Author Topic: *Fort Hood FF was the "Pearl Harbor" to initiate IBM'S TOTAL ENSLAVEMENT OF VETS  (Read 20521 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Please read this thread:

IBM Global Movement Management: Commerce, Security, Resilience, Slavery, Terror
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=190901.0

In 2005, IBM created a white paper to petition congress for unprecedented authority to implement a total enslavement grid. The co-author presented the plan to congress in 2008. On 11/5/2009 (same day as the Guy Fawkes False Flag exposed by Webster Tarpley) Major Hasan was the only patsy blamed for the false flag which ushered in a new department dealing with controlling US Soldiers and Veterans. The person heading that program is a collegue of Major Hasan's on the Homeland Security Task Force and the co-author of the white paper by IBM...

Statement by Jonah J. Czerwinski
Senior Fellow, Homeland Security, IBM Global Leadership Initiative
Managing Consultant, IBM Global Business Services

to the
Committee on Homeland Security
Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection United States House of Representatives
for the hearing entitled
“Partnering with the Private Sector to Secure Critical Infrastructure:
Has the Department of Homeland Security Abandoned the Resilience-based Approach?”

May 14, 2008

http://homeland.house.gov/SiteDocuments/20080514143358-14814.pdf

Do you know what this guy is doing right now? HE IS IN CHARGE OF CONTROLLING AND ENSLAVING OUR MILLIONS OF VETERANS!!!!!!!!! I SHIT YOU NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Jonah J. Czerwinski
Director, VA Innovation Initiative

http://www4.va.gov/VAI2/VAi2XAboutLeadership.asp
Jonah J. Czerwinski is Special Assistant to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs for Budget and Management, and directs the VA Innovation Initiative. He assists the Secretary on a range of strategy and policy issues regarding VA budget, management, and transformation. He advises senior VA leadership in identifying, articulating, and disseminating strategic guidance and management priorities.
Prior to joining VA, Mr. Czerwinski was Managing Consultant, Global Business Services at IBM, and was a Senior Fellow in IBM’s Global Leadership Initiative. Jonah also served as a Senior Advisor for the Center for the Study of the Presidency, a Senior Fellow at the Homeland Security Policy Institute of the George Washington University, and a member of the Board of Directors at the Partnership for a Secure America. Before joining government, he served on the Task Force on Leveraging National Laboratory S&T Assets for 21st Century Security. He is the co-author of “Global Movement Management: Strengthening Commerce, Security, and Resiliency In Today’s Networked World.” Mr. Czerwinski graduated magna cum laude from Salve Regina University (A.B., Philosophy), and earned his M.B.A. from the University of Virginia Darden Graduate School of Business.



THE ENTIRE INITIATIVE IS FILLED WITH NAZI PSYCHOPATHIC CYBERNETIC/PHARMACEUTICAL/BEHAVIORAL MODIFICATION-CONTROL FREAKS!!! ALL THE INSANITY OCCURING TO OUR VETERANS WHO GET USED AND ABUSED UP AND DOWN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THIS TOTALLY BACK ASSED INSANE INITIATIVE!!!!!!!!!!



VAi2 is a department-wide program that brings the most promising innovations to VA’s most important challenges to create visionary solutions in service to Veterans.

Mike O’Neill - Senior Advisor
[Cybernetic Marketeer, Venture Anti-Capitalist...and total psychopath to take on this role of enslaving our soldiers via profiteering via cybernetic enslavement. HIS MAIN JOB - GETTING AN IBM BRAIN CHIP IN EVERY US SOLDIER!]
As Senior Advisor to the Director of VAi2, Mike drives the operational aspects of the programs that make up the Innovation Initiative. Mr. O’Neill has been involved in the commercialization of new products and technology as an executive in both startups and large companies, and as an early stage venture capital investor. He was Senior Vice President of AMI Semiconductor’s Digital ASIC and Communications Products division, and continued to run the division following ON Semiconductor’s acquisition of AMI. At semiconductor startup Philsar Semiconductor, he served as Vice President of Sales, Marketing & Business Development through Philsar’s acquisition by Conexant Systems. Mr. O’Neill led a number of seed and early stage investments as a General Parter with Kodiak Venture Partners. He started his career in engineering and management positions with IBM. Mr. O’Neill received a Bachelor’s and Master’s degree in Electrical Engineering from Virginia Tech.

Thomas Gates - Deputy Director, VA Innovation Initiative
[He is an investment bankster who can get huge investments into funding this insane initiative of cybernetic fascism using our veterans as a Bilderberg experiment.]
Thomas Gates is a Presidential Management Fellow and Management Analyst in the Office of Policy and Planning, and works full-time on the VA Innovation Initiative.  Prior to joining Veterans Affairs, Mr. Gates was Assistant Secretary of Technology in Virginia.  His focus in Virginia was on Health Information Technology and improving performance and productivity in government operations.  In this role, he served as the Director of Virginia’s Productivity Investment Fund, a multi-million dollar program designed to fund innovative projects to lower costs and improve quality in state operations. Mr. Gates graduated with honors from the College of William and Mary (B.A., Government), and earned his Master’s in Public Policy from Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.

Smitha Dante -Management Analyst
[She is the pharmaceutical fascist whose main job is to use our soldiers in illegal trials of the most insane depopulation and zombie creating vaccines, pills, food additives, etc.]
Smitha Dante is a Presidential Management Fellow and Management Analyst in the Veterans Health Administration, and she works full-time on the VA Innovation Initiative. Prior to joining the team, Ms. Dante completed her J.D. at the University of Virginia School of Law, where she conducted in-depth research into healthcare policy as part of her studies. She was also a member of the Editorial Board of the Virginia Journal of Law and Technology. Before beginning law school, Ms. Dante was a management consultant at ZS Associates. Her focus there was on the sales and marketing of pharmaceutical and biotechnology products in all stages of development. Ms. Dante graduated from Princeton University (A.B., Chemistry), and received a Master’s in Chemistry at UC Santa Barbara.

Matthew G. Robinson - Program Analyst
[His job is profiling of the veterans to put them into compartmentalized groups/lists, behavioral modification systems, and slave computation/logistics.]
Matt Robinson is a Program Analyst in the VA Office of Policy and Planning, and a full-time member of the VAi2 team. He graduated with honor from the Michigan State University Honors College (B.A., Political Science), and is currently pursuing his Master's in Public Policy at the George Washington University's Trachtenberg School. Before beginning his studies at GW, Mr. Robinson served as an AmeriCorps Volunteer in Service to America (VISTA) at the Helping Hand of Goodwill Industries in Kansas City, where he worked to develop a new Job Hunters' Program for individuals who are homeless, on probation/parole, or receiving public assistance.



MORE INFORMATION:

None of these people served or ever saw combat as far as I can see!

Also, Czerwinski was on the same Homeland Security Task Force with Major Hasan who was the only patsy blammed for the Fort Hood False Flag. Did this iniative have something to do with the Fort Hood False Flag?

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2009/11/09/terrorist-hasan-was-bush-homeland-security-advisor/
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
Co-author of that same document uncovered was W. Scott Gould



http://www1.va.gov/opa/bios/bio_gould.asp


W. Scott Gould was nominated by President Obama to serve as Deputy Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and subsequently confirmed by the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee on April 2, 2009.

As Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Gould serves as the chief operating officer of the federal government's second largest department, responsible for a nationwide system of health care services, benefits programs and national cemeteries for America’s veterans and their dependents.

Prior to his appointment to the VA, Gould was Vice President for public sector strategy at IBM Global Business Services where he focused on strategy and innovation.
Previously, he was Chief Executive Officer of The O’Gara Company, a strategic advisory and investment services firm, and Chief Operating Officer of Exolve, a technology services company.

The former Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary for Administration at the Department of Commerce, Gould has also served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Finance and Management at the Treasury Department. As a White House Fellow, he served in the Export-Import Bank of the United States and in the Office of the White House Chief of Staff. Gould was also appointed by the Governor of Massachusetts to conduct a financial and operational work-out of the city of Chelsea, the first municipality in the state to be placed in receivership by the general court.

Gould is a veteran of the U.S. Navy, having served at sea aboard the guided missile destroyer Richard E. Byrd. As a Naval Intelligence reservist, Capt. Gould was recalled to active duty for Operation Noble Eagle and Enduring Freedom. After President Obama’s election, he served as co-chair of the VA Agency Review Team for the Presidential Transition Team.

A fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration and former member of the National Security Agency Technical Advisory Group and the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Board of Overseers, Gould has been awarded the U.S. Department of Commerce Medal, the U.S. Department of Treasury Medal and the Navy Meritorious Service Medal. He is coauthor of “The People Factor: Strengthening America by Investing in the Public Service,” published by Brookings Institution Press in 2009. He holds an AB degree from Cornell University and MBA and Ed.D. degrees from the University of Rochester. Gould is married to Michèle A. Flournoy. They have three children and reside in the Washington, D.C. area.


Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Co-author of that same document uncovered was W. Scott Gould



http://www1.va.gov/opa/bios/bio_gould.asp


W. Scott Gould was nominated by President Obama to serve as Deputy Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and subsequently confirmed by the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee on April 2, 2009.


Appointed 3 days before Fort Hood, wow!
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
Gould is married to Michèle A. Flournoy. They have three children and reside in the Washington, D.C. area.


Hey, that's the same lady who wrote this on September 12, 2001 for CSIS!





Michèle Flournoy was confirmed by the U.S. Senate as the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy on February 9, 2009.  She serves as the principal staff assistant and advisor to the Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Defense for all matters on the formulation of national security and defense policy and the integration and oversight of DoD policy and plans to achieve national security objectives.
Prior to her confirmation, Ms. Flournoy was appointed President of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) in January 2007.  Before co-founding CNAS, she was a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where she worked on a broad range of defense policy and international security issues.
Ms. Flournoy previously served as a distinguished research professor at the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University (NDU), where she founded and led the university’s Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) working group, which was chartered by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop intellectual capital in preparation for the Department of Defense’s 2001 QDR.
Prior to joining NDU, Ms. Flournoy was dual-hatted as Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Threat Reduction and Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy.  In that capacity, she oversaw three Policy offices in the Office of the Secretary of Defense: Strategy; Requirements, Plans and Counterproliferation; and Russia, Ukraine and Eurasian Affairs.
Ms. Flournoy was awarded the Secretary of Defense Medal for Outstanding Public Service in 1996, the Department of Defense Medal for Distinguished Public Service in 1998 and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s Joint Distinguished Civilian Service Award in 2000.  She is a former member of the Defense Policy Board and the Defense Science Board Task Force on Transformation.
Ms. Flournoy earned a bachelor’s degree in social studies from Harvard University and a master’s degree in international relations from Balliol College, Oxford University, where she was a Newton-Tatum scholar.

biography retrieved from:
http://www.defense.gov/bios/biographydetail.aspx?biographyid=172




http://web.archive.org/web/20010914205137/www.csis.org/features/nyterror_flournoy.htm


 Ms. Michèle Flournoy
Senior Fellow
CSIS International Security Program

U.S. Security Implications

September 12, 2001

In the wake of this heinous terrorist attack, the U.S. government needs to take action on several fronts: (1) determining who is responsible for the attack, (2) developing options for an effective response (this should draw on the full range of military and non-military means at our disposal), (3) building an international coalition and strategy to fight terrorism over the long haul, and (4) making it crystal clear that acts of terrorism against the United States will fail to meet their ultimate objective - the United States will not be intimidated into disengaging from the world or shirking its leadership responsibilities. It is also imperative that this administration take the time it needs to develop the most effective retaliatory response possible - one that not only responds decisively to this particular act of terrorism, but that also advances our longer-term strategy to combat international terrorism writ large.

Yesterday, our national security paradigm changed. We no longer have the luxury of thinking about U.S. national security primarily in terms of protecting American allies and interests abroad; we need to give far more serious attention to protecting the U.S. homeland against a range of asymmetric threats, including terrorism. In the weeks and months ahead, it is critical that we conduct a comprehensive interagency assessment of our homeland security requirements. President Bush should direct that this assessment be undertaken; if he does not, Congress will likely demand it. Such an assessment should identify and prioritize shortfalls across the board and should produce a comprehensive plan to address these shortfalls in the upcoming budget cycle. This will mean broadening the discussion of homeland defense beyond missile defense to include everything from airport security, to enhancing our intelligence capabilities, to critical infrastructure protection, to defense against biological and chemical weapons, and more.

