US Army troop cuts: Hagel and Obama seem determined to decimate our military capability by Allen West

Early this morning I received an email from Mrs. Annie Shyne, a former constituent, whose son Nicholas received a nomination from our congressional office to the US Naval Academy where he is now a plebe.

She was distressed over the intentions of Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, former US Army Soldier, to decimate our military capability with deep US Army troop cuts. Her email expressed concern for her son and his future as a commissioned officer in the Navy or Marine Corps. She was even more disturbed over the abandonment our military families will receive by way of cuts to commissary services and pay freezes. We recently reported the level of food stamp usage by our military families and its unconscionable increase.

Then this morning, I tuned in to hear SecDef Hagel attempt to explain this ill-conceived budget decision — which certainly has our enemies cheering. It seems Hagel, in his insidious and dubious manner, fails to realize that the most technologically advanced weapon on the battlefield is a trained, resolute, and determined warrior.

Instead of “investing” in the most important task of our federal government — providing for the common defense — we shall now focus on “investing” in the expansion of the welfare nanny-state. There is no doubt where President Obama’s priorities lie.

We have departed from the maxim of “peace through strength” to a belief in “appeasement through weakness.” Obama somehow believes kumbaya is a strategic objective. And don’t give me the crap about drones, because we learned during Vietnam that a president should not be directing strikes from the White House – implemented by another failed progressive president, Lyndon Baines Johnson.

We should be examining how we create the capability and capacity to meet the challenges of the enemy globally. That means looking at each geographic AOR (Area of Responsibility; CENTCOM, AFRICOM, EUCOM, PACOM, SOUTHCOM, NORTHCOM) and ensuring they have the appropriate level of force mix to meet the threats in their AORs.

We don’t need massive endeavors into new technologies, we need a massive focus on capability to meet and defeat the enemy by way of deterrence. Of course I support the defense industry, but the defense industry should not be the drivers of our national security strategy.

For Obama and Hagel to believe taking the US Army down to pre-World War II levels is a smart decision evidences their abject stupidity in comprehending the global conflagrations in which we are embroiled — the enemy has a vote. This whole inane statement about “pivoting to the Asian-Pacific rim” is more empty rhetoric as we decimate our US Naval strength while China builds theirs.

Barack Hussein Obama cannot be seen as a Commander-in-Chief and I will never refer to him that way. His fundamental transformation of America means weakening our nation and leaving our Republic less secure. I can just imagine how appreciative and elated his Muslim Brotherhood friends are at this point, to include Turkey’s President Erdogan, as well as the mad mullahs in Iran.

Why would any mother like Annie Shyne want her son or daughter to serve under this charlatan? The real “War on Women?” It’s the Obama vision to have more American mothers welcoming their children home in flag-draped caskets — as we’ve seen under his purview in Afghanistan, where deaths have skyrocketed.

This is my Army for whom I gave 22 years of honorable service and where I have a nephew and many a dear friend serving. I will be damned if I allow these progressive socialists to put their lives in danger. This, my fellow Americans, is why we need conservative American leaders who have served and are willing to lay down their life for this nation. Not some sorry Obama lapdog.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on

Dr. Rich Swier speaking at the Eisenhower Center in The Villages, FL – March 2nd at 4:30 p.m.

Dr. Rich Swier will be participating in the first public showing of the Todah Menorah Memorial at the Eisenhower Recreational Center in The Villages on March 2nd, 2014 at 4:30 p.m.

This year marks the 70th Anniversary of the WWII Allied Forces Liberation of the Concentration and Death Camps in Germany and Poland. The camps were liberated by Russian, Canadian (under British Command) and American forces. American liberator units were: the 82nd Airborne Division, 101st Airborne Division and 30th Infantry Division.

The Todah Menorah Memorial is the dream of Phil Berkowitz, a US Navy veteran, who lives in The Villages. Phil Berkowitz and E.F. Gene Sweeney, a US Air Force veteran, are the co-Founders of the Liberator Foundation, which is co-sponsoring the event with the Lifelong Learning College.

Featured speakers are:

E.F. Gene Sweeney and Phillip “Phil” Berkowitz – co-Founders of the Liberator Foundation

Drew Willard. Pastor at United Church of Christ at The Villages and a Graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point

Holocaust Survivor Gene Klein

Liberator Major Frank Towers, US Army (Ret.), who served with the 30th Infantry Division during WW II and liberated Dachau.

Dr. Rich Swier, LTC, US Army (Ret.) representing the 101st Airborne Division Association


IRich Swier Final 1 12 JPeg 135

Dr. Rich Swier, LTC, US Army (Ret.)

Richard is a 23-year Army veteran who retired as a Lieutenant Colonel in 1990. He was awarded the Legion of Merit for his years of service. Additionally, he was awarded two Bronze Stars with “V” for Heroism in ground combat operations, the Presidential Unit Citation, and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry with Palm while serving with the 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam.

He is a graduate of the Field Artillery Officers Basic and Advanced Courses, and U.S. Army Command and General Staff College.

Richard commanded two nuclear capable field artillery units in Europe, served as Adjutant of the 7th Special Forces Group at Fort Bragg, N.C., and was responsible for anti-terrorism and terrorism counter action doctrine while assigned to the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, Fort Monroe, VA. Richard culminated his career as the Deputy Inspector General for U.S. Army Pacific Command, the Army Component Command for U.S. Forces Japan, U.S. Forces Korea and Alaskan Command.

Richard holds a Doctorate of Education from the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, CA, a Master’s Degree in Management Information Systems from the George Washington University, Washington, D.C., and a Bachelor’s Degree in Fine Arts from Washington University, St. Louis, MO.

Rich is Publisher of, an internationally read e-Magazine.

The Night Venezuela Finally Imploded

Tonight, Venezuela is seeing a spasm of violence that’s unlike anything the country has experienced since 1989. Information is fragmented, since an almost complete media black-out is in place, but you don’t need the media to hear your neighbor’s screams.


Caracas, Valencia, Merida and San Cristobal in particular have become virtual war zones: National Guard units and National Police have been shooting tear gas canisters and buckshot sometimes directly at protesters, sometimes into residential buildings and, raiding any place they think student protesters may be hiding. Alongside them, the government backed colectivos (basically paramilitary gangs on motorbikes, a tropical basij) shoot at people with live ammo.

But of course, this is no war zone: in a war zone you have two sides shooting at each other. Tonight one side is doing all the shooting, the other side is doing all the being shot at.

The videos that are starting to come out are simply shocking. It’s as though the denouement we both sides have either feared or looked forward to for so long is finally coming to a head. See the arrival of the colectivos at Altamira square earlier tonight:

As these videos were being shot, president Maduro was on a live TV and radio cadena broadcast saying “I can give you guarantees that what those colectivos are doing is working, producing.”

Here we see the Tupamaros, perhaps the oldest and best established colectivo, at work in Los Ruices.

It gets worse. In this video, you can see the National Guard murdering a civilian in La Candelaria (at 1:52)

Here, we see National Guard troops shooting a civilian in Av. Panteon – there are conflicting reports about whether he survived:

Some Twitter streams are genuinely scary. JG Punto writes, while hiding from police and collectives in one a residential building in Altamira: “They found us”, his next tweets are mayhem and beatings of the students hiding with him.

Others post a picture of the National Guard beating down a building’s door:

going in

Here is Catia tonight – the one glimmer of hope is that everyone has a camera ready phone these days – there will be plenty of evidence:


Here we see the guy shot at Avenida Panteon, above:

Avenida Panteon

After midnight, a fire was set in an apartment in El Marqués , (Romulo Gallegos Ave.)


