The USS Fitzgerald/ACX Crystal Collision – Questions & Conclusions

Bayard & Holmes

~ Jay Holmes

At approximately 2:20 a.m. local time on June 17, 2017 the US Navy Destroyer USS Fitzgerald suffered a collision with the Philippines-registered container ship ACX Crystal approximately 64 miles southwest of Yokosuka, Japan.

 

USS Fitzgerald at Yokosuka Naval Base
Image by US Navy employee, public domain

 

The 29,000-ton container ship suffered minor damage and was not impeded from continuing its journey to Tokyo. The 9,000-ton Arleigh Burke class USS Fitzgerald, on the other hand, suffered significant damage on her starboard side. Based on early reports, the USS Fitzgerald was in danger of sinking, and seven of her crew members lost their lives.

First and foremost, we extend our sincere condolences to the families and loved ones of the seven sailors who lost their lives.

This collision reminds us that there is no such thing as a “safe” deployment. Because of what those seven sailors suffered and what their families are now paying, decency demands that we be cautious in drawing conclusions about the causes of the collision.

Our US Navy, along with the broader US defense community, exists to ensure the sovereignty of the United States of America and the freedom and safety of her citizens.

Modern, extravagantly expensive and highly complicated Burke class destroyers play a critical role in that mission. These ships are an important and finite asset, and we currently have sixty-one of them in active service with fourteen more in various stages of design and building.

From my perspective, the loss of any service member always matters. Now, and at a time when only a small minority of eligible young Americans are willing to serve in our military, it is even more important for our military to do what it can to minimize personnel casualties.

In modern corporate America, workers are generally disposable and easily replaceable, but in the modern US military, qualified soldiers and sailors are a precious resource. The US military is in the business of war, and human losses are a grim, but somewhat unavoidable, result of war and war preparations. However, we must endeavor to not waste the lives of our service members due to inadequate equipment, doctrine, training, or leadership.

In an attempt to avoid similar calamities in the future, the US Navy and the US Coast Guard will each conduct thorough independent investigations of the collision.

The Navy will, in fact, conduct two parallel investigations. The Japanese Coast Guard is also conducting an investigation, and the Philippine government has, not surprisingly, announced that it, too, will conduct its own investigation. In addition, beyond all the official investigations, any number of intelligence services from a variety of nations will be searching for any unusual evidence relative to the collision.

All investigations of maritime calamities rely on constructing an accurate and detailed timeline of the events leading up to and subsequent to the impact. The communications logs, navigations logs, bridge recordings, and all physical evidence from the USS Fitzgerald and the ACX Crystal must be examined in detail. Also, all members of both crews must be questioned. The investigators have not had time to gather and examine all of the statements and evidence, and they have yet to offer any conclusions concerning the causes of the accident.

The fact that the professional investigators have yet to draw conclusions has not stopped the legions of not-professional armchair naval experts from reaching ironclad conclusions. The fact that those ironclad conclusions of the not-professionals seem to change by the hour does nothing to dissuade these folks from fervently and passionately espousing what they consider to be irrefutable fact.

Many Americans care a great deal about our Navy, our entire military, and our nation’s defense. That perhaps explains their need to have immediate answers as to whom or what caused the disaster. I salute their patriotism. For a democracy to survive, it requires the diligence of enough of its citizens to overcome apathy. However, I suggest to them that they remain flexible in their views until more evidence is available.

Some of the opinions being passionately expressed are, to say the least, a bit colorful. Most collisions at sea do not involve complex conspiracies or exotic causes, and a collision in a shipping route at night in busy waters is not altogether rare. This collision has our attention because it involved one of our valuable “Burkes,” and because seven sailors lost their lives.

Many of the conspiracy theories popping up are influenced by several key factors.

First, the night was clear. Even on a clear night at sea, haze can impair and distort a helmsman’s or watch stander’s view, and judging the distance and speed of another ship at night is not as simple as it sounds. Even so, in this day and age, we all quite reasonably expect that any modern US Navy warship has adequate radar, sonar, transponder sensors, and adequate information processing systems to detect and note an approaching 29,000-ton freighter. It begs the question, how did the Fitzgerald and ACX Crystal not see each other in time to avoid a collision? In theory, only one of the ships’ crews would need to be aware of the other ship in time to avoid a disaster.

The second reason the public is suspicious is that the accident occurred near Japan, where China and/or North Korea might be able to easily influence events. I, too, am suspicious. In fact, I am justifiably suspicious of the North Koreans and the Chicoms every moment of every day. However, we must remember that suspicion is not, in itself, evidence.

Third, some early and not yet verified statements indicate that the ACX Crystal had her running lights and her navigation transponder off. At this point, my suspicion is that her transponder was on, but I may be wrong. I am not sure about her lights. If they were in fact off, then that may well have been a major contributing factor to the collision. We will have to wait for all the crewmen to be questioned and data logs from multiple sources to be examined before we know if those assertions are accurate.