As the meaning of this paradigm shift sinks in, the American public may be willing to trade some civil liberties for enhanced security. They may, for example, be more willing to put up with more extensive and intrusive security checks at airports in exchange for a greater degree of safety. For the U.S. government, this shift should force us to break out of the organizational stovepipes that have constrained our ability to address threats like terrorism in the past. We must have a new level of interagency cooperation and a new way of doing business.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
WTF is this shit? Color by numbers? Hey NSA/NRO/CIA/FBI... You do not need $80 Billion a year on intelligence! A few keyboard punchers flicking toe cheese have just exposed all the fricking terrorists who hate us for our freedoms. Now read the constitution 500,000x as punishment for committing fraud against the American people!
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Wow, CSIS gives us the solution for Fort Hood, how nice of them:

http://csis.org/files/publication/100304_Nelson_GrowingTerroristThreat_Web.pdf



The Tragedy at Fort Hood

More than any other event explored here, the shootings at Fort Hood captured America’s attention and stirred fears of domestic extremism. By now, the facts of the case are well known: on No- vember 5, Major Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly entered the Soldier Readiness Center at Fort Hood and opened fire, killing 13 and wounding 30. Within days, details began surfacing about Hasan’s contact with radical Yemeni cleric Anwar al-Awlaki. In 2001, the two met at a Falls Church, Vir- ginia, mosque, where al-Awlaki was the imam. Beginning in December 2008, they exchanged as many as 20 e-mails; this was around the same time that Charles E. Allen, former undersecretary of homeland security for intelligence and analysis, warned in a speech that al-Awlaki “targets U.S. Muslims with radical online lectures encouraging terrorist attacks.”12 Authorities now suspect that Hasan’s contact with al-Awlaki may have spurred the former to adopt increasingly radical views on the acceptability of religious violence.13 Late last year, for instance, reports emerged that Hasan had asked al-Awlaki “whether killing American soldiers and officers is lawful” according to the dictates of sharia law.14

The FBI intercepted Hasan’s communications with al-Awlaki [A confirmed CIA operative who had dinner with the Secretary of the Army 2 months after 9/11/2001 as reported and verified by FoxNews], but investigators determined that the nature of the dialogue was consistent with the army psychiatrist’s research on Muslims serving in the U.S. military. These e-mail exchanges proved to be part of a larger set of missed signals on Hasan’s wavering stability. Another was his now-infamous 2007 lecture while on staff at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. During the presentation—which drew public rebukes from some colleagues—Hasan suggested that Muslim soldiers be diverted from service in Afghanistan and Iraq because fighting there might put them in the position of “hurting/killing believers unjustly.”15

These anecdotes suggest two important things about Hasan’s apparent path toward extremism. First, his communication with al-Awlaki seems to have facilitated his radical turn. So Hasan, like Zazi, may have come to adopt extremist violence through increased contact with a transnational intermediary already well known for his support for radical activity. Second, both the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars—and their implications for Islam and Muslims—weighed heavily on Hasan. This fact suggests that he may have been influenced by the stock al Qaeda narrative—that the West is at
war with Islam—as justification for his alleged actions.

12. Charles E. Allen, “Keynote Address at GEOINT Conference” (keynote address, GEOINT Conference, Nashville, Tenn., October 28, 2008), http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/speeches/sp_1225377634961.shtm.
13. Brian Ross and Rhonda Schwartz, “Major Hasan’s E-Mail: ‘I Can’t Wait to Join You’ in Afterlife,” ABC News/The Blotter from Brian Ross, November 19, 2009, http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/major-hasans-mail-wait-join-afterlife/story?id=9130339.
14. Associated Press, “Report: Hasan asked about killing troops in ’08,” MSNBC, December 24, 2009, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34579275/ns/us_news-tragedy_at_fort_hood/.
15. “Hasan on Islam,” Washington Post, November 10, 2009, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2009/11/10/GA2009111000920.html.

Research the author Rick “Ozzie” Nelson:


Exploiting the CIA Patsy who was a red teamer for the Times Square fizzle crap
Lessons from Faisal Shahzad
w/ Ben Bodurian
http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/05/20/lessons_from_faisal_shahzad

Audio: Interview with Rick "Ozzie" Nelson on Homegrown Extremism
http://csis.org/multimedia/audio-interview-rick-ozzie-nelson-homegrown-extremism

Richard "Ozzie" Nelson, Joins CSIS as Senior Fellow (one month before Fort Hood False Flag)
http://csis.org/expert/rick-nelson

Part of Open IntellAcademy® Faculty with the following cybernetics/CIA psychos, the whole organization is a CIA front "Education" organization:
http://intellacademy.com/courses/open-intellacademy/open-intellacademy-faculty/

Mark Lowenthal, President of the Intelligence & Security Academy (History of U.S. Intelligence, Introduction to U.S. Intelligence, Risk Awareness Intelligence ™, Homeland Security Intelligence) has served as Assistant DCI for Analysis & Production; Vice Chairman for Evaluation, National Intelligence Council; Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Staff Director, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI).  Dr. Lowenthal is the author of the standard college/graduate school textbook on intelligence, Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy, now in its 4th edition (CQ Press).  He also serves as an adjunct professor at the Johns Hopkins University.  In 1988, Dr. Lowenthal was the Grand Champion on the television quiz show Jeopardy!

R. Maxwell Baber (GEOINT 101) is Director of Academic Programs at the United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation (USGIF), managing accreditation of university Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) certificate programs and supporting related educational initiatives.  These initiatives include but are not limited to USGIF scholarships, the foundation’s GEOINT 101 course introducing fundamentals and history of geospatial intelligence, GEOINT tradecraft development, and expansion of geospatial learning in K-12 education. Dr. Baber received a Ph.D. in Geography from the University of Georgia in 1999 and an M.A. in Geography from Georgia State University in 1993. He has served in faculty appointments with the Master of Science in Geographic Information Systems program at the University of Redlands and Departments of Geography at Samford University and the University of Northern Colorado. He has developed and implemented a number of pedagogical geographic information science projects supported with funding from various sources including the National Science Foundation. He is a member of the U.S. National Committee for the International Cartographic Association (USNC-ICA), serves on the executive boards for the Cartography and Geographic Information Society (CaGIS) and the North American Cartographic Information Society (NACIS), and is a Fellow of the British Cartographic Society (BCS).

Robert Clark (TECHINT) has been chief of CIA’s Analysis Support Group and President and CEO of the Scientific and Technical Analysis Corporation.  He was an electronics warfare and intelligence officer for the USAF. As a private consultant, Dr. Clark continues to perform space systems threat analyses for the NRO and CIA.  He is the author of Intelligence Analysis: Estimation and Prediction; and Intelligence Analysis: A Target-centric Approach, now in its 2nd edition (CQ Press). His third book, Technical Collection of Intelligence, is due to be published in 2009.

Pierre Ghazal (Mid-East Cultural Intelligence) is the founder and director of the Rhode Island Center for Mid-East Studies.  Mr. Ghazal retired from the USAF as a Lt. Colonel.  He is the Adjunct Middle East and Arabic resident expert at the National Defense Intelligence College (NDIC)-Executive Program, Defense Intelligence Agency, where he also developed the predictive intelligence course.  He is also a guest lecturer at the Army JFK Special Warfare Center & School and the Foreign Service Institute of the State Department.  Colonel Ghazal served as the senior CENTCOM interrogator during Operations Desert Shield & Desert Storm and led the Coalition Forces’ Document Exploitation (DOCEX) efforts in Kuwait City. Colonel Ghazal was selected as the first Air Attaché to the US embassy in Damascus, Syria. He has also served as Deputy Director of Intelligence, USAF Electronic Systems Center, Hanscom AFB, Massachusetts.  Colonel Ghazal is a native speaker of Arabic and Aramaic.  His education includes a Baccalaureate in Arabic Literature, a Bachelors Degree in Political Science, and a Masters in International Relations.

Jason Healey (Intelligence Support to Cyber Conflict) is a senior consultant at Delta Risk and has worked cyber security policy, intelligence and operations from the White House to Wall Street.  Before coming to Delta Risk, he was an executive director for Goldman Sachs Asia, where he built their crisis management capability and managed business continuity.  Prior to that, as Director for Cyber Infrastructure Protection at the White House, he helped coordinate U.S. efforts to secure cyberspace and other elements of critical infrastructure.  Mr. Healey started his career as an intelligence officer in the U.S. Air Force.  During his time at HQ Air Force at the Pentagon, he coordinated all Air Force efforts to stand up the Joint Task Force – Computer Network Defense to be the first ever joint military cyber warfighting command.  He subsequently took over current intelligence and warning at the JTF during its first two years of operation.

W. George Jameson (Intelligence and the Law) spent 33 years as a lawyer at CIA, in many senior positions and across the entire range of intelligence activities: analysis, operations and Community affairs.  Mr. Jameson currently is a consultant on issues relating to intelligence and other national security matters and co-founded the Council on Intelligence Issues, a non-profit educational and service organization established to help provide legal and other assistance to CIA and other intelligence personnel.

Keith Masback (GEOINT 101) is the President of the United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation (USGIF).  He also is a member of the standing Intelligence Task Force of the Defense Science Board.  Prior to joining USGIF, he spent a combined 20 years as an officer in the U.S. Army and in government service, culminating as a member of the Defense Intelligence Senior Executive Service at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA).

Rick “Ozzie” Nelson (National Security Policy Process) is President of Fuel Consulting and a Senior Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where he focuses on counterterrorism, homeland security, and defense and intelligence-related issues. He is a former Navy helicopter pilot with over twenty years operational and intelligence experience, including assignments at the National Security Council, the National Counterterrorism Center, and the US Special Operations Command. He is operationally trained in naval helicopter strike warfare has deployed throughout the world and flown in support of numerous operations. He also is an adjunct lecturer at Georgetown University, where he teaches courses on homeland security and counterterrorism.

Kathleen Reilly (The Intelligence Budget Process) has been a professional staff member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) since 2001.  She has been the principal staffer for all aspects of the CIA program (budget and operations) and has previously monitored the Military Intelligence Program (MIP).  She also served as an assigned staff member on the House Appropriations Committee’s Select Intelligence Oversight Panel (SIOP), which coordinates between authorizers and appropriators.  She has also served in the U.S. Navy on active duty and, presently, in the Reserves.  Her Navy assignments have included electronic warfare, anti-submarine operations, counternarcotics and logistics.  Ms. Reilly  was in the first group of three women to perform aerial Intelligence Surveillance & Reconnaissance operations for the Navy in Desert Shield/Storm and was personally hand selected by Secretary of Defense for first-ever assignment of women destined to combat operations afloat (SECDEF waiver before Combat Exclusion).  In 2008, she was selected as the Navy Reserves’ Top Sailor of the Year.  Ms. Reilly has a B.S. in Aviation Management.

Maria Velez de Berliner (Risk Awareness Intelligence™) is a recognized expert on the identification and analysis of regulatory, political, economic, social and cultural risk worldwide, with a specialization in Latin American issues, including security and terrorism. Dr. Velez de Berliner has both government and private sector experience and has been published widely in a variety of journals.  She has taught global risk for the U.S. Special Operations command.

Also on the staff of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness (or: How to stage and profit from false flags)
http://www.ncdp.mailman.columbia.edu/daythree/day3bios.html


What is very important to note is that CSIS is actively involved in controlling the narrative concerning the evolution of the Terrorist Industrial Complex's expansion of false suspects into their surveillance and analytics grid. They continue to say that more and more normal behavior should be added into the profiling of "threat assessments" for the IBM sense and response auto-genocidal control systems.