The Petare-Santa Lucia Road:

Carretera Petare-Santa Lucia

Here we see soldiers shooting into residential buildings in the Caracas neighborhood of Santa Monica:

Santa Monica

And this is not Kyiv, not Baghdad…it’s Valencia tonight:


Here’s Barquisimeto earlier today:


And this was San Cristobal yesterday. (We’re hearing reports that the internet has gone down in San Cristobal now.)


Of course it’s not just the big cities. This is Acarigua tonight:


Ramon Muchacho is working with Polichacao to evacuate students from their hiding places. You read that right, the municipal police is scrambling to keep national security forces from killing protesters.

A grave line has been crossed. Real, physical violence is finally catching up with the huge reserve of pent-up rhetorical violence we’ve suffered through since 1999.

We’ve spent 15 years fearing this.

Now we’re living it.


RELATED COLUMN: Hezbollah operative relocates to Venezuela, supports failing Maduro

Barack Obama and Pamela Geller win “Islamophobia” awards

Congratulations to my colleague Pamela Geller, winner of the Orwellian-named Islamic Human Rights Commission’s Islamophobia award. There must be weeping and gnashing of teeth at the White House over this: Obama has been unstintingly obsequious toward the Islamic world, even going so far as to declare his opposition to his own country’s Constitutional protection of the freedom of speech by declaring that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” But he has not acted against two vestiges of counter-terror programs that he inherited: Guantanamo (although he has freed jihad terrorists who were incarcerated there) and the drone attacks. And for that, he is now an “Islamophobe.” That shows that this Islamic Human Rights Commission, which no doubt enjoys a reputation in Britain as a “moderate” organization, wants all obstacles to jihad terror removed — and that is no surprise, since it is the goal of the entire propagation of the concept of “Islamophobia.”

“Barack Obama wins first prize at ‘Islamophobia awards,’” from Asian Image, February 21 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

US president Barack Obama has won first prize at the toung-in-cheek Islamophobia awards for for his nations unrelenting drone attacks.

Obama had been nominated by the public for “just about everything” – a charge that covers his continuation of drone strikes in the Muslim world as well as the failure to close the notorious Guantanamo Bay detention centre, and the introduction of the National Defense Authorisation Act that effectively ‘Guantanamises’ the whole USA.

Obama came in streets ahead of a gallery of fellow rogues which included other prominent politicians including French President Francois Hollande – cited for his country’s invasion of Mali – and the British Home Secretary Theresa May for a host of sins including extraditing Asperger’s sufferer Talha Ahsan to the United States, stripping Muslims of their citizenship, and most recently thinking about applying “anti-terror” ASBO-style punishments for British Muslims who are merely “suspected” of so-called terrorist activities.

As well as a chief Islamophobe award, an award is given to the worst Islamophobe in each of five geographical areas in line with the votes received from the participating public.

In the Americas the winner this year was Pamela Geller. Geller was nominated for her rise to fame as the USA’s Islamophobia Matriarch.

She has made a name for herself for opposing anything Islamic and particularly her opposition to the planned construction of a mosque near the site of the Twin Towers destroyed in the Sept 11 attacks in the USA.

First prize in the Europe and Central Asia category goes to the Dutch far-right politician Geert Wilders. Wilders is the leader of the Netherlands’ Freedom Party, which continues to campaign on its virulently anti-Muslim platform and propagate fears of an impending Islamic takeover of Europe.

In Asia and Australasia, the top prize went to the unlikely figure of Burmese freedom and democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi.

The 1991 Nobel Peace Prize winner was nominated for her continuing refusal to back citizenship calls by the country’s oppressed Rohingya Muslim minority.

The Burmese government’s denial of statehood to the Rohingya is one of the main reasons they are described by the UN as one of the world’s most persecuted peoples.

Along with her National League for Democracy party, Aung San Suu Kyi has tiptoed around the issue and has even refused to condemn the state-supported attacks that ravaged Rohingya communities in 2012.

The clear winner in The Middle East and Africa was Egypt’s General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, the army general who conducted a bloody campaign to remove and then ban the democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood and put the Arab world’s most populous nation firmly back on the road to military rule.

Although the Islamophobia Awards are intended to be a tongue in cheek poke at public figures of all stripes, they do carry a serious message.

Islamophobia is on the rise all over the world, particularly in the West, and the event serves to focus attention on the problem. Five genuine awards will also be given to people who have struggled against Islamophobia.

It will be interesting to see which tools, hacks, bottom feeders and jihad enablers get those awards. I do hope that Reza Aslan’s gunsel, the creepy little thug Nathan Lean, who cheerfully and repeatedly endangers innocent people by publishing what he thinks is my home address and the names of places I frequent, is a prize winner, as that will show up the cynicism and whiff of menace surrounding this whole enterprise.

Islamophobia can be described as stereotypes, bias or acts of hostility towards individual Muslims or followers of Islam in general.

In reality, the charge of “Islamophobia” is an attempt to intimidate people into thinking that there is something wrong with resisting jihad terror and Islamic supremacism.

In addition to individual acts of intolerance and racial profiling, Islamophobia leads to viewing Muslims as a greater security threat on an institutional, systemic and societal level and perceiving their views to be intrinsically problematic, violent or unethical.

The 2014 Islamophobia Awards are being held tonight [February 23rd] at the Holiday Inn, Wembley, starting 6.30pm.

The event will consist of performances including comedians, gala dinner, and a fundraising charity auction. It is being streamed live on

Dancing with the Devil: The Perils of Engaging Rogue Regimes

Michael Rubin, former Bush era Pentagon official who is currently a Resident Scholar at the Washington, DC –based American Enterprise Institute(AEI), has been engaged in intense media interviews since the launch of his new book, Dancing with the Devil: The Perils of Engaging Rogue RegimesDancing with the Devil covers Rubin’s research on fifty years of US and Western experience with rogue regimes and terrorist groups. The Encounter Books release on the publication of Rubin’s book noted:

The American response of first resort is to talk with such rogues, on the theory that, “It never hurts to talk to enemies.” Seldom is conventional wisdom so wrong. It is true that sanctions and military force come at high costs. However, case studies examining the history of American diplomacy with North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Libya, the Taliban’s Afghanistan, and Pakistan demonstrate that problems with both strategies do not make engagement with rogue regimes a cost-free option. Rogue regimes have one thing in common—they pretend to be aggrieved in order to put Western diplomats on the defensive. Whether they are in Pyongyang, Tehran, or Islamabad, rogue leaders understand that the West rewards bluster with incentives. The State Department, the process of holding talks is often deemed more important than results.

We met Rubin in 2005 when he returned to Yale to discuss his experience as a former Pentagon official on Iran and Iraq who also served as a political advisor to  the Provisional Coalition Authority. He spoke  about the emergence of the nuclear Iran threat under the ‘reformist’ regime in Tehran led by Ayatollah Khatami. See Rubin’s background and blog at the AEI website, here and here.

Our interview with Rubin ranged across an array of prevailing issues. Among these are the Iranian nuclear and ICBM threat and Putin’s great game of one sided politics in the Middle East and Eastern Europe. He also addresses Pakistan’s tolerance of terrorism and the  lack of US support for the Kurds in both Iraq and Syria. He criticizes the folly of the Administration’s support of Turkey under Premier Erdogan and the folly of its lead in the Final Status negotiations with the Palestinians imperiling Israel’s security.

Here are some of his observations.

Dr. Michael Rubin

Back in 2000 to 2005 the EU’s pursuit of engagement with Iran under President Khatami enabled the Islamic Republic to devote 70 percent of its hard currency reserves to both ICBM and nuclear weapons development. Moreover Rubin’s research on that period revealed that Iran took the lead from North Korea in its negotiating posture with the West alternating bluster with soothing words about the dialogue of civilizations. That raises the question of whether the present P5+1 negotiations backed by the US Administration with another reformist, President Rouhani, might be what  baseball legend Yogi Berra  called “déjà vu all over again”? Rouhani was Iran’s nuclear negotiator under former President Khatami. On Putin’s great game strategy in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, in the midst of the crisis in the Ukraine, Rubin had the following observations.

