, of inclusion, of compromise with our principles only results in a watered-down culture unable to survive the hard realities of dangerous and determined enemies.

When we are clear about what we stand for, clear about uncompromising with our basic purposes, we will advance accordingly in our Cause. The deeds of the National Socialists have illuminated the differences between "us" and "them," and we must now trumpet those differences to the political and cultural gray areas.

Is our side the side of political cronyism, back room deals, hidden agendas, outright or covert bribery, sell-outs to the highest bidder, permissive and promiscuous cultural values, materialism, decadence, and the inability to answer attacks against our nation because we are too wishy washy to call an enemy an enemy?

The answer is NO WE ARE NOT.

We are not the Conflict Mongers, nor the Agent Provocateurs, and refuse to be the enablers of such agents of doom. What then are we? We are the Vanguard of Freedom, the advance of the Conservative Cultural Revolution, and we will bring about a Renaissance of Freedom.

And lest you fall prey to the Conflict Mongers, learn to identify them and render them ineffective against your purpose and your Cause.

ABOUT Vanguard Of Freedom


Van Guard of Freedom

"Van Guard"

The Name.  Yes, it's a nom de plume, but I chose it from my dubious past, from a joke someone made about myself and a "van."  It is significant only to me.

Additonally, however, I chose that name to honor those I served with during my "tumultuous" Navy years (in my opinion) 1969-1973.  For the most part I was stationed in the Washington D.C. area in "communications".  My intention was to join the Navy to become a Corpsman and serve with the Marines.  The Marines had no "medics" and I had dared to major in "pre-med" in college.  The Navy, however, had other plans for me.  Apparently the Navy knew more about my communications aptitude than I did.  Eventually I discovered that my "big mouth," which got me into considerable trouble (I started as an E-3 and remained that way throughout my four years in "the Nav"), could be channeled into something constructive, and to borrow a quip from the notorious radio talk show host, Neal Boortz, (paraphrased, of course) I turned a nasty personality disorder, into a positive activity.

I do understand that some would take issue with my definition of "positive."

The Navy was more than generous to me, despite my recalcitrance, (or perhaps in some cases, because of it) and, I choose to believe, rewarded me with invaluable training in Communications "operations" and "security," and I acquired considerable insight consequently, and I emerged from that adventure, quite blessed and privileged with the experience to be able to work eventually in The Media, specifically in the promotion and marketing areas (in the beginning) and then in the local T.V. News Reporting, Editing and On-Air/Announcing fields.

I have since ventured to become a publisher of a local community newspaper. It was a small venture, in which I also assumed the status of editor, reporter, writer, photographer, etc.  Ask any editor of a small community newspaper and they will tell you that at one time or another, they have had to assume all the "hats" (or most of them) to keep operating.

It's my opinion that upon taking sides in any issue, one loses approximately fifty percent of one's audience (the opposition). I have been known to lean toward Conservatism, but I would say a more apt description is that I have sworn to uphold our Constitution, and that I work towards that ideal as deliberately and as fervently as I am able to, and so I will actively challenge encroachments and expeditions into the subversion of our Founding document(s). And since, of late, there is an abundance of encroachment, I find myself being, oft times, deliberate and fervent in what I write.  And so I choose to "write" without the approval or "applause" of at least half "the audience."

I invite you and implore you to join me in being fervent and deliberate in honoring our men and women in uniform, and to nourish, develop, and express your own passion(s) in defense and in the advancement of our Liberties, if you are not yet "in the fight."

And if you are, then please count me in as one beside you in the efforts, not just to keep alive the Flame of Freedom, but to help build that nation that will "ensure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

Thank you for being a Vanguard of Freedom.