Here is their basic mindset when it comes to defining homegrown terrorists:

Juan Zarate, another co-author and a former deputy National Security Advisor for counterterrorism, said one motivating factor is the call to Islamic identity and that emotions were one of the many paths to radicalism. Zarate, now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), noted that Marc Sageman, a former CIA officer, had written about “Jihad Cool.”
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2010/06/terrorist_motivations_shooting.php


Get that...many paths, Jihad cool...you can see where this is going. No longer is it good enough to take out terror training camps (which we built). Now we have to monitor everything 24/7 to watch out for the "many paths".
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
Joe Sestak who was the "maverick" that defeated Arlen Specter in the primary was the first director of "Deep Blue" a post-9/11 think tank.  Ozzie Nelson was a "team leader" under that same "Deep Blue" think tank.  LMAO, so much for throwing out incumbents like Specter.  Now you have a super-duper pro-NWO anti-gun, pro-choice, pro cap and trade, pro-GWOT stooge taking Specter's place!

http://sestak.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13&Itemid=2
Quote
Joe also served in President Clinton's White House as the Director for Defense Policy on the National Security Council. After 9/11, he was selected to serve as the first Director of "Deep Blue," the Navy's anti-terrorism unit where he worked to establish new strategies for the Navy to fight the Global War on Terror.

http://csis.org/expert/rick-nelson
Quote
Other career assignments have included counterterrorism team leader in Deep Blue, the navy’s operational think tank created after September 11

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Joe Sestak who was the "maverick" that defeated Arlen Specter in the primary was the first director of "Deep Blue" a post-9/11 think tank.  Ozzie Nelson was a "team leader" under that same "Deep Blue" think tank.  LMAO, so much for throwing out incumbents like Specter.  Now you have a super-duper pro-NWO anti-gun, pro-choice, pro cap and trade, pro-GWOT stooge taking Specter's place!

http://sestak.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13&Itemid=2
http://csis.org/expert/rick-nelson

Sestak definitley will be working hard to push the CSIS/IBM's "Homegrown Terrorism BS" Bill!
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline redeux

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 751
  • I challenge any NWO member to a fist fight
WTF is this shit? Color by numbers? Hey NSA/NRO/CIA/FBI... You do not need $80 Billion a year on intelligence! A few keyboard punchers flicking toe cheese have just exposed all the fricking terrorists who hate us for our freedoms. Now read the constitution 500,000x as punishment for committing fraud against the American people!

lmao.......
Protect your manhood, demand Testosterone..........

Anti_Illuminati

  • Guest

Hey, that's the same lady who wrote this on September 12, 2001 for CSIS!

Quote

Michèle A. Flournoy

This will mean broadening the discussion of homeland defense beyond missile defense to include everything from airport security, to enhancing our intelligence capabilities, to critical infrastructure protection, to defense against biological and chemical weapons, and more.

As the meaning of this paradigm shift sinks in, the American public may be willing to trade some civil liberties for enhanced security. They may, for example, be more willing to put up with more extensive and intrusive security checks at airports in exchange for a greater degree of safety. For the U.S. government, this shift should force us to break out of the organizational stovepipes that have constrained our ability to address threats like terrorism in the past. We must have a new level of interagency cooperation and a new way of doing business.
I bet they seriously never figured that we would figure out that they were the actual terrorists.

Her statement is outright treason against the Constitution, which is punishable by death. Not to mention being an accomplice to assist radical, Nazi fascist cyberneticist revolutionaries who overthrew the previously legitimate government.

Look at this document she helped craft:  http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/0510_eurodefensereport.pdf


Look at the website this came from:

http://www.comw.org/rma/fulltext/allied.html

The RMA was the primary motive for them carrying out 9/11--because the RMA is a facet of cybernetics.  The military and intelligence agencies had this cybernetic model applied to them as a model to then apply to all businesses, and then overlay onto society itself.  it is the distillation of knowledge and lessons learned from past tyrannies all condensed and perfected into what they seek to make a tyranny that is impossible to overthrow.

Anti_Illuminati

  • Guest
Look who Michèle A. Flournoy is affiliated with.  Many of the people who planned the 9/11 false flag, and every other false flag in recent history.  Probably most everyone on this list is guilty of treason and should be investigated.

http://outerdnn.outer.jhuapl.edu/PastSeries/tabid/96/Default.aspx


Past SERIES

Video, audio, presentation, and bulletized note files are available for all Rethinking Seminars beginning wiht the 2005-2006 Series.  No recordings were made during the first series but bulletized notes and some presentation materials are available for those seminars.
Rethinking Series Archives

    * Rethinking the Principles of War (2004-2005)
    * Rethinking the Future Nature of Competitions & Conflict (2005-2006)
    * Rethinking the Relation Between Economics, Resources, Technology & National and International Security (2006-2007)
    * Rethinking Future Elements of National & International Power (2007-2008)
    * Rethinking the Foundations of the National Security Strategy & QDR (2008-2009)
    * Rethinking US Grand Strategy and Foreign Policy (2009-2010)






______________________________________________________________________________
http://www.ndu.edu/inss/symposia/jointops01/agenda.html
http://www.ndu.edu/inss/symposia/jointops01/bios.html#Blechman

DR. BARRY M. BLECHMAN

Dr. Blechman is the founder of and President and CEO, DFI International, a Washington-based research, analysis, and consulting firm.  The DFI family of companies includes two operating units:  Among other services, DFI Corporate Services supports strategic business planning in the private sector, including market assessments, partner and competitor analyses, and advice on mergers and acquisitions.  Its clients include major aerospace, telecommunications, and information companies, as well as financial institutions.  DFI Government Practice conducts research for US government agencies on a variety of political/military, strategic, force structure, and operational issues.  Its clients include the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the military services, the Joint Staff, and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.  During the 1960s, he worked as an operations research analyst for the US Army and for the Center for Naval Analyses.   In 1971, he became a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, where he headed the defense analyses staff and co-authored Brookings’ annual analysis of the federal budget, Setting National Priorities.

In 1976, Dr. Blechman joined the Carter Administration transition planning staff at the Office of Management and Budget.  The next year, he was confirmed by the Senate as assistant director of the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency.  Among other assignments, he served as deputy chairman of the US delegation for negotiations on arms transfers and as head of the Agency’s policy planning staff.  After leaving the government, he was affiliated at various times with the Carnegie Endowment, the Roosevelt Center, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and the Johns Hopkins University Foreign Policy Institute. Dr. Blechman chairs the Henry L. Stimson Center, a non-profit research and educational organization, which he co-founded in 1989.  He also serves on the board of the Academy of Political Science.   His published works on defense issues include the widely respected study of politico-military operations, Force Without War, and the more recent, The Politics of National Defense.  He graduated from Queens College, earned a M.A. in political science from New York University, and received a PhD in international relations from Georgetown University.  He has taught at The Johns Hopkins University, Georgetown University, and the University of Michigan.  He has organized or served on numerous study groups and government commissions, most recently on the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, chaired by Donald Rumsfeld.  He is currently a member of the Defense Policy Board and the Deterrence Concepts Analysis Group.

DR. STEPHEN A. CAMBONE

Dr. Cambone was confirmed as Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy in July 2001.  From January to July 2001, he served as The Special Assistant to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense.  Prior to that, he was the Staff Director for the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization from July 2000 to January 2001.  Dr. Cambone was the Director of Research at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University from 1998 to 2000.  Before that, he was the Staff Director for the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, a Senior Fellow in Political-Military Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) from 1993 to 1998, the Director for Strategic Defense Policy in the Office of the Secretary of Defense from 1990 to 1993, the Deputy Director, Strategic Analysis, SRS Technologies (Washington Operations) from 1986 to 1990, and a Staff member in the Office of the Director, Los Alamos National Laboratory from 1982 to 1986.  He graduated from Catholic University with a B.A. degree in Political Science, an M.A. and a Ph.D degree in Political Science from Claremont Graduate School.  

LIEUTENANT GENERAL BRUCE CARLSON, U.S. AIR FORCE

General Carlson is Director, Force Structure, Resources and Assessment, J-8, the Joint Staff, Washington, D.C.  As director, he supports the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in force structure requirements; studies, analyses and assessments; and in the evaluation of military forces, plans, programs and strategies.  As secretary of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council, he coordinates Joint Staff actions in support of the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and represents the interests of the commanders of the combatant commands in requirements generation, acquisition and planning, and programming and budgeting.  General Carlson was commissioned in 1971 after completing the University of Minnesota's Air Force ROTC program as a distinguished graduate.  He has held various assignments in flying units. Staff assignments have included positions at Tactical Air Command, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, and the offices of the Secretary of the Air Force and Secretary of Defense. Additionally, he commanded the Air Force's stealth fighter wing, the 49th, at Holloman Air Force Base.  He is experienced in multiple aircraft weapons systems, is a command pilot with more than 3,000 flying hours, and has combat experience in the OV-10.

VICE ADMIRAL ARTHUR K. CEBROWSKI, U.S. NAVY (RETIRED)

Admiral Cebrowski is the Director, Force Transformation in the Office of the Secretary of Defense.  He retired from the U.S. Navy in 2001.  Previously, he served as President, U.S. Naval War College.  Admiral Cebrowski has commanded Fighter Squadron 41 and Carrier Air Wing EIGHT, both embarked in USS NIMITZ (CVN 68). He later commanded the assault ship USS GUAM (LPH 9).  During Operation Desert Storm, he commanded the aircraft carrier USS MIDWAY (CV 41).  Following promotion to flag rank, he became Commander, AMERICA Battle Group.  In addition to combat deployments to Vietnam and the Persian Gulf, he has deployed in support of United Nations operation in Iraq, Somalia and Bosnia.  His tours of duty have included service with the US Air Force; the staff of Commander-in-Chief, Atlantic Fleet; the staff of the Chief of Naval Operations on four occasions; and the Joint Staff as Director, Command, Control, Communication and Computers (J6).  Admiral Cebrowski holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Mathematics from Villanova University and a Master of Science Degree in Computer Systems Management from the Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA.  He has been a member of the CNO’s Strategic Studies Group and a Federal Executive Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

DR. PAUL K. DAVIS

Dr. Davis is a Senior Scientist and Research Leader at RAND and a Professor of Policy Analysis in the Rand Graduate School.  Dr. Davis holds a B.S. from the University of Michigan and a Ph.D. in chemical physics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.  He has worked at the Institute for Defense Analyses, the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, the Office of the Secretary of Defense as a senior executive, and at RAND--where he has served tours as project leader, program director, and corporate research manager.  Dr. Davis has published on defense planning, national military strategy, deterrence theory, cognitive models of decision-making, and advanced simulation.  He was editor and principal author of the 1994 RAND compendium, New Challenges in Defense Planning: Rethinking How Much Is Enough.  Most recently, he has written on strategy for DoD's force-transformation efforts, capabilities-based planning, and analysis for effects-based planning.  Dr. Davis is a member of the Naval Studies Board under the National Research Council and has served on numerous studies for it and the Defense Science Board.  

DR. JOSEPH J. EASH, III

Dr. Eash is Chief Scientist for computational social science modeling in the Center for Technology and National Security Policy, National Defense University.  Prior to his current position, he was Principal Research Engineer, Georgia Tech Research Institute.  He is also responsible for oversight of Advanced Concept Technology Demonstrations, Office of the Secretary of Defense, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Advanced Systems & Concepts).  Dr. Eash serves as the OSD Acquisition Technology and Logistics focal point for Joint Experimentation, Transformation, the Joint Advanced Warfighting Program, and Science and Technology Ttransition Initiatives.  From 1995 to 1997, he was Senior Vice President and Director of Applied Technology Programs, GRC International.  Between 1993 and 1995, Dr. Eash was President and CEO of SWL, Inc. (a subsidiary of GRC International).  He was Vice President, GRC International between 1992 and 1993 and was responsible for strategic planning and cross-divisional program development and investment.  Between 1987 and 1990 Dr. Eash worked at SRI International as Vice President, Systems Technology Division and Senior Vice President, Engineering Research Group.  Dr. Eash has also held  positions in the Air Force Office of Research, Secretary of the Air Force Space Systems, Satellite Data Systems Program Office, Air Force Systems Command, Air Force Director of Laboratories, Canadian Scientific and Technical Liaison Office, New York City Scientific and Technical Liaison Office, and the Air Force Weapons Laboratory.  Dr. Eash’s other activities include Chairman of the Platforms Panel of the Defense Science Board Study of Global Surveillance, Member of a sub panel of the Defense Science Board reviewing the potential for low observable technology in support of Special Operations Forces, Member of the Board of the David Sarnof Research Center, Member of the Board of DEVCO Corporation, and  Chairman of the technical advisory panel for Southwall Corporation.

MS. MICHÈLE A. FLOURNOY

Ms. Flournoy is Senior Advisor for International Security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), where she works on a broad range of defense policy and international security issues.  Previously, she was a Distinguished Research Professor at the Institute for National Strategic Studies at the National Defense University where she founded and led NDU’s QDR working group to develop intellectual capital in preparation for the Department of Defense’s 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review.  The group’s final report, QDR 2001: Options and Issues for the Next Administration, was published in November, and its book, QDR 2001: Strategy-Driven Choices for America’s Security, was published in May.  Prior to joining NDU, she was Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Threat Reduction and Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy.  She was the principal author of current “Shape, Respond, Prepare” defense strategy and led several critical efforts for the Department of Defense, ranging from the drafting of PDD-56 on managing complex contingency operations to various post-QDR assessments of U.S. military capabilities required to carry out the strategy.