The Administration’s current negotiations posture with the Russian President is the equivalent of ”Chamberlain negotiating with Machiavelli, and Machiavelli always wins.” Rubin believes that Putin is “playing a zero sum game” in both the Middle East and Eastern Europe. Based on recent speeches by an Iranian Revolutionary Guards leader, Iran believes itself the head of the Islamic world.

The Administration’s outreach to Islamist non-state actors like the Muslim Brotherhood he considers a catastrophe reflected in recent conversations with senior leaders in Kuwait and the UAE. Rubin believes that the Administration has made a mistake not supporting secular Kurdish regimes in the Iraqi regional government and the virtual autonomous Kurdish region in the Northeastern province of Hazaka in Syria.  He believes this stems from our support of Turkey under the Erdogan government. Rubin suggests that Turkey’s embattled Premier Erdogan may be creating another rogue regime in Ankara.

We will be publishing both an article based on our interview with Rubin and a review of Dancing with the Devil in the March edition of the New English Review.

Listen to senior editor Jerry Gordon’s interview with Michael Rubin, here.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

Unrest in Venezuela and Ukraine coming to America?

The prevailing theme for this week is liberty. A lot of attention is being focused towards the events in Ukraine. However, just south of us here in South Florida there is another example, Venezuela.

In Venezuela we see what always happens when socialism takes root, as described so aptly by Margaret Thatcher, “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” When Hugo Chavez rose to power in Venezuela, he promised everything for everyone: shared prosperity, fair share, economic equality. He enacted policies that directed the government to nationalize more of the country’s production — especially the lucrative oil industry.

He took over the means of informing the people – hm, I wonder if he started with a “critical information needs” study similar to what the Obama administration’s FCC is seeking to initiate?

What resulted? The same that always happens when you punish, demonize, and denigrate the individual entrepreneurial spirit. The same that always happens when you disincentivize work for a government subsidy check. The same that always happens when there is a promotion of a welfare nanny-state focused on dependency rather than opportunity.

The producers stop producing and flee. We see it right here in South Florida in Broward County in the city of Weston, where the Venezuelan flag flies right along with the American. So as Prime Minister Thatcher poignantly stated, socialism fails because its empty promises are rooted in the legal plunder of others based upon some ill-conceived – I submit, actually demented — sense of benevolence. And then come the riots — because after all, you promised stuff but in the end what do the people gain? Nothing. What do they lose? Liberty.

In the Ukraine the fight for liberty is not against socialism but rather totalitarianism. A quarter of a century ago, Ukraine was given a new lease on life, a chance to determine its own future. It had once been a central part of the Soviet Union but then became an independent state.

However, old desires don’t fade away easily and control is a powerful motivator. Ukraine is caught in the middle of a fight to gain control of its future and it centers around a very important commodity: natural gas. Control of energy resources is a vital aspect of foreign policy and national security strategy — as well as important to the resurgence of Putin’s Russia. Liberty is the result of independence. Subjugation is the result of totalitarianism. Ukrainians seek the former, not the latter, and so they are making a stand.

There are lessons to be learned for us here in America. Venezuelans and many from Eastern Europe have fled to our shores to enjoy liberty and freedom as they escape the ills of their home countries. But if America succumbs to progressive socialism and totalitarian control of our government, where will people go? If America succumbs, who will be the beacon of liberty and freedom? Let me refresh your memory about what’s happening in America. Democrats and the New York Times are advocating for the IRS to eliminate and attack Americans. The FCC is seeking to put monitors into newsrooms. Our president feels he does not need to govern by legislative process but rule by edict — executive order. Elected officials such as Obama and DeBlasio are leading the charge to punish hard-working successful Americans — for what purpose? Redistribute their wealth.

So where do Americans flee? What is actually perplexing is that liberal progressives run away from failing liberal states such as California and New York. Unfortunately, they do not leave behind their damaging political beliefs. Like locusts they migrate to states like Colorado, Montana, and Florida with their cancerous political philosophy and destroy those states — message to Texans: you may want to stop asking Californians to relocate, unless they renounce liberal progressivism!

As we watch unrest in Venezuela and Ukraine unfold, I wonder, will we soon reach a tipping point in America?

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on

RELATED COLUMN: Americans rising up against government – USA Today

The Bloody Boomerang of Stalinism

Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Lenin, March 1919

The recent Olympic Games in Russia have opened the country to the world — As if a Pandora Box — the secrets held by the Russian regime for a long time have been discovered, revealing the reality of life in Russia. Reporting on Olympics in Sochi our media, for the first time, was using negative terms and images to depict: the unprecedented corruption, terrorism, yellow water, a disaster, and others. To grasp the reality of life in Russia, we ought to return to the discussion we had in the previous article published on January 27, 2014.

The ideological fireball unleashed by Marxism had a dramatic impact on life in Europe. Aggressive mob leaders fed on the public disorder and violence and their leadership produced the first socialist revolution in France.  This was the period of the “Paris Commune.” The revolution produced enormous casualties and then failed very quickly.  These events were followed by socialist revolt in Hungary and German Bavaria.  Both of those revolts failed, as well.  Western civilization rejected violent and destructive ideology–capitalism continued its development in those countries. I agree with Nietzsche that the envy of the poor is the main impulse to revolution. Furthermore, history shows that the leadership of any political movement plays a crucial role in shaping the outcome of revolt–Lenin is the prime example of that concept and victory of the first Socialist revolt in Russia…

There had been one earlier revolution in Russia in February 1917 (the February Revolution) that enjoyed widespread popular support. That revolution had a platform of fundamental social and constitutional reform that would move Russia toward western-style democracy. The February Revolution took place in St. Petersburg (Petrograd at the time) and led to the abdication of Russian Tsar Nicholas II on his own and his son’s behalf and the establishment of a Provisional Government in Russia.


Group picture of the delegates at the VIII Congress of the RKP. Click on the photo for a larger view.

The first successful socialist revolution took place in Russia in October 1917 (November 7 by the new calendar). Its official name in Russia was the Great October Socialist Revolution. The Bolshevik Party and its leader Vladimir Lenin seized power under the banner of Marxism—“proletariat of the world, unite!” Yet some historians today consider the Great October Socialist Revolution a meticulous and very well organized coup d’etat against a Provisional Government of Russia by the parliamentary manipulations and tricks. By the way, Ayn Rand was agreed with the concept of a coup d’etat. Lenin’s leadership in the revolt is not questionable; however we are currently talking about Soviet Socialism—that entire model of social organization has been created by Stalin and his global design later.

To grasp the perspectives Stalin envisioned for Russia and the world, we have to know the character, personality of the man and the circumstances of his life. Unlike Lenin, Stalin was not a highly educated individual, yet he was smart-street, which was more significant at the time. He was born in 1889 in the Russia’s Christian province Georgia, on the Caucasus, surrounded by the Muslim world. Proximity of the Muslim culture had a strong effect on Stalin’s personality for the rest of his life, his attitude to women testified to that. You can see it throughout his entire reign of power—no women in the government .His personal life and mysterious death of his second wife, a young and active Allelueva, telling us a tragic story…

His real name was Joseph Jugashvili, his nickname he took from Russian word steel–Stalin. If I tell you that Stalin was a bank-robber in his revolutionary career you wouldn’t believe me. Therefore let me give you an opinion of others about Stalin: “He became one of the Bolsheviks chief operatives in the Caucasus, organizing paramilitaries, inciting strikes, spreading propaganda and raising money through bank robberies, ransom, kidnappings, and extortions.” (Wikipedia). I would add: he was imprisoned five times, three of them for bank robberies—violence, lawlessness, and a Muslim Neighborhood  had been his real parents…

Every word, written about Stalin’s characteristic is only a part of the real true character of the man. Today you would call such a man a thug, mobster, or con. He was a brutal, manipulative, and maniacal, deceitful intriguer; he acquired power by moving up on the corps of others. He was an extraordinary liar and hypocrite. Two other features of his character stood out: The first one is that Stalin hated the Russian Orthodox Church and the Christian religion. The second one was his vindictiveness that had no barriers.