A fourth factor that drives suspicions of foul play is the fact that as a container ship, sophisticated electronics warfare equipment capable of damaging or temporarily obstructing radar and radio systems could conceivably have been loaded on to the ACX Crystal without the knowledge of the captain or crew. Such equipment could have been activated remotely.

It’s important that for now we remember the critical difference between “could have been” and “was.”

At this point, I estimate that Communist China wants war with the United States even less than we want war with China. In spite of all the propaganda out of China, and in spite of her current efforts to expand her naval power, China remains at a strategic disadvantage in any potential war with the United States. North Korea has been, and remains, less rational in its decision making as compared to China, but the distances between “would do it” and “could do it” remain substantial for now.

One possible factor that many members of the public might not be aware of is the fact a US Navy warship might at times operate without its full suite of Aegis systems active.

Aegis is a powerful and brilliant radar tracking system, but the more powerful a radar system is, the more easily it can be detected by opponents. I have no information indicating that the USS Fitzgerald was on that night, or any night, operating in “quiet” mode. I am simply explaining that it is one possibility.

I understand the tremendous need for answers and explanations.

I feel the same way. I share your anger. I want to know why those sailors died, why our ship was damaged, and who or what is at fault. This sad event is important to me, because our national security is important to me, and because I consider all US military members to be my brothers and sisters. We share an oath that matters to me.

I know that this calamity is also important to many of you. We owe it to the lost sailors and to their families to find the real causes of the collision. I hope that as a country, we will not rely on emotion or conjecture, but rather wait for investigations to lead us to accurate conclusions, because as you read this, many other US Navy and allied ships and sailors are sailing in dangerous waters, and we need accurate information to prevent more loss of life and more damage to valuable ships.

 

 *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

 

 

Gunner’s Mate Seaman Dakota Kyle Rigsby, 19, of Palmyra, VA

Yeoman 3rd Class Shingo Alexander Douglass, 25, of San Diego, CA

Sonar Technician 3rd Class Ngoc T Truong Huynh, 25, of Oakville, CN

Gunner’s Mate 2nd Class Noe Hernandez, 26, of Weslaco, TX

Fire Controlman 2nd Class Carlos Victor Ganzon Sibayan, 23, of Chula Vista, CA

Personnel Specialist 1st Class Xavier Alec Martin, 24, of Halethorpe, MD

Fire Controlman 1st Class Gary Leo Rehm Jr., 37, of Elyria, OH

*

Our deepest sympathies to the families and loved ones of these fine sailors.

 

 

Advertisements

Fat Leonard, US Navy, & America’s Military Corruption Conspiracy of the Century

Bayard & Holmes

~ Piper Bayard & Jay Holmes

The US Navy is currently caught in the throes of the greatest known American military corruption conspiracy of this century to date.

After a three-year investigation, the story first broke in November, 2013 with the accusation that Director of Naval Intelligence Vice Admiral Ted “Twig” Branch and four other naval officers accepted bribes of cash, prostitutes, and expensive trips in exchange for steering US Navy contracts for port services to a company named Glen Defense Marine Asia (“GDMA”). Indictments started coming down.

 

Leonard Glenn “Fat Leonard” Francis
Image by US Navy, public domain,
via Defense News

 

Several naval officers and civilians were arrested at that time on charges of Conspiracy and Bribery. Among those arrested was the apparent mastermind, one Leonard Glenn “Fat Leonard” Francis, a Malaysian businessman who is the owner and CEO of GDMA. He is a port service kingpin in the South Pacific region with alleged connections to Communist China. According to the US Justice Department prosecutors, “This is the first time multiple officers are charged as working all together in a multi-layered conspiracy, pooling their individual and collective resources and influence on behalf of Francis.” It is a multi-layered conspiracy with countless cost to our nation.

One of the indictments was unsealed on March 14, 2017, and its 78 pages reveal just how extensive this maze of betrayal, greed, debauchery, and arguably even treason had become, involving at least twenty US Navy officers including a Vice Admiral, five Rear Admirals, a Marine Colonel, five Navy Captains, six Navy Commanders, two Navy Lt. Commanders, and a Navy Warrant Officer, along with several top GDMA employees. Some officers even drew their wives into this proven criminal conspiracy.

It began in January of 2006 when Navy Contract Supervisor Paul Simpkins, a Department of Defense civilian employee, contacted Fat Leonard and offered to throw Navy ship docking service contracts to GDMA in exchange for cash.

One month later the cash—our taxpayer dollars—started flowing. GDMA signed a $929,000 contract with the US Navy for docking services. Not only was this the first contract of many, but the Navy now estimates that it paid more than double the normal rate for the services provided. In exchange, Simpkins received $50k in US cash from Fat Leonard’s hands.

In short time, Simpkins and Fat Leonard pulled several naval officers into their dealings—senior officers who were responsible for coordinating missions, directing operations, directing ship movements, and scheduling port visits to service the ships and submarines of our US Navy 7th Fleet, which is the US Far Eastern Fleet. One conspirator was even the commanding officer of the nuclear aircraft carrier, USS George Washington.