Prior to joining the Department of Defense in 1993, Ms. Flournoy was a Research Fellow at the Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.  There she edited two volumes – one on U.S. nuclear weapons policy after the Cold War and another on managing proliferation – and directed the Avoiding Nuclear War Project.  She also served as the principal policy advisor to the Carnegie Commission on Reducing the Nuclear Danger.  Previously, Ms. Flournoy was a Senior Analyst at the Arms Control Association in Washington, DC, writing on a range of arms control issues.  In addition to two edited volumes, Ms. Flournoy has published dozens of articles on a variety of international security issues.  She has a B.A. in Social Studies from Harvard University and an M.Litt. in International Relations from Balliol College, Oxford University, where she was a Newton-Tatum Scholar.  She is a member of the Defense Policy Board, the Aspen Strategy Group, the Council on Foreign Relations International Security. She also served on the Defense Science Board Task Force on Transformation., the International Institute of Strategic Studies, and the Executive Board of Women in International Security. She also served on the Defense Science Board Task Force on Transformation.

MR. DAVID C. GOMPERT

Mr. Gompert became President of RAND Europe in January 2000.  He is a member of the RAND Europe Executive Board, Vice President of RAND and Chairman of RAND Europe UK.  Mr. Gompert was Vice President of RAND and Director of the National Defense Research Institute from 1993 to 2000.  During a leave of absence (1997-98), he was Distinguished Research Professor at the National Defense University and Visiting Professor at the United States Naval Academy.  From 1990 to 1993, he served as Special Assistant to President George Bush and Senior Director for Europe and Eurasia on the National Security Council staff.  He has held a number of positions at the State Department, including Deputy to the Under Secretary for Political Affairs (1982-83), Deputy Assistant Secretary for European Affairs (1981-82), Deputy Director of the Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs (1977-81), and Special Assistant to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (1973-75).  Mr. Gompert worked in the private sector from 1983 to 1990.  At Unisys (1989-90), he was President of the Systems Management Group and Vice President for Strategic Planning and Corporate Development.  At AT&T (1983-89), he was Vice President, Civil Sales and Programs, and Director of International Market Planning.  Mr. Gompert has published extensively on international affairs, national security policy, and information technology.  His books include Nuclear Weapons and World Politics, America and Europe:  A Partnership for a new Era (co-ed.), Right Makes Might:  Freedom and Power in the Information Age, Mind the Gap:  A Transatlantic Revolution in Military Affairs. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the Chief of Naval Operations’ Executive Panel, the Foreign Policy Association, Atlantik Bruecke, and the Board of Visitors of the U.S. Defense Department’s international schools.  Mr. Gompert holds a Bachelor of Science degree in engineering from the United States Naval Academy and a Master of Public Affairs degree from the Woodrow Wilson School, Princeton University.  

MR. ANDREW R. HOEHN

Mr. Hoehn is the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Strategy in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Threat Reduction.  He received a Bachelor’s degree in political science from Baldwin-Wallace College and a Master’s degree in public and international affairs from the University of Pittsburgh.  He has specialized in American foreign policy and national security affairs.  Prior to his current positions, he was the Principal Director for Strategy in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Requirements. He also has held staff positions in the Office of the Secretary of Defense focusing on strategy development and force planning.  Before joining government service, Mr. Hoehn was associate editor of the Marine Corps Gazette.  He has authored various publications on defense and security matters and has contributed to books on European and Latin American security issues.

MR. FRANCIS G. HOFFMAN

Mr. Hoffman is a national security affairs analyst with more than twenty years of policy and operational experience.  He is currently a strategic planner at the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory, Quantico, Virginia.  Prior to this position, Mr. Hoffman was appointed by the Secretary of Defense to the National Security Strategy Group to support the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century.  While serving on the Commission, he specialized in future military and security environment projections, strategic planning, military strategy, and organizational change.  He was the principal analyst and author for the Commission's homeland security and future military conflict assessments. Prior to his Commission appointment, Mr. Hoffman was the National Security Analyst and Director, Marine Strategic Studies Group, at the Marine Corps Combat Development Command, Quantico, Virginia.   From 1995 to 1999, he served as special assistant for national security affairs.  Just prior to this position, he served on the Professional Staff, Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces.  From 1983 to 1993, Mr. Hoffman served as an analyst at Headquarters, Marine Corps.  From 1978-1983, he served as an active duty Marine Infantry Officer in a variety of line and staff positions in the Second and Third Marine Divisions.  He received his commission from the NROTC program at the University of Pennsylvania in 1978.  In addition to supporting a number of government reports, Mr. Hoffman has authored Decisive Force: The New American Way of War, (Praeger, 1996), co-edited Maneuver Warfare Science (Quantico, VA 1998), and served as editor of the Marine Corps' Concepts and Issues for seven years.  He has published over 100 articles and reviews on national security strategy, defense economics, and military history, and lectured at most of this country’s professional military education schools. Mr. Hoffman holds degrees from the Wharton Business School, George Mason University, and the U.S. Naval War College.

DR. ANDREW F. KREPINEVICH, JR.

Dr. Krepinevich. is Executive Director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, an independent policy research institute established to promote innovative thinking about defense planning and investment strategies for the 21st century.  He also served as a member of the Department of Defense’s National Defense Panel. An accomplished author and lecturer, He has written extensively on a variety of security related issues, to include articles published in The National Interest, Issues in Science and Technology, Armed Forces Journal, Joint Forces Quarterly and Strategic Review, among others. He is also the author of a number of monographs, including The Air Force of 2016, A New Navy for a New Era, Missed Opportunities:  An Assessment of the Roles and Missions Commission Report, and The Bottom-Up Review: An Assessment.  Dr. Krepinevich received the 1987 Furniss Award for his book The Army and Vietnam, a critical assessment of the service’s performance during the war.  He gained extensive strategic planning experience in national security and technology policy through his work in the Department of Defense’s Office of Net Assessment, and by serving on the personal staff of three secretaries of defense.  During this period, he wrote the Defense Department's seminal assessment of the emerging revolution in military affairs. He has taught a wide variety of national security and defense policymaking courses while on the faculties of West Point and George Mason University, and currently lectures at The Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, and Georgetown University.  In 1993, following an Army career that spanned twenty-one years, Dr. Krepinevich retired from military service to assume the directorship of what is now CSBA.  A graduate of West Point, he holds MPA and PhD degrees from Harvard University.  He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

GENERAL JAMES P. McCARTHY, USAF (RETIRED)

General McCarthy is the Olin Professor of Political Science at the U.S. Air Force Academy.  Prior to retiring from the U.S. Air Force, he held a number of operational command positions including a fighter squadron in Vietnam, two bomber wings, 8th Air Force and Deputy Commander in Chief, U.S. European Commander where he had day-to-day responsibility for all US forces in Europe.  While in Danang, Vietnam, he commanded the 4th Tactical Fighter Squadron and flew 152 combat missions.  He served in a number of assignments in the Pentagon, including the Director of Legislative Liaison with the U.S. Congress.  General McCarthy served on the National Defense Panel created by Congress to assess the Quadrennial Review.  The panel developed defense policy for the post-Cold War era and offered alternative approaches to Congress.  He is also a member of the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board, a member of the Defense Policy Board advising the Secretary of Defense; co-chaired the Defense Science Board's task force on Information Architecture for the Battlefield, and was the vice-chairman of the DSB on Intelligence Support for Bosnia Operations.

MAJOR GENERAL WILLIAM L. NASH, U.S. ARMY (RETIRED)

Appointed Director of the Council on Foreign Relation’s Center for Preventive Action in April 2001, General Nash leads the Council’s efforts to work with governments, international organizations, the business community and non-governmental organizations to anticipate international crises and to provide analysis and specific recommendations for preventive action.  Last year Bill Nash became one of the few Americans to lead a civilian as well as military peacekeeping operation.  At the request of the United States government, he became the Regional Administrator for the United Nations in northern Kosovo with headquarters in Mitrovica.  Prior to going to Kosovo, he was the Director of Civil-Military Programs at the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs in Washington, DC.  After his retirement from the Army in 1998, he was a Fellow and Visiting Lecturer at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.  General Nash commanded the United States Army’s 1st Armored Division from June 1995 to May 1997.  In late 1995, he became the Commander of Task Force Eagle, a multinational division of 25,000 soldiers from 12 nations charged to enforce the military provisions of the Dayton Peace Accords in northeastern Bosnia-Herzegovina.  He was a platoon leader in Vietnam and an armored brigade commander in Operation Desert Storm.  General Nash is also chairman of the advisory council to The Fund For Peace’s Regional Responses to Internal War program, and a member of the policy committee of the United Nations Association of the United States of America.

AMBASSADOR ROBERT BIGGER OAKLEY

Ambassador Oakley is a Distinguished Research Fellow at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University.  In 1992, Ambassador Oakley became President of C&O Resources, Inc. after a 34-year career in the United States Foreign Service.  From 1988 to 1991, he served as U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan.  Before that he had served as Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Middle East and South Asia on the staff of the National Security Council.  From 1991 to 1992, he served as Coordinator of the Special Program in Middle East Peacekeeping and Conflict Resolution, at the United States Institute of Peace (USIP), and remains associated with special projects of the USIP.  From 1992 until 1993, he served as the President's Special Envoy for Somalia.  He began his long and varied Foreign Service career in Khartoum, Sudan in 1958.  He served successively in the Office of the United Nations Political Affairs, Department of State; U.S. Embassy, Abidjan, Ivory Coast; U.S. Embassy, Saigon, Vietnam; U.S. Embassy, Paris, France; U.S. Mission to the United Nations; and the U.S. Embassy, Beirut, Lebanon; and Senior Director for Middle East and South Asia on the staff of the National Security Council. Before being sent to Zaire as U.S. Ambassador, he served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs.  After his assignment in Zaire, he was assigned as U.S. Ambassador to Somalia.  He then returned to Washington and was appointed Director of the State Department  Office of Combating Terrorism.  He was seconded as a Fellow to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace before joining the National Security Council Staff.  Ambassador Oakley earned a B.A. degree in Philosophy and History from Princeton University.  After military service as a U.S. Naval Intelligence Officer in Japan, he attended graduate school at Tulane University.

DR. MICHAEL O'HANLON

Dr. O'Hanlon is a Fellow in the Foreign Policy Studies Program at the Brookings Institution. Dr. O’Hanlon expertise is in Arms treaties; Asian security issues; civil warfare; European security issues; military technology; missile defense; peacekeeping operations; U.S. defense strategy and budget.  His most recent books include Defending America: The Case for Limited National Missile Defense (2001); Defense Policy Choices for the Bush Administration, 2001-2005 (2001); Winning Ugly: NATO's War to Save Kosovo (2000); Technological Change and the Future of Warfare (2000).  He has also been an Adjunct Professor at Columbia University's School of Public and International Affairs and Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University.  He was formerly a defense and foreign policy analyst in the National Security Division at the Congressional Budget Office.  He received his undergraduate training in Physics at Princeton University, where he also received a Master of Science in Engineering Degree and a Ph.D. from the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.  Between college and graduate school he spent two years in the Peace Corps stationed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central Africa (formerly Zaire).

MR. JOHN C. ROOD

Mr. Rood is Director for Proliferation Strategy, Counterproliferation, and Homeland Defense, National Security Council.  At the NSC, his responsibilities include the formulation, coordination, and implementation of policy on missile defense, and related arms control and nonproliferation matters.  Prior to coming the NSC, he served as Senior Policy Advisor to Senator Joh Kyl of Arizona.  In that position he worked on a broad range of defense and foreign policy issues, with an emphasis on missile defense, arms control, nonproliferation, export controls, and nuclear weapons issues.  His duties included drafting speeches and background memoranda, developing legislative strategy, and advising and preparing the Senator for votes and hearings.  Mr. Rood worked for Senatory Kyl for four years.  Prior to that, he held a variety of positions at the Central Intelligence Agency, including serving as the Nonproliferation Briefer where he supported the work of the NSC’s Nonproliferation and Export Controls Directorate, and as an analyst following missile programs in Third World countries.