Stalin grew up in a shoemaker’s family, his father systematically beat him. His Mother, a devoted Christian, wanted him to be a priest, so she sent him to a church school in Georgia, he learned Russian there. After church school, he was admitted to an Orthodox Seminary, which had widened his horizon: The Orthodox Church had been highly respectable authority in the Russian Empire—the Emperor Nicholas was the “Messenger of God.”  The education there was the best in Europe. When Stalin protested against the imperialist and religious order, he was expelled from the Seminary, yet the knowledge obtained there had tremendously help him to manipulate the West later on…


Bolshevik Party flag.

Shortly after being expelled, he joined a revolutionary movement, became a convert to Marxism. In 1903 his Marxist group had become the Bolshevik Party, and Stalin got an assignment to begin organizing Bolshevik Party in the Caucasus Mountains area that was well known to him. It should be noted that Caucasus Mountains, a location with predominant Muslim culture and many different ethnic groups. Stalin was surrounded by the Muslim world in his entire childhood. He loved and knew the Muslim culture pretty well; his proclivity to lie perhaps came from Koran, which is allowing to lie if it benefits Islam. This rule of Koran is called Tajak (the spelling can be wrong). Stalin learned that Islam was divided on Sunnis and Shiites; he found out how to use both.

While organizing Marxists of the Caucasus, Stalin had the opportunity to go over the border. As a matter of fact, Azerbaijan was divided, one part in Russia and the other in Iran. The language was the same and Stalin could propagate Marxism in both countries. He had maintained his interest in Iran since then… In 1911, by the money obtain through bank robberies, he helped to establish Pravda, later the official daily of the Communist Party of the USSR. Living in St .Petersburg, Stalin played an important secret role in guiding the Bolshevik deputies in the Duma (Russian parliament) and in directing the Bolshevik Party press against the Provisional Government…

Stalin served the Bolshevik and then Communist Party pretty well. The sense of ambition and desire for prestige has always been a driving impulse for Stalin. His first official post in the Soviet government was the People’s Commissar on Nationalities. In 1922 he became the General Secretary of the Communist Party, the post he held to the day of his death in March of 1953. He stigmatized the rich, cultivating the hate and revenge to create an envy and resentment. Under the condition of secrecy, overwhelming fear, and intimidation Stalin had created a centralized system and his ideology that brought an enormous suffering to the people–he killed more people than all Russian Tsars combined.

Unlike Lenin, Stalin had no educational background, but persistently implemented his own vision of the country’s future in building a, so-called, Communist society. Since his childhood, violence formed his personality: and. throughout his entire life, force, violence, and ferocity had prevailed in his behavior. He began building his Communist, or Soviet Socialism, according to the personal features of his character. Only through the prism of his personality you can grasp the entire essence of the Stalinist Soviet Socialism. 

The first thing he did was dispose of any and all opposition. He immediately started building his cult of personality. According to Encyclopedia Britannica Online “[a] cult of personality arises when an individual uses mass media propaganda, or other methods, to create an idealized and heroic public image, often through unquestioning flattery and praise.” Stalin promised “to lead the country out of poverty into a bright communist future.” Instead he dedicated his efforts solely to concentrating ever greater power in his own hands.  The Stalinist cult of personality portrayed him as larger than life itself and endowed him with unrivaled wisdom. . As a result, Stalin became the best writer in the country, the best poet, the best diplomat, the best scientist, and the best military commander, friend and Father of the people.

Stalin used Lenin’s words to boost his cult of personality and to create a political machine within the Communist Party as a collective leader of the country. Lenin’s words were also used to identify the tasks and agenda of the Soviet government — The goal of Socialism is Communism, and Unions are the school of Communism.  In just this way had the Soviet state been created and functioned for seventy years. The Soviet government and all the unions worked together to control and operate the country—Big Government of unprecedented size wielding unassailable power over the population. The industries were field with people loyal to Stalin and he piled them with all special privileges.

Stalin’s personal agenda included, in first order, disposal of his opponents. He started eliminating them by demonizing and smearing their reputations. As a community leader of the Caucasus Mountains knowing the history of sectarian power struggle and the leadership of all ethnic groups, Stalin started a systematic liquidation of the leaders there. Just ask the people of Azerbaijan, Georgia, Chechnya, and others how many their leaders had been shot and how many thousands of people been perished during deportation to Siberia and central Asia … Then, Stalin had begun smearing and building accusations against the country leaders.

The first victim was Leon Trotsky, a hard-line Bolshevik but a very smart man and a respected leader.  He had been exiled and later assassinated by Stalin’s order in Mexico.  The next target was Sergey Kirov, a beloved leader from Leningrad (St, Petersburg) who was murdered by Stalin’s henchmen. The next were the series of purges and Show Trials that Stalin used to remove all the old Bolsheviks from the Communist Party in the 1930s. He chose to replace them with an army of loyal Stalinist yes-men. By the time he completed this first phase, he had attained his goal of absolute power built on a foundation of overwhelming fear. It is helpful to grasp Stalin’s chief motivation and the agenda by knowing the fate and the life of the people there.

Unlike the politically agile Lenin, Stalin was a pedantic and loyal Marxist who believed in world revolution. His ultimate goal was one of titanic agenda: the spread of Socialism throughout the entire world and create a global government under the auspices of the Soviet Union. Stalin’s reign of power started with a global double-game in which Stalin never played by the rules and never lost sight of his global strategy. Stalin deceived and misled the entire world, talking about socialism within one country while spreading his Socialist model throughout the world.  In fact, Stalin unleashed an undeclared war against capitalist western countries through insurrection against western civilization. And again, you can see the fraudulent intentions of the Communist ideology—Stalin has quadrupled it by creating a system of big lies under an Iron Fist to perpetrate a fraud further.

Stalin was dishonest with regard to ideology, because although he preached Marxism-Leninism, he practiced his own religion of Stalinism. Only through the prism of Stalin’s geo-political objectives can we comprehend the world’s predicament in the 21st century. Stalin’s war was real and had multiple fronts and many targets. It was both a domestic war and a war abroad. Only now, after being acquainted with Stalin’s character and personality we can begin understanding of the extent of his war against Western civilization. You can ask how it was possible that one man established a model of social organization, so dangerous for the entire world, yet which survived for two centuries. There is an explanation.

Stalin’s first concern was the constant aggrandizement and preservation of his absolute power, his cult of personality, and the leadership role of the Communist Party which was his personal fiefdom.  A mighty security apparatus was built on the foundation of the first Soviet security agency named the Cheka. During Stalin’s reign the name of the agency has been changed several times to cover up the crime committed. It finally appeared under the title—the KGB, three letters familiar to the people worldwide—the doer of Stalinism. A bloody boomerang of Stalinism, its dreadful ideology has the same form and shape, but different geography: yesterday it was Georgia on the Caucuses and the Middle East, today it is Venezuela and Ukraine. Who is next? To grasp the concept of the Stalin’s security apparatus and his war against humanity, please read What is happening to America? The Hidden Truth of Global Destruction, by Simona Pipko, Xlibris, 2012.

