Friday, August 17, 2012

National Security Should Trump Politics

Recently, a group of retired Special Operations and Intelligence professionals banded together as a self-proclaimed watchdog group called OPSEC. They released a trailer, then a full 22 minute-long documentary about the dangers of exposing national security secrets for political gain.

In response, another alleged watchdog group, Media Matters for America (MMfA), and their "Senior Fellow" called those former special operators as well as the current ones, "gutless".

MMfA is anything but a "watchdog" group. If they were, their primary job would be to expose any falsehoods reported by any media outlet instead of being a socialist propaganda tool that attempts to obfuscate facts and deny those biases that are exposed by, FOX News, and other media outlets. In his statement, MMfA's "Senior Fellow" did nothing to expose any bias or untruth. He expressed a biased opinion that was based upon no facts and no empirical data. It was emotive rhetoric, not a reasonable assessment.

Members of OPSEC responded accordingly to MMfA's claims. In addition, I issued two challenges to that individual.

The full documentary from OPSEC is linked below. It is 22 minutes well spent regardless of which side of the political aisle your personal ideology may reside.

National Security Policy is a political issue. Debates on the subject let citizens know how each candidate intends to keep our country free and secure. However, keeping our great republic free, secure, and prosperous is NOT a political issue. It is a mandate to all federal elected officials. That is must be done is not an opinion. It is a constant, a fact, hard reality.

The facts demonstrate that Obama, or those within his administration such as Valerie Jarrett, have violated OPSEC. They have violated national security. If those in uniform had done the same, they would face court martial or worse. The names Aldrich Ames and Robert Hansen come to mind when considering leaks done by the current administration. Both of those men were convicted of espionage and treason against the US.

Speakers in the video make several key points. I admit my political ideology lends to a level of bias in my articles. However, on the subjects of national security and national defense, my views are largely apolitical. the views I express are based upon my real life experiences in that real world where there are people who want to destroy America. the threats are real. I have seen them. I have seen the face of hate up close and personal, with just a desk between us. This is not politics. It is reality.

Any news release, speech, or casual conversation needs to be guarded. Those of us "in the know" learn how to avoid telling those without proper clearance and access, and "need to know" those mission critical bits of information. Even peripheral details that seem insignificant can be put together, tipping our hand, exposing our assets, and putting our people and their families at risk. For those who doubt that there are those capable of doing so, I must advise you that I not only did just that for 15 years, I taught others how to do it. If there are those in our forces whose job it is to do so, you can bet that our enemies have those who do (or aspire to do) the same.

In explaining security levels and impacts to my younger soldiers, I used an atomic bomb analogy. If For Official Use Only or Confidential information is accidentally (or worse, intentionally) leaked, it can be the same as a 500 KT bomb dropped on your mom's home town. A Secret level bit of info is a 1 MT bomb dropped on her block. A leak of TS level info is a 5 MT bomb on your mother's house. What is the difference? In all three cases, your mother is most likely vaporized. In the first case, she may survive the initial bomb, but will die of radiation poisoning within a week (and ti will be even more painful).

Some of the information leaked over the past three years amounts to drafting death warrants on some of our SPECOPs personnel, our Intelligence personnel, their families, our sources around the world, and their families. In fact, information leaked by the current administration led to actions taken against one of those who assisted our Special Operators in that eventual operation against bin Laden.

Obama did not kill Usama. In fact, in giving his "OK" on the mission, he set it up so he could take credit if it went well, but could claim ignorance if it was botched. Obama never worked in the intelligence field. Obama never served in the US Military. Obama was not involved in any form of operational, strategic, or tactical planning. In fact, Valerie Jarrett advised him to not use personnel, but to do a surgical strike instead. The truth is that US Military Intelligence and CIA personnel have been tracking bin Laden since the late 90s. Given bin Laden's random nature and previous leaks during the Clinton Administration, it took that long to pin HVI #1 down long enough to take action. On VJ's advice (it's obvious she has no international relations of intelligence background), that sort of a strike a few blocks away from a Pakistani Army camp would have been an international incident of epic proportions that could have put us into yet another war.

"Loose Lips Sink Ships". Al-Qaeda Reads the NEW YORK TIMES, too. 17% of the illegals entering Arizona from Mexico come from the Middle East, with at least one in ten of those aligned with Al-Qaeda or some other terrorist group that wants to destroy the US. They sit at Starbucks and listen to people talk. This is the reality of the world we live in.

The security of our nation and protecting the families of those who serve to guard and defend it are not issues for political maneuvering. They are not props for political juggling acts and campaign stunts. They are precious things that must be guarded and protected. Regardless of political affiliation, like the members of OPSEC, I will openly chastise anybody who uses these things as political props thus placing our country in jeopardy.