BRIGADIER GENERAL JAMES B. SMITH, U.S. AIR FORCE

General Smith is Deputy Commander, Joint Warfighting Center, U.S. Joint Forces Command, Joint Training Analysis and Simulation Center, Suffolk, Virginia.  He is responsible for managing the joint force exercise and training development program, and for reviewing, coordinating, developing, publishing and applying the joint doctrine program. He also assists in planning and executing the joint task force commander and staff integration training, and contingency planning.  The general is a 1974 graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy.  He received a master's degree in history from Indiana University in 1975.  His aviation career includes 4,000 hours in the F-15 and T-38, including combat sorties during Desert Storm.  He commanded the 94th Tactical Fighter Squadron and 325th Operations Group.  His staff tours include duty as an action officer at Headquarters U.S. Air Forces in Europe and executive officer at Tactical Air Command. His joint experience includes serving as the CSAF chair at the National War College and as vice director of operations for North American Air Defense Command.  Prior to assuming his current position, the general served as commander of the 18th Wing at Kadena Air Base, Japan. The wing provided support air operations to the commander in chief of U.S. Pacific Command through Pacific Air Forces and 5th Air Force.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
I bet they seriously never figured that we would figure out that they were the actual terrorists.

Her statement is outright treason against the Constitution, which is punishable by death. Not to mention being an accomplice to assist radical, Nazi fascist cyberneticist revolutionaries who overthrew the previously legitimate government.

Look at this document she helped craft:  http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/0510_eurodefensereport.pdf


Look at the website this came from:

http://www.comw.org/rma/fulltext/allied.html

The RMA was the primary motive for them carrying out 9/11--because the RMA is a facet of cybernetics.  The military and intelligence agencies had this cybernetic model applied to them as a model to then apply to all businesses, and then overlay onto society itself.  it is the distillation of knowledge and lessons learned from past tyrannies all condensed and perfected into what they seek to make a tyranny that is impossible to overthrow.




Well this story is making more and more sense:

French generals taking command of the SAS

Britain and France to share nuclear secrets as Cameron and Sarkozy sign historic 50-year military agreement

Daily Mail
Tuesday 02 Nov 2010


# Britain to surrender testing of nuclear warheads from 2015
# Liam Fox denies deal will compromise British sovereignty
# Launch combined Joint Expeditionary Force of about 6,000 troops
# Britain and France to share aircraft carriers from 2020
# Share more intelligence, air-to-air refuelling and cyber-warfare capabilities
# Work more closely on counter terrorism, particularly on Channel Tunnel


Britain and France have signed a new entente cordiale today agreeing to unprecedented military cooperation including the joint testing of nuclear warheads.  Nuclear secrets - which have been preserved for five decades - will be shared under the plans. Britain will surrender testing of nuclear warheads which will be done at Valduc, near Dijon, from 2015. The Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston will instead focus on developing new technology. The ground-breaking agreement will even see French generals taking command of the SAS as part of a rapid reaction force.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,090
    • Git Ureself Edumacated


Death By Design: Science, Technology, and Engineering in Nazi Germany

http://www.pearson.ch/HigherEducation/History/Germany/1471/9780321276346/Death-By-Design-Science-Technology.aspx
Eric Katz

Description
Through a selection of primary and secondary sources, Death by Design examines the uses of technology during the Holocaust and  the specific ways in which scientists, architects, medical professionals, businessmen, and engineers participated in the planning and operation of the concentration and extermination camps that were the foundation of the “final solution.”  The book discusses the overriding intellectual, ethical, and philosophical implications of the Nazi's use of science and technology in their killing operations.

Features
Primary sources.  Individuals who witnessed the Holocaust first-hand-such as the engineers (Ch. 3). architects (Ch. 7), and doctors (Ch. 10) who participated in the building and running of the concentration camps, as well as individuals who survived internment in these same camps (Ch. 1)-give their accounts of the Nazi killing operations.  These primary sources allow students to “hear” the voices of perpetrators and victims, alike, and build their skills as critical readers and historians. Secondary sources.  Essays on the involvement of the SS (Ch. 11), IBM (Ch. 12), and Ford (Ch. 14) in the Nazi operations help students understand the role of business in the Holocaust.  Additional secondary sources-such as a critical look at the ethics of Nazi architect Albert Speer (Ch. 8 ) and essays considering the political and ethical values associated with technology (Chs. 5, 6, and 15)-prompt students to question the connections between Nazi science and technology and the current uses of science.  

A brief historical background introduction.  This essay provides students with a concise history of the Nazi regime.

Chapter introductions.  Each chapter introduction provides context for the following reading.  The author of the selection is identified, as is the time and place in which he/she was writing and any other historical background information that might facilitate a deeper understanding of the material.

Discussion questions.  Appearing at the end of each chapter, discussion questions provide the basis for in-class discussions or essay assignments, by encouraging students to bring a more critical eye to the readings.


Section I:  Details of the Killing Operations

1.  The Killing Process at Auschwitz-Birkenau - Miklos Nyiszli.
From Auschwitz: A Doctor's Eyewitness Account. Nyiszli, a Hungarian Jewish doctor employed by the infamous Nazi doctor of Auschwitz, Joseph Menegle, describes the step-by-step killing procedure of the gas chambers and crematoria at the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp.

2.  Design and Development of the Gas Chambers and Crematoria in Auschwitz - Franciszek Piper. “Gas Chambers and Crematoria”. Piper presents a detailed history of the five gas chamber and crematoria complexes, and the provisional temporary gas chambers, that were built and operated at Auschwitz-Birkenau from 1941 through the end of 1944.

3.  Engineering Mass Murder at Auschwitz - Jean-Claude Pressac with Robert-Jan Van Pelt. From “The Machinery of Mass Murder at Auschwitz”. Using the latest source material recently acquired after the fall of the Soviet Union, Pressac and van Pelt provide a history of the engineering firms that were involved with the SS in the design and construction of the gas chambers and crematoria at Auschwitz-Birkenau.



Section II:  Technology, Management Policy, and Politics: General Issues

4.  Technology and Politics in Totalitarian Regimes: Nazi Germany - Paul Josephson.
From Totalitarian Science and Technology. Josephson presents an overview of the relationship between technology and political power in Nazi Germany, showing how the Nazis used technology to advance the political ideology of the Third Reich, while banning technologies that seemed “Jewish” or ideologically suspect.

5. Nazi Ideology, Management, and Engineering Technology in the SS - Michael Thad Allen. From The Business of Genocide: The SS, Slave Labor, and the Concentration Camps. Allen examines the ways in which Nazi ideology influenced management and engineering decisions in the industrial operations of the SS.  By examining several SS managers and engineers, including Chief of Engineering Hans Kammler, he discusses the reasons why technological professionals aligned themselves with the evil aims of Nazism.



Section III:  The Role of Architectural Design in Nazi Germany

6.  Architectural Aesthetics and Political Ideology in Nazi Germany - Paul Jaskot.
“Architecture and the Destruction of the European Jews”. Art historian Jaskot focuses on the aesthetics of architecture as an example of the connection between political ideology and the development of technology in Nazi Germany.

7.  Architecture and Technology in Nazi Germany:  Memoirs - Albert Speer. From Inside the Third Reich: Memoirs. In these excerpts from his memoirs, Speer, one of the highest ranking officials in Nazi Germany during the war, discusses his role as Hitler's architect, the role of technical professionals and engineers in the operations of the Third Reich, and the connection between his training as an architect and his service to the goals of Nazism.

8.  Albert Speer: Ethics, Architecture, and Technology - Jack Sammons, Jr. “Rebellious Ethics and Albert Speer”. Sammons considers the case of Albert Speer as an example of ethics in the technological professions, and he argues that Speer betrayed the highest ideals of his craft--architecture--in his work to further the aims of the Nazi regime.



Section IV:  Medicine and Biology in Nazi Germany

9.  Genetic and Racial Theories in the Nazi War on Cancer - Robert N. Proctor.
From The Nazi War on Cancer. Proctor discusses how Nazi ideas of biological and racial determinism influenced research and industrial policy regarding the causes and cures for cancer.

10.   Medicalized Killing in the Nazi Death Camps - Robert J. Lifton. From The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide. In several selections from his book on the Nazi medical establishment, Lifton shows how the medical metaphor of the Jews as a disease in the German nation became the guiding principle for killing all undesirables in the Third Reich.  Medical professionals oversaw all the killing operations at Auschwitz, and used Jews (and other prisoners) as subjects in grotesque medical experiments.



Section V:  Engineering, Technology, and Business

11.  IBM in Nazi Germany - Edwin Black.
From IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance Between Nazi Germany and America's Most Powerful Corporation. In an excerpt from his controversial book, Black discusses the history of IBM's cooperation with the Third Reich and how IBM provided sophisticated information-managing technologies that the Nazis used in the labor camps, population censuses, and the armaments industry.

12.   The Crime of I.G. Farben: Slave Labor and Mass Murder in Nazi Germany - Joseph Borkin. From The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben: The Unholy Alliance Between Hitler and the Great Chemical Combine. Borkin examines the history of the giant petrochemical corporation I.G. Farben and its alliance with the SS in the building of a slave-labor factory on the grounds of Auschwitz and in the manufacture of the Zyklon B gas that was used in the gas chambers.



Section VI:  Concluding Ethical Considerations

13.  Technological Evil: Cultural Values in the Holocaust-Eric Katz.
“On the Neutrality of Technology: The Holocaust Death Camps as a Counter-example”. This chapter provides a philosophical overview of many of the case histories in earlier chapters, arguing that the development of the Nazi concentration camps is a clear example that technology is endowed with the values of the culture that produced it.
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
Also, Czerwinski was on the same Homeland Security Task Force with Major Hasan who was the only patsy blammed for the Fort Hood False Flag. Did this iniative have something to do with the Fort Hood False Flag?[/b]
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2009/11/09/terrorist-hasan-was-bush-homeland-security-advisor/

A big fat smoking gun, right here!

http://www.gwumc.edu/hspi/policy/HSPIPTTFProceedingsReport.pdf

Isn't that nice???

Major Hasan in the same room with Czerwinski, IBM, FBI, CIA, MITRE, Washington Post, DHS, CSIS, Deutsche Bank, Aspen Institute, FEMA, Heritage Foundation, Raytheon, Civitas, World Bank, In-Q-Tel, US telecom, Global Defense Solutions, Lockheed martin, Internet2, and many more cybernetic/NWO false flag shills to advise Barry Soetoro's puppet administration!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS UP!!!!!!!  It's sooooo bats**t insane!


Related thread
Ft. hood shooter appears to have Obama conection, Can anyone find anything eles?
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=144020.0

Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
Fort Hood Army Internal Review Team: Final Report
http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e1/rv5_downloads/misc/FtHoodAIRTwebversion.pdf

The Army's whitewash report of Hasan's attack at Fort Hood.

Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
Fort Hood Army Internal Review Team: Final Report
http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e1/rv5_downloads/misc/FtHoodAIRTwebversion.pdf

The Army's whitewash report of Hasan's attack at Fort Hood.

PAGE 28

B. Quick Wins.
The team determined that each action below, if implemented quickly, would have an immediate and
positive impact on Army FP and identification and mitigation of internal threats. These “quick wins”
are as follows:

• The Army developed and implemented the iSalute CI reporting system via “Army Knowledge
Online” and “Army Knowledge Online – Secure” internet based reporting links in April
2010. G-2 Information Sharing and CIO/G-6 developed and implemented the reporting
platforms enabling any Soldier or Civilians with an Army Knowledge Online or Army
Knowledge Online – Secure account to report a suspicious activity to Army CI.