To be continued:

Victory for Ukrainian Revolution

Ukrainian revolution has won today and it’s very emotional for me, since that is where I was born and raised. eighty-two protesters are dead, the president is running, government thieves are being hunted down and brought to justice, communist party headquarters ransacked, and all remaining statues of Lenin and other communist leaders torn down all over Ukraine.

I spent all day watching live feed from the victory rally on Independence Square, or Maidan (pronounced as My-DONE) in Kiev, wishing I were there. In fact, this is the first time in almost 20 years that I’ve been in the US that I wanted to be back in Ukraine and celebrate. So many memories, so much to say. So excuse me if I don’t write more now. Perhaps, later.





EDITORS NOTE: We stand with the Ukrainian people and salute their victory over a tyrannical socialist regime. Our prayers are with them as they rebuild their great nation into a center of prosperity, beauty and freedom.

February 27th: Congressional Hearing for 30 fallen heroes killed in the shoot down of Extortion 17

On May 9, 2013, Billy and Karen Vaughn and other families of fallen American heroes held a press conference demanding a Congressional Hearing to investigate the death of their sons in the military operation, commonly referred to as Extortion 17.

Their cries have been heard. Americans all across the nation banded together with the Vaughns, and on February 27th, Congress will hold a one-day hearing on the devastating details behind the fatal operation leading to the death of 30 Americans.

On August 6, 2011, a U.S. Boeing CH-47D Chinook military helicopter, carrying special operations officers sent to reinforce Army Rangers under fire, was shot down in the Wardak Province, Afghanistan, killing 30 of our soldiers – 22 of whom were part of Navy SEAL Team VI; the team who took down Osama Bin Laden.

Only months before, Vice-President Joe Biden betrayed Navy SEAL Team VI after publically crediting them to the killing of Osama Bin Laden. This put members of the special ops community, and their families, in grave danger.

The shoot down of Extortion 17 resulted in the greatest loss of U.S. military lives in a single incident in the twelve-year war in Afghanistan that began in 2001, and the greatest single loss in the history of the Navy SEALs.

The Vaughns, parents of slain U.S. Navy SEAL Aaron Vaughn, demanded answers from military leaders and the Obama administration after reading the 1,200-page heavily redacted document provided to them after their son’s death.

Questions demanding to be answered during the Congressional Hearing will include:

  • Why our special operations forces were sent into an active battle zone in an outdated Chinook transport helicopter, as opposed to the MH47’s with which they trained.
  • Why the U.S. military has permitted the Afghan military and police to be part of every planned military operation executed in this war on terror.
  • Why our military’s rules of engagement under Obama’s administration has caused the casualty rate of our American heroes to skyrocket.

After the hearing on February 27th, America will be one step closer to saving the lives of future men and women who answer the call to serve our nation.

For interviews, please contact Ana Rivera at


Extortion 17: A Scandal Worse than Benghazi?

Florida Family of a fallen Navy SEAL feels “Betrayed”

In Memoriam: August 6, 2013 marks the 2nd anniversary of the Extortion 17 shoot down

Ukraine: Does President Obama have a third bite at the “Apple of Freedom”?

A second bite at the apple is defined as, “A second chance at an argument or negotiation previously lost.” President may have a third bite at the apple of freedom if he decides to support the people of the Ukraine in their efforts to achieve liberty. He has failed twice to make a strong argument against tyrannical regimes during his administration. As people died Obama remained silent.

The first failure was in 2009 during the Green Revolution in Iran.

The Los Angeles Times reported, “At a White House news conference in June 2009, Obama was asked whether he had a message for ‘people who are on the streets protesting, who believe their votes were stolen and who are being attacked violently?’… We will continue to pursue a tough, direct dialogue between our two countries, and we’ll see where it takes us.  But even as we do so, I think it would be wrong for me to be silent about what we’ve seen on the television over the last few days.  And what I would say to those people who put so much hope and energy and optimism into the political process, I would say to them that the world is watching and inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was.  And they should know that the world is watching.”

Iranian officials and the Russian media have accused the Western media for unfair coverage and have contended that the protests were planned by the CIA.

President materially did nothing and the Green Revolution was put down violently by the Iranian regime. The winners: Russia and Iran. Loser: United States.

The second failure was in 2013 during the mass demonstrations against and overthrow of the Morsi regime in Egypt.

President Obama stated on July 3rd, 2013, “The United States is monitoring the very fluid situation in Egypt, and we believe that ultimately the future of Egypt can only be determined by the Egyptian people. Nevertheless, we are deeply concerned by the decision of the Egyptian Armed Forces to remove President Morsy and suspend the Egyptian constitution. I now call on the Egyptian military to move quickly and responsibly to return full authority back to a democratically elected civilian government as soon as possible through an inclusive and transparent process, and to avoid any arbitrary arrests of President Morsy and his supporters. Given today’s developments, I have also directed the relevant departments and agencies to review the implications under U.S. law for our assistance to the Government of Egypt.”

President Obama materially did nothing and the people of Egypt prevailed. The winners: Egypt and Russia. Loser: United States.

Today President Obama is faced with yet another revolution but this time in the heart of Eastern Europe – Ukraine.

CBS News reports:

Following deadly clashes between protesters and police on the streets of Ukraine’s capital, President Obama said Wednesday [February 19th] that the United States “condemns in the strongest terms the violence that’s taking place.”

“We have been deeply engaged with our European partners as well as the Ukrainian government and the opposition to try to ensure that that violence ends,” Mr. Obama said, shortly after arriving in Toluca, Mexico for an economic summit.

 The U.S., he said, holds the Ukrainian government primarily responsible for dealing with peaceful protestors in an appropriate way. Hours later, a statement on Ukraine’s presidential website said that President Viktor Yanukovych met with opposition leaders and that the two sides called for a truce, the Associated Press reports. However, the statement gave no details of what the truce would entail or how it would be implemented.Mr. Obama said that over the next several days, “we’re going to be watching closely, and we expect the Ukrainian government to show restraint, to not resort to violence in dealing with peaceful protestors.”

Sound familiar? Will President Obama miss, once again, the opportunity to take a bite out of the apple of freedom? Or will he, once again, make statements without taking material actions?


Why American Foreign Policy is Headed for Disaster

Protesters Seize Presidential Palace…

Yanukovych cries ‘coup,’ will not resign…

Parliament Votes To Dismiss…


EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of Mstyslav Chernov and is of the state coat of arms of Ukraine, Tryzub, against the background of Dynamiska street barricades on fire. Euromaidan Protests. Events of Jan 19, 2014. The use of this image implies that Mstyslav Chernov in anyway endorses the author or the use of the work in this column. This photo is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported

It’s called “spying” on Muslims, but just SOP for the rest of us

Interesting how just one word in a news headline reveals the agenda of the media. This morning, the Washington Post reported an AP story “Judge: Spying on NJ Muslims by NYPD was legal.”

Someone once asked me about “racial profiling” of Muslims. I responded that the issue was not “profiling” which is the PC word liberal progressives love to use to make you uncomfortable. The issue is trend analysis. In combat, as well as in law enforcement investigations, you study trends in order to understand the adversaries.

But woe betide you if your trends point in one particular direction.

In 2012, eight Muslims sued the New York Police Department of spying on ordinary people at mosques, restaurants and schools in New Jersey since 2002. However, US District Judge William Martini dismissed the lawsuit saying it was a lawful effort to prevent terrorism, not a civil rights violation.

I’m quite sure President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder are trying to figure out what they can do to reverse the decision. I can almost hear all the individuals associated with the Muslim Brotherhood working within the Obama administration making the calls right now. Funny thing though, it’s apparently ok to conduct wide-open blanket surveillance – spying — on the general American public despite that pesky Fourth Amendment thing about “unreasonable search and seizure.”

So let’s do a bit of trend analysis. Just this week we learned there are indeed Islamic terrorist training camps in America.