• The Army transmitted instructions on 15 April 2010 for Army-wide implementation of the
iWATCH Program by 1 August 2010. The Army iWATCH program, modeled after the nationwide
program sponsored by the Los Angeles Police Department, is a modern version of
the Neighborhood Watch program designed to promote anti-terrorism awareness across
all commands, leverage every member of the Army community as a sensor and reporter
of potential terrorist acts and establish SAR procedures at the local level

• The Army revised and re-titled AR 381-12 from “Subversion and Espionage Directed
Against the U.S. Army (SAEDA)” to “Threat Awareness and Reporting.” G-2(CI), Human
Intelligence, Security and Disclosure Directorate updated this regulation to include additional
observable indicators for espionage, terrorism and extremism. The revised regulation
includes more robust reporting requirements.
• The Army expanded and refined active shooter training for the Army law enforcement
community since the tragedy at Fort Hood. OPMG developed and implemented its plan
to train MP personnel to the same level as DACPs through an annual law enforcement
certification program reported through the Unit Status Report. Previously, active shooter
training was limited to DACP who were trained to respond to active shooters both at their
academy and in the field. The program was implemented on 1 April 2010 and is supported
by USAMPS’ release of an active shooter TSP on 19 March 2010.
• The Army’s OPMG and G-3/5/7 authorized the use of jacketed hollow point ammunition
for Army law enforcement and published an ALARACT message on 7 May 2010 in order
to execute this initiative. This Army action provides an immediate solution to risks posed
by internal threat response and active shooter scenarios. The Army’s fielding of jacketed
hollow point ammunition concludes a long-standing assessment of its effectiveness. The
Army law enforcement community, within the CONUS and its territories only, now shares
the long standing use of jacketed hollow point ammunition with the civilian law enforcement
community.
• The G-3/5/7 now briefs the Army's EM Program to the attendees of the General Officer/
Senior Commander Course at the Army Management Staff College, Fort Belvoir. Briefed topics
include: NIMS Implementation Plan, EM Awareness, Ready Army and Risk Assessment
for an All-Hazards approach. This is the first time General Officers/Senior Commanders
are introduced to the details of the Army EM Plan and these briefings will ensure that
senior commanders have the knowledge they need prior to an actual emergency. The
Army needs to improve General Officer attendance to this course. Currently, only 56% of
General Officers moving into senior commander billets have attended this course.
• The Army implemented the TEM Course at the AMEDD Center and School. This course
trains behavioral health providers, related healthcare professionals and Unit Ministry
Teams on TEM. This course standardizes how the Army will provide trauma management.
A Field Manual (FM) addressing TEM is in draft pending publication. Two classes have
been held as of this report.
• The General Officer Management Office revised General Officer assignment orders to expressly
reflect senior commander authorities, responsibilities and duties.
• Army OTSG and MEDCOM implemented Care Provider Support training. Care Provider
Support training is an annual requirement for all healthcare providers and teaches healthcare
providers how to manage the unique stressors associated with providing health care.
MEDCOM monitors completion through the Digital Training Management System.
• The United States Army Crime Center in concert with the FBI CJIS amended the CJIS
Security Policy, June 2007, Version 4.4 (4.5 is pending review and approval for release)
authorizing Private Contractor (i.e. CSGs) User Agreements to allow NCIC access for Private
Contractors. Private Contractors shall be permitted access to CJIS record information
systems pursuant to an agreement which specifically identifies the contractor's purpose
and scope of providing services for the administration of criminal justice. Radford Army
Ammunition Plant and Military Ocean Terminal Concord were the first to request access.

Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
PAGE 47:

B. ASA(M&RA)/DCS, G-1/CCH Lead:
1. Finding 2.1 - DoD programs, policies, processes and procedures that address identification of indicators
for violence are outdated, incomplete and fail to include key indicators of potentially violent behaviors.
Recommendation 2.1.D - (OTSG and G-3/5/7 in support) Develop programs to educate DoD
personnel about indicators that signal when individuals may commit violent acts or become
radicalized.
Discussion: The Army will issue commanders and supervisors interim guidance until the
DoD releases identified behavioral indicators of violence from the DSB study scheduled
for completion no later than March 2011. In addition to the DSB study, the Army will
integrate concepts from the FBI Behavioral Science Unit’s Military Violence Unit into its
violence indicator education program. The estimated timeframe for program analysis, design,
development and implementation is two years.
Key actions necessary to implement the recommendation include:
• (D) Write, staff, adjudicate and publish an update to AR 600-20, Army Command Policy.
• (D) Address identification of violent behavior indicators, contributing factors, or prevention
of workplace violence.
• (T) Modify existing or adopt new training requirements addressing behavioral observations
and reporting.
• (L) Work with TRADOC to develop a program of instruction for the soldier to enable him/
her to effectively observe behavioral characteristics or actions that could lead to or result
in violent acts.

2. Finding 2.3 - DoD standards for denying requests for recognition as an ecclesiastical endorser of chaplains
may be inadequate.
Recommendation 2.3A - Review the limitations on denying requests for recognition as ecclesiastical
endorsers of chaplains.
Discussion: The Army’s position is that the current DoD Instruction is adequate in both
scope and authority. In order to accomplish this recommendation the Service Chiefs of
Chaplains through the Armed Forces Chaplain Board will review DoD Instruction 1304.28,
“Guidance for The Appointment of Chaplains for the Military Departments.”
3) Finding 2.5 - The policies and procedures governing assessment for pre- and post-deployment medical
risks do not provide a comprehensive assessment of violence indicators.
Recommendation 2.5.A - (OTSG and G-3/5/7 in support) Assess whether pre- and post-deployment
behavioral screening should include a comprehensive violence risk assessment.
Recommendation 2.5.B - (OTSG and G-3/5/7 in support) Review the need for additional postdeployment
screening to assess long-term behavioral indicators that may point to progressive
indicators of violence.
Recommendation 2.5.C - (OTSG and G-3/5/7 in support) Revise pre- and post-deployment
behavioral screening to include behavioral indicators that a person may commit violent
acts or become radicalized.

Recommendation 2.5.D - (OTSG and OTJAG in support) Review policies governing sharing
healthcare assessments with commanders and supervisors to allow information regarding
individuals who may commit violent acts to become available to appropriate authorities.
Discussion: The Army implemented recommendation 2.5.D. ALARACT 160/2010, dated 28
May 2010, directs specific implementation tasks and reviews to improve communication
between patients and providers, commanders and patients and commanders and providers.
Health care providers are authorized to provide health information to commanders as
it relates to indicators of possible violence.
In order to implement recommendations 2.5.AC,
the Army will assist the USD(P&R) to determine if current pre- and post-deployment
screening requires additions or revision.
Key actions necessary to implement the recommendation include:
• (D) Review and update AR 600-8-101, “Personnel Processing” by February 2011 (G-1 lead).
• (D) Write, staff, adjudicate and publish an interim update to AR 600-20, “Army Command
Policy” by February 2011 (G-1 lead).
4) Finding 2.6 - The Services have programs and policies to address prevention and intervention for suicide,
sexual assault and family violence, but guidance concerning workplace violence and the potential for selfradicalization
is insufficient.
Recommendation 2.6.A - (OTSG and ACSIM in support) Revise current policies and procedures
to address preventing violence toward others in the workplace. (Note: This recommendation
requires OSD action before the Army can implement)
Recommendation 2.6.B - (OTSG, ACSIM and TRADOC in support) Integrate existing programs
such as suicide, sexual assault and family violence prevention with information on violence
and self-radicalization to provide a comprehensive prevention and response program.

Discussion: The Army is participating with and providing input to develop DoD policy on the
prevention of workplace violence. The development process phase will complete no later
than January 2011. Concurrently, the Army is developing an internal workplace violencetraining
program similar to the Civilian Personnel Management Services’ program with
projected implementation no later than March 2011.
Key action necessary to implement the recommendation includes:
• (D) Develop an Army version of the Civilian Personnel Management Services’ Workplace
Violence Training program by March 2011 (G-1 lead).
5) Finding 2.7 - DoD policy regarding religious accommodation lacks the clarity necessary to help command

ers distinguish appropriate religious practices from those that might indicate a potential for violence or
self-radicalization.
Recommendation 2.7A - Promptly establish standards and reporting procedures that clarify
guidelines for religious accommodation. (Note: This recommendation requires OSD action
before the Army can implement)
Discussion: The Army will assist the Armed Forces Chaplains’ Board in the development of a “Guide
to Religious Accommodation” to provide commanders with a framework for religious accommodation
decision-making. Revision of DoD Instruction 1300.17, “Religious Accommodation,” creates
a two-tiered approach to religious accommodation request approvals.
Key actions necessary to implement the recommendation include:
• (D) Interim update AR 600-20, “Army Command Policy,” as required by DoD Instruction
1300.17 revision by September 2011 (G-1 lead).
• (L) Integrate guidance on DoDI 1325.06, “Handling Dissident and Protest Activities Among
Members of the Armed Forces,” into Chaplain Professional Military Education by March
2011 (OCCH lead).
6) Finding 2.9 - DoD and Service guidance does not provide for maintaining and transferring all relevant information
about contributing factors and behavioral indicators throughout Service members’ careers.
Recommendation 2.9.A - (OTJAG in support) Review what additional information (e.g., information
about accession waivers, substance abuse, minor law enforcement infractions, conduct
waivers) should be maintained throughout Service members’ careers as they change
duty locations, deploy and re-enlist.
Recommendation 2.9.B - (OTSG and OTJAG in support) Develop supporting policies and procedures
for commanders and supervisors to access this information. (Note: This recommendation
requires OSD action before the Army can implement)
Discussion: The Army will assist in updating DoDI 1336.08, “Military Human Resource
Records Life Cycle Management.” The update for this instruction, which governs the type
of records to retain, will occur no later than June 2011. Concurrently, the procedures and
system to share records will be developed to facilitate implementation.
Key action necessary to implement the recommendation includes:
• (D) Review and update AR 600-8-104, “Military Personnel Information Management/
Records” by September 2011 (G-1 lead).
7) Finding 2.12 - Policies governing communicating protected health information to other persons or agencies
are adequate at the DoD-level, though they currently exist only as interim guidance. The Services, however,
have not updated their policies to reflect this guidance.
Recommendation 2.12A - (OTSG in support) Ensure Services update policies to reflect current
DoD-level guidance on the release of protected health information.
Discussion: The Army implemented this recommendation through update of AR 40-66,
“Medical Record Administration and Health Care Documentation,” dated January 2010,
and will ensure review of this regulation upon release of the anti-stigma DoDI scheduled
for release by September 2010. Additionally, the OTSG and MEDCOM Policy Memorandum
10-024, “Case Management for Soldiers Referred to the Network for Behavioral Health
Care,” dated March 29, 2010, requires that Soldiers undergo behavioral health care in the
network and not at a military treatment facility. Soldiers will also be required to sign an authorization
that allows a case manager to access the Soldier’s pertinent health information
generated by a network behavioral health care provider.
Key action necessary to implement the recommendation includes:
• (D) Review and update AR 40-66, “Medical Record Administration and Health Care
Documentation,” by March 2011 (OTSG lead).
8) Finding 2.15 - DoD policy governing prohibited activities is unclear and does not provide commanders and
supervisors the guidance and authority to identify indicators of violence or take actions to prevent violence.
Recommendation 2.15.A - (OTJAG in support) Review prohibited activities and recommend
necessary policy changes.
Discussion: The Army will integrate changes from OSD’s review of DoDI 1325.06, “Handling
Dissident and Protest Activities Among Members of the Armed Forces,” into AR 600-20,
“Army Command Policy,” within 180 days after instruction update
.
Key action necessary to implement the recommendation includes:
• (D) Update AR 600-20, “Army Command Policy,” as necessary by September 2011 (G-1 lead).
9) Finding 2.16 - Authorities governing civilian personnel are insufficient to support commanders and supervisors
as they attempt to identify indicators of violence or take actions to prevent violence.

Recommendation 2.16.A - (OTSG and OTJAG in support) Review civilian personnel policies to
determine whether additional authorities or policies would enhance visibility on indicators
of possible violence and provide greater flexibility to address behaviors of concern.
Discussion: The Army will assist OSD in its effort to develop a DoD-level policy on prevention
of workplace violence. Draft policy is currently undergoing informal staffing by the working
group. The Army anticipates that a two-phase training program will result. Within the first
two (2) years new supervisors will undergo training and refresher training will be required
every three (3) for supervisors with over two years of experience. This will occur no later
than May 2011 (G-1 lead).
Key action necessary to implement the recommendation includes:
• (L) Integrate Civilian Leader training into existing training programs by May 2011 (G-1 lead).
10) Finding 4.9 - The lack of published guidance for religious support in mass casualty incidents hampers
integration of religious support to installation EM plans.
Recommendation 4.9.A - (ACSIM in support) Consider modifying DoD and Service programs
designed to promote, maintain or restore health and well-being to offer each person the
services of a chaplain or religious ministry professional.
Recommendation 4.9.B - (ACSIM in support) Develop policy for religious support in response
to mass casualty incidents and integrate guidance with the installation EM Program.
Discussion: The Army OCCH reviewed its programs and the above recommendations and
found that chaplain training, force structure distribution, command integration and regulations adequately support its response. The Army, through the Armed Forces Chaplains
Board, is participating in DoD’s review of policies and identification of best practices for
religious support to mass casualty incidents by June 2010. The Army will integrate changes
arising from this review into AR 165-1, “Army Chaplain Corps Activities.” In April 2010,
OCCH integrated a change into the HQDA Mass Casualty Response Plan that designates
the Army Chief of Chaplains as branch proponent to coordinate worldwide chaplain augmentation
to a mass casualty site in response to command priorities.
Key action necessary to implement the recommendation includes:
• (D) Based on DoD policy review results, the Army will review and update AR 165-1, “Army
Chaplain Corps Activities,” and update as appropriate.
11) Finding 4.10 - Inconsistencies among Services entry-level chaplain training program can result in inadequate
preparation of new chaplains to provide religious support during mass casualty incidents.
Recommendation 4.10.A - Review mass casualty incident response training in the Chaplain
Officer Basic Courses by September 2010 (OCCH lead).
Discussion: The Army implemented this recommendation. The United States Army Chaplain
Center and School (USACHCS) adjusted the basic officer course curriculum to include discussion
on the process and planning involved in the Fort Hood incident. The enhanced
instruction began June 2010. Additionally, USACHCS implemented an hour of additional instruction
into its Senior Leader course curriculum to include religious support to the installation
mass casualty response SOPs, exercise planning and installation staff integration.
12) Finding 4.11 - The DoD has not yet published guidance regarding installation or unit memorial service entitlements
based on the new Congressional authorization to ensure uniform application throughout the Department.
Recommendation 4.11.A - Develop standardized policy guidance on memorial service entitlements.
Discussion: The Army implemented this recommendation with the release of ALARACT
146/2010 on 10 May 2010. The ALARACT release provided guidance for implementation
until release of the formal directive. The Army anticipates that the formal Army directive will
be released by 15 November 2010.
13) Finding 4.12 - DoD casualty affairs policy, Federal law and DoD mortuary affairs guidance do not exist regarding
injury or death of a private citizen with no DoD affiliation on a military installation within CONUS. There is no
prescribed process to identify lead agencies for casualty notification and assistance or to provide care for the
deceased, resulting in each case being handled in an ad-hoc manner.
Recommendation 4.12.A - Review current policies regarding casualty reporting and assistance
to the survivors of a private citizen with no DoD affiliation, who is injured or dies on
a military installation within CONUS. (Note: This recommendation requires OSD action before the
Army can implement)
Recommendation 4.12.B - Review current mortuary affairs policies relating to mortuary services
for private citizens who become fatalities on a military installation within CONUS.
(Note: This recommendation requires OSD action before the Army can implement)
Discussion: The Army participates through the Casualty Advisor and Central Joint Mortuary
Affairs Boards to draft appropriate policy. These boards are both scheduled to meet in
October 2010.


Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
PAGE 52

C. Army G-2 Lead:
1) Finding 2.2 - Background checks on personnel entering the DoD workforce or gaining access to installations
may be incomplete, too limited in scope, or not conducted at all.
Recommendation 2.2A - Evaluate background check policies and issue appropriate updates.
Recommendation 2.2B - Review the appropriateness of the depth and scope of the National
Agency Check with Local Agency and Credit Check as a minimum background investigation
for DoD Secret clearance.

Recommendation 2.2C - (G-3/5/7 Lead; see paragraph c. for details) Educate commanders,
supervisors and legal advisors on how to detect and act on potentially adverse behaviors
that could pose internal threats.
Recommendation 2.2D - Review current expedited processes for citizenship and clearances
to ensure risk is sufficiently mitigated.
Discussion: The National Joint Security and Suitability Reform Team (NJSSRT) is revising the
national investigative standards. The NJSSRT goal is to issue the revised national investigative
standards by December 2010.1 The Army concurs with the revised National investigative
standards and has successfully demonstrated and implemented many of them.
While the Army remains a strategic partner and supports key initiatives of the National
NJSSRT, on 23 March 2010, the G-2 submitted a formal waiver request to the USD(I) from
certain existing DoD policy. Once approved, the waiver will provide the Army with additional
authority to implement security measures and increase the scope of investigation for specific
categories of individuals with significant foreign loyalties and connections.
The Army is working to implement Homeland Security Presidential Directive – 12 (HSPD-
12)2. The implementation of HSPD-12 will mandate populations (i.e., contractors working
unclassified contracts and certain non-appropriated Fund personnel), who were not previously
subjected to a background investigation are properly vetted, which includes the submission
of a background investigation. The G-2 will issue an ALARACT message by August
2010 that will provide clarifying guidance to Army commanders and leaders, on the reporting
of derogatory information. The ALARACT message will ensure commanders understand
how to report derogatory information, where to report it and the requirements associated
with reporting. To alleviate risks associated with certain categories of non-US citizens entering
the Army and subsequently receiving United States citizenship under the provisions
of EO 13269, the Army will implement policy that will enhance the military accessions
screening process for certain categories of foreign nationals with significant foreign loyalties
and connections (i.e., Soldiers enlisting into Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 09L
Interpreter/Translator and Military Accessions Vital to National Interest (MAVNI)).
Key actions necessary to implement the recommendation include:
• (D) Adjustments to doctrine may be required once policy and procedures are completed.
Adjustments to policy will be required.
• (O) Preliminary working groups have identified specific organizations that are best suited to promulgate
policies and procedures. The Army will consider adjustments to these organizational
structures once policy and procedures are identified within the DoD and Army working groups.

• (T) Ensure that leaders train Soldiers to identify and report Soldiers that exhibit indicators
of potential violence and/or potential terrorist behavior consistent with the 23 November
2009 ALARACT message 322/1009 which directed that all commanders review measures
to prevent and mitigate potential acts of violence directed against the Army.
• (M) The Army will fully implement the Army Investigative Enterprise Solution (AIES) for the
efficient and effective processing of background investigations to the Office of Personnel
Management (OPM). Army implemented eScreening capability, which reviews all background
investigations completed by OPM and submitted to the Army Central Clearance
Facility (CCF). The eScreening review automatically identifies and highlights issues of
security and CI concern for subsequent action.

• (L) The Army will issue an ALARACT message to provide clarifying guidance to Army commanders
and leaders on how and where to report derogatory information by August 2010.
• (P) Army Accessions Command will participate in a pilot program to demonstrate the
automatic records check capability.



PAGE 56:

4) Finding 2.14 - The DoD does not have a comprehensive and coordinated policy for CI activities in cyberspace.
There are numerous DoD and interagency organizations and offices involved in defense cyber activities.
Recommendation 2.14 - Publish policy to ensure timely CI collection, investigations and operations
in cyberspace for identifying potential threats to DoD personnel, information and facilities.
Discussion: USD(I) drafted DoDI 5240.mm, “Counterintelligence (CI) Activities in Cyberspace”
and staffed it formally to the Services. The Army has reviewed the first version, provided comments,
met with the principal drafters of the DoDI and now is reviewing the second version.
Army’s comments and concerns were addressed by the USD(I) staff in this second version.
Key actions necessary to implement the recommendation include:
• (D) G-2 will evaluate the requirement for Army doctrine and policy when the DoD publishes
Instruction 5240.mm, “CI Activities in Cyberspace.”
• (O) G-2, working with INSCOM, has developed a concept plan that details the personnel
and organizational structure required to execute CI activities in cyberspace. This concept
plan is contained within the larger plan for the military intelligence rebalancing effort.
The Army will adjust this concept plan if required due to publication of DoDI 5240.mm.
• (T) The highly technical nature of cyber CI and the velocity of technology development
will require continued engagement to update the DIA’s Joint CI Training Academy and the
United States Army Military Intelligence Center at Fort Huachuca, Arizona.
• (M) Army will use existing computer hardware and software for current research and development
of cyber training and education programs, while working to field new systems.
• (L) Work with INSCOM, Fort Huachuca, Joint Counter-Intelligence Training Academy and
industry/academia to ensure the latest software applications are available for proper
training CI agents and analysts.
• (P) Army currently receives National Intelligence Program funding for CI activities conducted
in cyberspace.

5) Finding 3.3 - The DoD’s commitment to support JTTFs is inadequate.
Recommendation 3.3.A - (OPMG in support) Identify a single point of contact for functional
management of the DoD’s commitment to the JTTF program.
Recommendation 3.3.B - (OPMG, US Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) and OTJAG in
support) Evaluate and revise, as appropriate, the governing memoranda of understanding between
the FBI and different DoD entities involved with the JTTF to ensure consistent outcomes.
Recommendation 3.3.C - (CID in support) Review the commitment of resources to the JTTFs
and align the commitment based on priorities and requirements.
Discussion- The ASD(HD & ASA), in coordination with USD(I), CI, was identified as the single
DoD entity for developing requirements and associated program resourcing supporting
the DoD’s overall contribution to the JTTFs across the country. The current July 2009
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and
DoD effectively articulates the purpose, mission, authorities, management, reporting and
support arrangements necessary to ensure effective operational execution of the JTTF
program. However, the increased emphasis on cooperation and information sharing along
with increased DoD participation levels requires an updated MOU. The original MOU sat
isfactorily addressed the Army’s unique participation in the JTTFs which uses both Army
CI Special Agents and Criminal Investigative Special Agents. G-2 will publish Army supplemental
guidance once the FBI publishes the new MOU. USD(I) led the review of current
DoD JTTF manning, reviewed prioritization based on threats and Service equities and deconflicted
Service requests for additional JTTF authorizations. If resourced as proposed,
DoD will eventually be represented in 85 of the 104 JTTFs across the country. The Army requested
17 additional CI agent positions and 9 CID investigator positions be added to the
overall JTTF manning effort. Additionally, Army requested 8 CI agents for placement within
FBI HQ activities. The FBI recommended this initiative and is intended to further integrate
DoD into the FBI CT effort. USD(I) will forward the final manpower request OASD (HD & ASA)
for submission to the Secretary of Defense this fall in time for the FY12 program submission.
Key actions necessary to implement the recommendation include:
• (D) The Army may make adjustments to doctrine once Army reviews the policy and
procedures contained in the updated MOU. G-2 has updated AR 381-20, “The Army
Counterintelligence Program,” effective 25 Jun 2010, in order to address the unique role
and responsibilities of Army CI agents filling JTTF positions. Army will reevaluate the need
for implementing guidance memoranda when the DoD – FBI JTTF MOU is updated.
• (O) G-2, working with the INSCOM, has developed an implementation plan that details
the positioning and functions for personnel increases expected in FY12 to the Army’s
overall JTTF contribution.
• (T) Increase the volume of DoD student throughput at the DIA Joint CI Training Academy
and the DoJ Federal Law Enforcement Training Center to train individuals designated for
assignment at JTTF related duties and positions.
• (L) G-2 will develop information pertaining to its continued participation in the FBI-lead
JTTFs as a key element of the nation’s CT effort. This point is critical for the larger strategic
communications plan supporting the final report for the AIRT for the Fort Hood shooting.



PAGE 58

Discussion: Upon approval and funding of these recommendations, the G-3/5/7 will establish
a working group to identify and assess existing training and education programs,
research current doctrine and policy and determine if changes are necessary. The working
group will consist of representatives from G-3/5/7, OTSG, TRADOC, Army G-1 and the Army
Safety Center. Projected initial working group meetings will begin December 2010. The
Army will develop a risk assessment tool to determine if personnel present risks for various
types of violent behavior.
Key actions necessary to implement the recommendation include:
• (D) Discuss an accessible consolidated criminal investigation database or SAR system.
• (D) Address identification of violent behavior indicators, contributing factors, or prevention
of workplace violence.
• (D) Write, staff, adjudicate and publish AR 525-XX, “Protection,” and associated
Department of the Army Pamphlet (DA PAM).
• (T) Modify existing or adopt new training requirements addressing behavioral observations
and reporting.

• (M) Use existing computer hardware and software for research and development of training
and education programs.
• (L) Work with INSCOM, OPMG and CID to ensure proper training of MPs and CID agents.
• (L) Work with TRADOC to develop a program of instruction that enables Soldiers to recognize
behavioral characteristics or actions that could lead to or result in violent acts.


Required personnel will:
• Research various FP training programs (threat identification, behavioral characteristics,
interpretation, analysis, threat reporting, etc.).
• Seek advice on behavioral analysis of potentially violent actors.
• Make recommendations to modify existing programs or develop new training.
• Develop risk assessment tools.

Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
[Drumroll please....  This is the kicker!!!!]

page 77-81

7) Finding 3.9 - Services cannot share information on personnel and vehicles registered on installation, installation
debarment lists and other relevant information required to screen personnel and vehicles and grant access.
Recommendation 3.9.A - (G-1, G-2 and ACSIM in support) Develop timely information sharing
capabilities among components including vehicle registration, installation debarment lists
and other access control information.
(Note: This recommendation requires OSD action before the
Army can implement)
Recommendation 3.9.B - (G-1, G-2 and ACSIM in support) Accelerate efforts to automate access
control that will authenticate various identification media (e.g., passports, Common
Access Card, drivers’ licenses, license plates) against authoritative databases.

Recommendation 3.9.C. - (G-2 in support) Obtain sufficient access to appropriate threat databases
and disseminate information to local commanders to enable screening at continental
United States and overseas installation access control points.

Discussion: OPMG is working with the DoD Physical Security Equipment Action Group’s
Defense Installation Access Control Working Group to define a cross-service interoperable
access control enterprise architecture. The goal is to field interoperable installation physical
access control systems that can access the Defense Manpower Data Center’s Defense
Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System to facilitate Common Access Card validation. The
Defense Installation Access Control Working Group will be meeting during May-November
2010 to define among the Services the end-state concept for access control enterprise architecture
for joint interoperability. This effort is expected to generate required changes for
DoD Access Control Policy, define requirements to build debarment and local population
databases and identify equipment and technology. The end state will be a recommended
solution (middleware/enterprise/standard interface) for physical access control systems
to use that can share access control information with the other Services.

OPMG is fielding automation to authenticate identification cards against DoD databases,
thus improving security as well as reducing guard requirements. This system is called
Automated Installation Entry and will improve vehicle throughput, reduce manpower requirements
and comply with DoD guidance and Congressional direction. This system was
first fielded at Fort Hood. There are Product Verification Tests ongoing at Letterkenny Army
Depot, Fort Campbell and the Military Ocean Terminal at Sunny Point. Fielding is expected
in FY 2010 - 2011. The OPMG developed Automated Installation Entry requirements for
18 additional installations for POM 12-16. In addition, OPMG will submit requirements for
handheld screening systems at the remaining CONUS installations once a viable multiservice
concept and interoperable middleware are developed.

Army OPMG is implementing DoD policy and working several efforts simultaneously to gain
access to threat screening databases for access control.
OPMG is publishing an update of Chapter 8 (Access Control) to AR 190-13, “Physical
Security,” that will implement the DoD Directive Type Memorandum requirement to screen
non-Common Access Card holders. Installations are required to query authoritative government
data bases (NCIC) which includes a check against the terrorist screening database
in order to vet a non-Common Access Card cardholder’s claimed identity and determine
their fitness for access. The FBI permits the use of NCIC for vetting visitors to ensure the
security of military installations. The Army will publish the revised AR 190-13 no later than
30 August 2010.
The Army OPMG is participating in the USD(I) led effort to field the Justice Communications
Systems. Justice Communications Systems is a store and forward information sharing
system which interfaces with the Federal Bureau of Investigation CJIS NCIC and the
International Justice and Public Safety Network as well as the National Law Enforcement
Telecommunications System. This will enable a rapid method for verifying a person’s crimi
nal and personnel records status for access control. Justice Communications Systems is
web based and allows the transmittal of batch files of names for screening against NCIC
records. A pilot program of Justice Communications Systems began in May 2010 at Fort
Campbell and in USAREUR at Campbell Barracks. Justice Communications Systems currently
charges a fee per name check which is expensive, but once it is fully implemented
costs should be reduced. Department of Justice’s Justice Communications Systems capability
could potentially provide accounts and vetting capability for all Army installation visitor
control centers. USD(I) will finalize an MOU with Department of Justice in August 2010
and plans to enable fielding at all installations across DoD in FY 2011.

OPMG is working with CID, United States Forces-Korea, USAREUR and the FBI to provide
NCIC access to overseas locations which until now have not had such access. This effort
will field hardware, software, licensing, training and system accreditation in support of the
United States Forces Korea PM’s Office no later than 30 September 2010. This is the first
step of a multi-phased plan to provide NCIC access to locations in Korea and in Europe.
Additionally, on 27 January 2010 the Provost Marshal General requested USD(I) assistance
in helping Army overseas commands gain direct access to the Terrorist Screening
Center’s terrorist screening database. USAREUR, United States Eighth Army in Korea and
United States Army Central require this capability to screen personnel desiring access to
Army bases that do not have a Common Access Card. The plan calls for DoD guards (to
include foreign contract guards) to use the terrorist screening database to screen personnel
entering our installations. USD(I) is developing business rule requirements to store,
update and safe guard information which will be governed in accordance with a MOU with
the Department of Justice/ Terrorist Screening Center.

Key actions necessary to implement the recommendation include:
• (D) Maneuver Support Center of Excellence will update FM 3-19.30, “Physical Security,”
to reflect the changes to AR 190-13.
• (D) OPMG Revised AR 190-13, “The Army Physical Security Program,” to incorporate access
control identification vetting and proofing requirements in accordance with USD(I)
Directive-Type Memorandum 09-012, “Interim Policy Guidance for DoD Physical Access
Control.” AR 190-13 is currently at the Army Publication Directorate, but any new policy
coming out of the Defense Industry Access Control Working Group events would require
another rapid revision. OPMG also issued a message that implements Directive Type
Memorandum 09-012 (ALARACT message 049 2010 “Guidance for Physical Access
Control for Army Installations,” 191713Z FEB 10).
• (T) Training for Automated Installation Entry occurs during implementation at installations.
Training costs are included in the total cost of Automated Installation Entry fielding.
• (T) United States Army Crime Records Center will oversee local training plans for military
police personnel who will have access to NCIC.

(M) The adoption of a recommended solution (middleware/enterprise/standard interface)
for service personnel access control systems to use that can share access control
information with other Services may require adjustments to existing and future access
control automation specifications. OPMG will work with Product Manager, FP Systems
and the United States Army Corps of Engineers to incorporate changes.

The Defense Installation Access Control Working Group met 17-19 May 2010 and is cur
rently finalizing best practices and has followed with a capability demonstration in June
2010. Services will now be able to select the best option for physical access control architecture
and methods for sharing access control information. OPMG anticipates that as
commanders and security forces employ automation for access control they will find innovative
ways to improve efficiency/traffic throughput and further reduce guard forces. OPMG
will review best practices, and if adopted, will make policy updates. OPMG will determine
best practices implementation and review of Phase I NCIC access in United States Forces
Korea after the 30 September 2010 implementation date.
The Defense Installation Access Control working group and Physical Security Equipment
Action Group are developing resource requirements as the architecture develops. OPMG is
conducting a cost-benefit analysis to define options for program costs for the II PEG.
Installations will submit requirements in November and December of 2010 to field NCIC
databases at visitor control centers. However, the fielding of the Justice Communication
System could potentially reduce costs since existing internet capability is the only materiel
requirement. Overseas installations are developing funding requirements for the NCIC program.
Phase I implementation is projected to cost $350,000. OPMG will program future
costs during the Program Objective Memorandum cycle in FY 2011 through the II PEG,
Physical Security MDEP.

Recommendation Milestones:
3.9.A - The Defense Installation Access Control Working Group will meet during May-
November 2010 to define the concept for access control enterprise architecture for joint
interoperability. This working group will also conduct a series of demonstrations from June-
November 2010 that will assess options for a Physical Access Control Architecture that
specifically includes the ability to exchange data between Service Personnel Access Control
Systems and an authoritative source. The end state of the Defense Installation Access
Control demonstrations should be a recommended solution (middleware/enterprise/standard
interface) for Service Personnel Access Control Systems to use that can share access
control information with the other Services. Based on the results of the Defense
Installation Access Control working group demonstrations in 2010, DoD will likely publish
changes to policy and system standards that the Services may have to follow in fielding
future access control systems.
OPMG in coordination with G-3/5/7 and IMCOM will develop a strategy to communicate to
installation commanders the cross-service interoperable access control enterprise architecture
requirements that will affect their installations.
3.9.B - United States Army Corps of Engineers is installing Automated Installation Entry at
Fort Campbell and Military Ocean Terminal at Sunny Point during FY 2010.
Program Manager for FP Systems will begin to field Automated Installation Entry at ten additional
installations during FY 2010.
OPMG submitted requirements for fielding Automated Installation Entry at 18 installations
during FY 12-16 through the Installation PEG.
OPMG and the United States Army Corps of Engineers will develop a strategy to communicate
to installation commanders the Automated Installation Entry schedules and engineer
site preparation requirements that will affect their installations prior to Automated
Installation Entry fielding.

The United States Army Corps of Engineers and OPMG will develop and approve specifications
and performance metrics for Automated Installation Access.
3.9.C - Policy Guidance: OPMG published an ALARACT message on Access Control to implement
guidance in accordance with DoD Directive Type Memorandum on Access Control
released in January 2010. The Army OPMG will revise AR 190-13, “Physical Security,”
Chapter 8 (Access Control) by 30 August 2010.
Overseas National Criminal Information Center Fielding: Approval of Phase I funding – April
2010 (completed), completion of phase I NCIC access to United States Forces-Korea PM
Office: 30 September 2010 (ongoing), phases II-IV to be determined after second quarter
FY 2011 assessment of administrative workload based on Phase I usage.
Justice Communication Systems: Pilot Programs at Fort Campbell, Kentucky and USAREUR
(May - October 2010); fielding at installations across the Army in FY 2011.
Resource Estimate: OPMG submitted requirements for fielding Automated Installation Entry
at 18 installations in Program Objective Memorandum 12-16. Requirements for threat assessment
database fielding are being developed as implementation of overseas installation
NCIC program occurs. Phase I implementation is projected to cost $350,000.

Offline birther truther tenther

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,726
  • Against all forms of tyranny
Fort Hood Army Internal Review Team: Final Report
http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e1/rv5_downloads/misc/FtHoodAIRTwebversion.pdf

The Army's whitewash report of Hasan's attack at Fort Hood.

My summary of the report:


Major Hasan was in the same room with Czerwinski, IBM, FBI, CIA, MITRE, Washington Post, DHS, CSIS, Deutsche Bank, Aspen Institute, FEMA, Heritage Foundation, Raytheon, Civitas, World Bank, In-Q-Tel, US telecom, Global Defense Solutions, Lockheed martin, Internet2, and many more cybernetic/NWO false flag shills to advise Barry Soetoro's puppet administration, as evidenced here:

http://www.gwumc.edu/hspi/policy/HSPIPTTFProceedingsReport.pdf

After Hasan did his "drill" that went live, on marching orders from Anwar Al-Awlaki, (the al-CIA-duh stooge who dined at the Pentagon), the Army's solution to their false flag is the cybernetic NWO agenda!


  • Integrating DHS SARs with DoD
  • Tightening policies on personal firearms of soldiers
  • Integrating FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force in with DoD
  • Coordinate with the FBI’s Behavioral Science Unit’s Military Violence unit to identify behavioral indicators that are specific to DoD personnel.
  • Phasing in Ptech-style Enterprise Architecture with inherently backdoored "security", and making it "interoperable" for false-flagging anytime TPTB feel like it
  • REAL ID with biometrics integrated in with EA
  • Having a "Credit Check" as apart of a background check using Choice Point
  • The creation of iWatch, which is a snitching program
  • Integrating E911, alert systems, and other communications to hype future false flags


Offline larsonstdoc

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,341
Please read this thread:

IBM Global Movement Management: Commerce, Security, Resilience, Slavery, Terror
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=190901.0

In 2005, IBM created a white paper to petition congress for unprecedented authority to implement a total enslavement grid. The co-author presented the plan to congress in 2008. On 11/5/2009 (same day as the Guy Fawkes False Flag exposed by Webster Tarpley) Major Hasan was the only patsy blamed for the false flag which ushered in a new department dealing with controlling US Soldiers and Veterans. The person heading that program is a collegue of Major Hasan's on the Homeland Security Task Force and the co-author of the white paper by IBM...

Do you know what this guy is doing right now? HE IS IN CHARGE OF CONTROLLING AND ENSLAVING OUR MILLIONS OF VETERANS!!!!!!!!! I SHIT YOU NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



  If you are a vet,  move from the cities.  These bastards are crazy.  Thanks for the info.
I'M A DEPLORABLE KNUCKLEHEAD THAT SUPPORTS PRESIDENT TRUMP.  MAY GOD BLESS HIM AND KEEP HIM SAFE.