And less than a year ago, the Tsarnaev brothers conducted a terrorist attack against innocent Americans at the Boston Marathon. Would it have made sense to conduct surveillance and trend analysis of the mosque they attended? Yes.

And this week we have new warnings about renewed threats of shoe bombs in aircraft emanating from the mastermind Islamic terrorist bomb maker in Yemen – the chap behind the “underwear bomber” Abdulmutallab from Nigeria.

In his ruling, Judge Martini said “The police could not have monitored New Jersey for Muslim terrorist activities without monitoring the Muslim community itself.” Farhaj Hassan, a plaintiff in the case and a U.S. soldier who served in Iraq, said he was disappointed by the ruling. “I have dedicated my career to serving my country, and this just feels like a slap in the face — all because of the way I pray,” he said.

I pray Hassan’s allegiances are in the right place, but I beg to differ with him. This is not about how he prays, it is about those who pray to destroy America, kill innocent people, and follow a theocratic-political ideology aimed at totalitarian conquest. And if he fails to understand the enemy is already within the gates and our Constitutional Republic and its people must be protected, then he is misguided.

The Center for Constitutional Rights in New York and the California-based civil rights organization Muslim Advocates, which represented the plaintiffs, complained the court’s decision “gives legal sanction to the targeted discrimination of Muslims anywhere and everywhere in this country, without limitation, for no other reason than their religion.”

However, using Constitutional liberties to not only allow the enemy to hide and mask itself but actually be protected and find sanctuary is a very dangerous path. It is a form of civilizational jihad and “lawfare” under the sympathetic guise of political correctness. Americans must not voluntarily drop our shield just to appease a minority, which fails to accept responsibility for the issues within its community.

Let me be clear and blunt. The bastards who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9-11; the traitor who stood atop a table and gunned down American Soldiers at Ft. Hood; these jerks were not heard saying “God Bless America” or singing “Rocky Top” — they were shouting “Allahu Akhbar.” When that stops, we can stop our trend analysis.

In the meantime, keep it up Brothers and Sisters in the NYPD!

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The feature image is adapted from one which was originally posted to This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States and does not in anyway suggests that EFF endorses the author or the use of the work in this column.

Yulia: ‘I Am A Ukrainian’

Michael Kirk from BizPac Review posted a clip is being called “a must-see video of a Ukrainian girl asking the world for help against oppression & corruption.” It has gone viral and left an impression on millions of people.


A brief description from the Facebook page linked to the YouTube video:

This is Yulia. She is a postgraduate student in literature. After the first people were killed on Hrushevskoho Street she posted about it on Facebook. She felt like screaming about everything that had been happening in the country. Her friend suggested to make the video of the same statement for more people to see and hear her. They made the video on Hrushevskoho next to the destroyed makeshift hospital. It was very cold then and her speech is uneven sometimes. ” I wanted to show that here I am – a person. If you say there are radicals and terrorists in our streets, then I am a terrorist too,” explains Yulia.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of

J-Street: Dividing the Jewish community’s support for Israel?

On Monday night of Presidents’ Weekend, Americans for Peace and Tolerance (APT) premiered a new film, The J Street Challenge, to an audience of 400 at a theater in Miami Beach. It is the latest in a series of provocative films by Avi Goldwasser and Charles Jacobs.

These films include: Columbia Unbecomingabout intimidation of Jewish students by pro-Palestinian faculty at an elite university; Northeastern Unbecoming, a documentary about the hostility to Israel and Jews on the campus of Northeastern University in Boston:


… and the award-winning film The Forgotten Refugees – which explores the history, culture, and forced exodus of over 900,000 Jews from Middle Eastern and North African Jewish communities in the second half of the 20th century:


Watch the trailer for  The  J Street Challenge here:


The J Street Challenge makes effective use of  J Street video, direct interviews with notable critics and archival footage, removing  the mask from the face of J Street leader Jeremy Ben Ami. The film graphically shows the perfidy of J Street’s alleged “pro Israel” messaging versus its actions. The takeaway from watching this film is that J Street is misleading Jewish students on college campuses about its real intention — the isolation of the Jewish state. In her Arutz Sheva Israel National News film review, Phyllis Chesler, commented:

Jeremy Ben-Ami may be a far more dangerous and morally problematic traitor to his people than were any of the Judenrat leaders during the Shoah. I say this because no one is threatening Ben-Ami with imminent death (each kapo and judenrat leader was death threatened while in captivity). Ben Ami lives in the United States and is a free man.

Yet, in classic Orwellian style, he presents his organization as both “pro-peace” and “pro-Israel” when he is neither. He condemns Israel at every turn and he does so in an era when Israel is under existential siege and a Second Holocaust is fully underway in slow motion. Jews are being blamed for and physically attacked outside of Israel because of Israel’s alleged “apartheid” and “occupation” policies. Israeli civilians are also being attacked—blown up, knifed—inside Israel proper.

The war against the Jews and the Jewish state rages on as never before at the United Nations, the European Union, among intellectuals and academics, on campuses, and within international human rights organizations. The Big Lies and filthy propaganda may be found 24/7 on the internet and in well-made documentaries as well as in prize-winning feature films.

The J Street Challenge is short, powerful, and an absolute must-see.

The J Street Challenge jpeg_ 2-19-14Among the J Street critics included in the film are: Lenny Ben-David, Alan Dershowitz, Carolyn Glick, Daniel Gordis, Charles Jacobs, Richard Landes, Andrea Levin, Bret Stephens, Ruth Wisse, Josh Block, Roz Rothstein and Noah Pollack.

Professor Richard Landes of Boston University commented in the film that many of J Street’s supporters are engaging in feel-good  “moral narcissism:”

[T]heir hyper-criticism of Israel functions as a way of showing their moral superiority. They contrast their own universalist concern for all the world’s people, with “small minded” Zionists who care only about their small tribe. J Street ally, Peter Beinert takes this to its logical extreme. Distorting Jewish prophetic tradition, he claims that Jewish values demand the creation of a Palestinian state at Israel’s pre-War 1967 borders, and the removal of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. J Street only blames Israel for the lack of peace and is notably silent about Palestinian terrorism and threats.

Lenny Ben David, former Chief of Mission at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, DC reveals through his research into through IRS filings who funds J Street. Among those backers and partners are George Soros, and Muslim Brotherhood Front groups in the US, MPAC and the National Iranian American Council.

This film should be adopted by those who care about the future of Israel and the American Jewish community. It must be shown in Jewish high schools, temples and JCCs. It must be used to wake the Jewish community to the deception employed by J Street to exploit the idealism and naviete of many well intentioned young Jews.

There is the moral blindness among American mainstream Jewish organizations and leaders, who have adopted false belief in dialogue as the solution to all human conflicts. Take for example funding support for the Olive Tree Initiative by an affiliate of the Orange county California Federation, sending unwary UC-Irvine students  who “accidentally” meet leaders of Hamas. Is this any different from J Street U sending Jewish student to pay homage at the grave of the late Yassir Arafat in Ramallah? The Palestinian Authority’s corrupt Holocaust-denying leaders are portrayed in The J Street Challenge film as honest men ready to make peace with the Jewish state. The film shows how these Arab leaders espouse peace to naive Jews in English and in Arabic they spout the classic Islamic doctrine of Jew-hatred and murder. Only one Jewish Federation in America, the Sarasota-Manatee Federation, had the courage to sign the a pledge against self destruction of American Jews through similar programs espoused by J Street and anti-Zionist ally, Jewish Voices for Peace in the BDS movement. There are Reform Temples and Federations in Nashville, Tennessee who defend dialog with local Muslim community leaders, among them are those who converted Carlos Bledsoe, aka Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, who became a homegrown jihadi.  Bledsoe/Muhammad in June 2009, on his way to his fateful murder of Army Pvt. Andy Long at an Army recruiting center in Arkansas, firebombed the home of an orthodox rabbi in Nashville and shot up the home of a rabbi in Little Rock. (See the acclaimed APT production, Losing our Sons).

Chesler noted in her review the powerful J Street rabbinic cabinet. This makes it all the more important that members of the rabbinate who reject the moral perversion of J Street should be involved in promotion of the APT film. We refer to valued friends in this struggle, Rabbis Jonathan Hausman in Massachusetts, Aryeh Spero in New York, Dr. Bernhard Rosenberg in New Jersey and the venerable theologian and noted author Dr. Richard L. Rubenstein. They have been wrongly and unfairly criticized by their rabbinic colleagues for combating J Street, yet these stalwart rabbis are the Zionist truth tellers. Norman Podhoretz called this J Street perversion of Judaism the equivalent of “worshipping at the torah of liberalism.” See our Iconoclast post, “Why are Jews Liberals?.

There is an irony about J Street leader Jeremy Ben Ami’s family background. We have a copy of a Bergson Pageant, “We will Never Die” Program in Philadelphia circa 1943 courtesy of Rabbi Hausman’s late mother. In it is a picture of Jeremy’s father, Yitzhak, one of the six Revisionist Palestinian Jews who came to recruit a Jewish Army to fight the Nazis and to lobby Congress successfully to save the remnant of European Jews. We wonder what Jeremy father would say about how far his son has fallen promoting the isolation of the sovereign Jewish homeland and six million Jews who live there — an Israel providing a bastion for Jews endangered by degenerate anti-Semitic hatred in Europe and elsewhere.

Kol Hakavod to the APT team for producing The J Street Challenge. Now let’s do what we can to ensure that this production is viewed in local Jewish communities across America so that we can expose the perfidy of J Street and Jeremy Ben Ami.

 EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

President Obama killing our soldiers softly with his Rules of Engagement

In the 7 years, from 2001 to 2008, US Military Personnel engaged in combat in Afghanistan operated under the “standard” Rules Of Engagement (ROE) that the military always operated under; during those 7 years, 630 US Military Personnel were Killed In Action (KIA).  In 2009, Obama imposed new and “dangerous” ROE on US Military Personnel operating in combat in Afghanistan, over the next 5 years, from 2009 thru 2013, 2,292 personnel were KIA.  The increase in KIAs for Combat personnel who had previously operated under the “standard” ROE, jumped from 90/year during the first 7 years, to 458/year over the next 5 years employing Obama’s new and “dangerous” ROE—–an increase in 458% in KIAs.

According to CNS, 19,080 US Military Personnel have been casualties in Afghanistan since 2001; CNS further reported that 73% of all casualties in Afghanistan occurred from 2009 thru 2013, the time frame when Obama’s new and “dangerous” ROE were forced upon US military personnel engaged in combat.  The increase in casualties for US Combat personnel who were operating under the new and “dangerous” ROE jumped from 5,151 during the first 7 years, to 13,928 over the next 5 years (many of those casualties were maimed for life), the annual casualty rate has gone from 736/year when they were operating under the “standard” ROE to 2785/year when they had to employ Obama’s new and “dangerous” ROE—an increase of 378%/year for Combat personnel Wounded In Action.

Apologists for the Obama administration might say there were more casualties because of an increase in tempo of operations; the tempo of operations might have increased somewhat, but the tempo operations did not increase by 378%.

The below listed article will put a face on the above listed statistics on Killed In Action numbers, and number of casualties, as a result the new and “dangerous” Rules Of Engagement imposed upon military personnel engaged in combat by the then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mullen. General Mullen never saw ground combat, but followed in lock step with how the occupant in the Oval Office wanted the Rules Of Engagement changed, and he didn’t carefully evaluate how those devastating changes would dramatically increase the casualties of combat personnel going into “Harm’s Way” daily, or how the new and “dangerous” would degrade the Combat Effectiveness of the finest tip of the spear military units in the world.

Two well-known losses of combat personnel are examples of how the imposition of the new and “dangerous” ROE forced on combat personnel increased the dangerous environment on the battlefield.  The first example was depicted in the movie “Lone Survivor” where the fear of being charged by civilians in the Pentagon with war crimes, if they silenced a hostile Afghani, resulted in compromising an entire operation and resulted in the death of 3 SEALs.  The second event, Extortion 17, occurred because the request for suppression fire at a landing zone, that used to be normally approved to allow a helicopter to land in a hot zone, was denied by senior commanders because of the new and “dangerous” ROE.  That lack of support resulted in the loss of 48 military personnel flying on Extortion 17 (those killed included 16 members of SEAL Team SIX, 20 Spec Ops Warriors, 5 helo crew members, and 7 Afghani military allies); Extortion 17 was the largest loss of life of US military personnel in one day in the 13 year history of combat operations in Afghanistan.  There have been thousands of incidents over the last 5 years that resulted in casualties that could have been avoided, if the “standard” ROE were being employed.

The occupant of the Oval Office has let it be known that he welcomes debate, but won’t tolerate dissent; the past 5 years of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan has taught the combatant commanders not to complain about the ROE (because they knew of the unusually high number of commanders that had been relieved in the midst of their tours).  Sound judgment was not exhibited by Mullen when he imposed the new and “dangerous” Rules Of Engagement on the US military by Obama—he should have had the courage to resign to demonstrate his opposition to Rules of Engagement that would result in killing so many of the Republic’s finest warriors.  Each year since 2008 when the new and “dangerous” Rules of Engagement took effect, 2049 more military personnel per year have been Wounded In Action each year for 5 years (a total of 10,245 more personnel have been wounded and/or maimed for life) which is an increase of 378%.  Each year since 2008 when the new and “dangerous” Rules Of Engagement took effect, 368 more military personnel have been Killed In Action each year for 5 years (a total of 1840 more personnel have been killed) which is an increase of 458%.  The unacceptable number of casualties continues to increase, while the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, hasn’t made a concerted effort to change the dangerous Rules Of Engagement that US Military personnel, engaged in combat, are required to operate under.


Written by Billy & Karen Vaughn on Friday, 14 February 2014.


US soldiers in Afghanistan are now forced to fight a two-fronted war. Before each deployment, these soldiers understand fully that day after day they will do battle against relentless terrorists with shifting loyalties and unspeakable hatred. But what none of them could have foreseen was the killing field that would open from their rear…the Continental United States.

Our government’s incessant tightening of already restrictive ROE (Rules of Engagement), compounded by the failed COIN (Counterinsurgency) strategy—also known as “winning hearts and minds,” has made an otherwise primitive enemy formidable.

Our best and brightest come home in body bags as politicians and lawyers dine over white linen tablecloths; writing, modifying, and re-modifying these lethal rules…rules that favor the enemy rather than the American soldier. Rules so absurd they’re difficult to believe until you hear the same stories over and again from those returning from battle.

In a delicate discussion with an Army Ranger who recently left the military, we heard the following: “I had to get out. I have a family who needs me. I didn’t join to be sacrificed. I joined to fight.” This decision came shortly after he lost a close friend to the ROE. He went on to explain: the Taliban had attempted an ambush on his friend’s squad, but quickly realized they were in a battle they couldn’t win and began retreating. While chasing them, the US soldiers were ordered not to engage due to the slight chance the Taliban had laid down their arms as they ran through some type of shack. While arguing with leadership at the JOC (Joint Operations Center) his friend was shot and killed.

A Navy SEAL who left his job only a few years shy of full retirement said the following: “I got out because I couldn’t take it anymore. We tried to explain how much reckless danger we were being exposed to and they told us we were being illogical.”

This type of response has created a growing compromise of confidence between our war fighters and senior military leadership. His argument wasn’t illogical at all.

A gut-wrenching pattern began forming in early 2009…a pattern completely ignored by Congress, the White House, and apparently the DOD.

In the first seven plus years of war in Afghanistan (October, 2001 – December, 2008) we lost 630 US soldiers. In early 2009, this administration authorized the implementation of the COIN strategy. Over the next five years, the US death toll skyrocket to 2,292.

Seventy-three percent of all US deaths in Afghanistan have taken place since 2009.

In the first seven plus years of war in Afghanistan, 2,638 US soldiers were wounded in action. In the next forty-five months (2009 – 2012) an additional 15,036 suffered the same fate.

Liars figure, but figures don’t lie.

While concern over being killed due to these policies weighs heavy on the minds of those we’ve spoken with, the deepest pit-in-the-stomach comes from fear of prosecution should they violate these absurd and ever-changing ROE. The last thing a war fighter should ever be forced to experience is unnecessary fear.

Fear creates hesitation. Hesitation creates flag-draped caskets. Flag-draped caskets create fatherless children, widowed wives, and childless parents. Our heroes deserve the right to fight with swift hands, clear minds, and confident hearts.

However, today’s war fighters have the grave misfortune of serving leaders who elevate the virtues of inaction over action. The message? If you dare use your training or your gut instinct, if you have the fortitude to fight for your life, or the desire to kill the enemy, there is a good chance you will be punished.

The physiological capacities of a true patriot cannot tolerate the vile stench of injustice, especially when perpetrated against those who defend us. Its wretched aroma permeates the core and demands a response.

We’re counting on you, the American patriot, for that response. We must defend our defenders. Please, spread the news and demand change.

The Tet ’68 Battle for Hue: The Road to Hell and Beyond


2LT Rich Swier, Tet 1968 – Battle for Hue, South Vietnam

The year 2018 is the forty-ninth anniversary of the 1968 Tet Offensive. As a young “butter bar” forward observer attached to A Company, 2nd Battalion, 501st Infantry, 101st Airborne Division it was the beginning of my travels on the road to hell and beyond. This road trip began on January 31, 1968 and ended four weeks later at the Western wall of the ancient City of Hue, in the former South Vietnam.

On January 31, 1968, the North Vietnamese Army (NVA) launched the Tet Offensive. Tet, the traditional Vietnamese New Year Celebration, was to be a peaceful truce. Not for the NVA who caught us with our pants down and holding our collective you know what in our hands.

This story is dedicated to the men of the 2nd Battalion, 501st Airborne Infantry (2/501) who fought in the critical Battle for Hue. According to the US Army Center of Military History, “The fight for Hue turned into a slow, grinding campaign of attrition that lasted nearly a month before the enemy was finally defeated.”

I dedicate it to men like SSG Joe Ronnie Hooper and SSG Clifford C. Sims, Delta Company, 2/501, both of who were awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, SSG Sims posthumously. SSG (later Captain) Hooper was second only to Audie Murphy in the number of awards and decorations with 37 compared to Murphy’s 38.

I dedicate it to the 2/501 airborne infantry Commanders: LTC Richard Tallman, Battalion Commander; Captains Reiss, Alpha Company, Nickels, Bravo Company, Denny Gillem, Charlie Company; 1st Lieutenant Cleo Hogan, Delta Company (the Delta Raiders) and 1st Lieutenant Buch, Recon Platoon leader. All were and still are true leaders of men.

Men like Captain Ken Crabtree, Commander, B Battery, 1st Battalion, 321st Field Artillery, who was my boss, mentor and personal friend. Lieutenant Colonel Crabtree would be killed on April 17, 1984 in a SWAPO guerilla bombing near the Angolan border, SW Africa. But that is another story for another time.

Elements of 101st Airborne Division, the 1st Cavalry Division and 5th Marine Regiment were the major units committed in the Battle for Hue.


Red Legs: 1LT Rich Swier (L) and 1LT Mike Watson (R), during the Tet 1968 Offensive.

The 2/501 ABN INF was attached to the 1st Cavalry Division commanded by Major General Jack Tolson. Hue was considered vital to the NVA because of its “history of Buddhist activism and Communist sympathy.” The NVA felt that Hue was second only to the capitol city of Saigon as a political foothold in South Vietnam. The 90th NVA Regiment was committed to its capture and defense.

The Battle for Hue lasted from January 31st to February 26th. During that time the men of 2/501 ABN INF suffered casualties and severe deprivations. For six days there was no resupply of food or ammo. The weather was rainy and the temperature dropped as low 48 degrees. Due to the weather air strikes were limited, thereby leveling the field of battle between my battalion and the 90th NVA Regiment.

Many believe Vietnam is a tropical paradise, yeah right. I have never been colder in my life. The constant flow of adrenaline, lack of food, sleep and daily, at times hand-to-hand, combat took its toll on all the men of 2/501st.

Delta Company Commander LT Cleo Hogan recalls, “During the night of 24 February, more than 500 rounds of 105MM, 155MM and 8-inch artillery were fired into the vicinity of YD728206 [near Hue]. A few rounds were also fired by the Battleship USS New Jersey [a.k.a. the Black Dragon]. At 1100 hours on the 25th, D Company joined by A company and C Company with almost 300 men on line, advancing on Hue… At 1400 hours, a small Vietnamese boy (estimated age 10 years-old) fired a few rounds at members of D Company. The boy was captured and Chicom C54 weapon was captured.”

In the rubble and along the road leading to Hue were found signs stating, “Shoot the American and South Vietnamese aggressors, for a better Vietnam, Long Live Ho Chi Minh.”

LT Hogan wrote in his memoirs, “During the night of 25 February, D Company received sporadic sniper fire from across the river but for the most part things were quiet. D Company occupied several bombed out buildings, and during the search of the area found large quantities of Vietnamese booze, individual weapons, enemy radios and other supplies.”

When Hue was liberated we found over 7,600 civilians in shallow graves. Men, women and children with their hands tied with barbed wire behind their backs with gun shots in the back of the head by their NVA occupiers. Yet another Communist atrocity in South Vietnam that the American press refused to report on was this massacre.

I vividly recall that on the morning of February 26th a small boat pulled up to the A Company CP, located in a three story building along the Perfume River. The Perfume River (Sông Hương) is a river that crosses the city of Hue. In the autumn, flowers from orchards upriver from Hue fall into the water, giving the river a perfume-like aroma.

In the boat were a Vietnamese man and his very pregnant wife who was in labor. Our company medic was called into action and with the help of some hot water delivered a beautiful baby boy. I remember thinking that God is sending a message that life goes on even among all the carnage we had witnessed since January 31st.

The 2/501 left Hue in unit formation counting cadence all the airborne way. We lined up by company and marched out of the city to our next mission. Along the way young children would pull on our 101st Screaming Eagle shoulder patches, saying “Chicken die, chicken die” – so much for our liberating the Vietnamese from their NVA oppressors.

The road to hell made a turn for the 2/501 troopers to reopen QL – 1 or Highway 1, also known to the French as “the Street without Joy” and then due West into the A-Shau valley (the Valley of Death) and triple canopy jungle.

But that also is another story for another day. Airborne All The Way! Let us never forget their shedding of blood, sweat and tears.

RELATED VIDEO: Battle for Hue. On January 31,1968, the North Vietnamese Army launches the surprise “Tet Offensive, simultaneously attacking dozens of South Vietnamese cities. Among them is the ancient city of Hue. Outnumbered 10 to 1 the brave US Marines and South Vietnamese Army troops defend the city with their lives.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is of (Left to Right) 1LT Cleo Hogan, Commander A Company, 2/501 Infantry, 1LT Grimsley, Platoon Leader and 1LT Rich Swier, Forward Observer, in the A-Shau valley (the valley of death) during Tet of 1968.