Soon, these senior US Navy officers were using their position and influence to direct business to Fat Leonard’s facilities throughout the Far East. Not only that, some of the officers regularly sent the Malaysian classified ship schedules and helped protect GDMA from investigations by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (“NCIS”). In return, the officers received lavish dinners, time with prostitutes, expensive gifts, travel expenses, and luxury hotel accommodations for themselves and their families.

The recently unsealed indictment best indicates the jaw-dropping extent of the criminal activities undertaken by these conspirators, not to mention their sheer stupidity. It includes charges of Conspiracy, Bribery, False Statements, and Obstruction of Justice, and Conspiracy to Commit Honest Service Fraud—a laundry list of what NOT to do as a naval officer.

As you read this, please keep in mind that it is highly illegal for any government employee, military or civilian, to receive expensive meals and gifts, much less prostitutes and travel expenses, from defense contractors or any other influencers. Also remember that Fat Leonard is a Malaysian national operating a multi-million-dollar business throughout the Far East, including facilities in Hong Kong.

You know, Hong Kong? That place controlled by Communist China, the hostile country that spies on the US at every possible opportunity? Yeah. That Hong Kong. Because a Malaysian criminal defrauding the US government is certainly going to be too moral and ethical to trade or sell our classified information to his host country of China, right?

Let’s look at the list of allegations included in the indictment:

  • Repeated incidents of officers sending Fat Leonard classified information on planned US Navy ship movements via private email and Facebook.

One of numerous examples from the recently unsealed indictment:

“On or about January 25, 2008 at 12:25 a.m., SHEDD, using his cooltoad.com account, emailed Francis [Fat Leonard] multiple classified ship schedules. During this exchange, SHEDD confirmed a change to the schedule of the U.S.S. Fitzgerald to accommodate Francis.”

  • Repeated incidents of officers using their position and influence to steer contracts to GDMA in full knowledge of the fact that GDMA was charging the US approximately twice the going rate for port services.

  • Repeated incidents of officers using their position and influence to re-direct US Navy ships to GDMA’s facilities, often at Fat Leonard’s request. (See quote above.)

  • Repeated incidents of officers actively suppressing GDMA competition for contracts.

  • Repeated incidents of officers using their position and influence to suppress NCIS investigations into GDMA’s overbilling practices.

  • Repeated incidents of officers warning Fat Leonard of investigations and helping to destroy evidence and otherwise obstruct said investigations.

  • Repeated incidents of officers and even their wives “shaping” contacts. “Shaping” is the espionage term of art for courting someone into a conspiratorial ring.

From the indictment:

“In a further effort to recruit AB, the FISC official, into the conspiracy, DEGUZMAN, his wife, Aruffo, Francis and others developed and implemented a ‘shaping op[eration].’ On March 30, 2007, DEGUZMAN wrote to Aruffo: “Ed san, Domo [thank you] for the tuna. Got the other tuna to [AB’s wife] for ‘shaping.’” Aruffo forward the email to Francis, adding, “Beginning our ‘shaping’ OP, dropped off a chunk of tuna that I bought in General Santos [City] for DEGUZMAN’s wife to drop off with [AB’s wife].””

Using wives this way is not uncommon in conspiracies. Sending wives to other wives with expensive gifts is a low risk way to test the waters before inviting new co-conspirators into schemes.

  • Repeated incidents of officers recruiting their successors to continue these criminal activities on behalf of Fat Leonard and GDMA.

  • At least one incident of an officer requesting that Fat Leonard pay off his personal debts, to which Fat Leonard requested and received classified information on planned US Navy ship movements.

  • At least one incident of an officer using his position to influence staffing levels in a Ship Support Office in Hong Kong at the request of and on behalf of Fat Leonard and GDMA.

  • Repeated incidents of officers requesting employment from GDMA for their post-service lives. As a point of interest, none were hired by GDMA.

  • Repeated incidents of officers destroying evidence, making false statements, and obstructing justice once they, themselves, came under investigation.

In return for these actions on his behalf, Fat Leonard provided the officers and many of their wives with lavish meals valued at tens of thousands of dollars, entertainment, travel and hotel expenses, gifts, cash, and the services of prostitutes. The recently unsealed indictment is a laundry list of things US Navy officers should NOT be receiving from smarmy defense contractors.

  • Repeated incidents of officers requesting and receiving travel expenses and lodging accommodations for themselves and their families.

  • Repeated incidents of officers and their wives receiving lavish meals costing tens of thousands of dollars.

From the indictment:

“On or about March 24, 2007, NEWLAND, DEGUZMAN, HORNBECK, and Aruffo attended a multi-course dinner hosted by Francis at the Oak Door in Tokyo, Japan, during which was served, at Francis’s expense, foie gras, Lobster Thermidor, and Sendai Tenderloin, and for dessert, “Liberte Sauvage,” the winning cake of the 10th Coupe du Monde de la Patisserie 2007, followed by cognac and cigars. Each course was paired with fine champagne or wine.”

  • Repeated incidents of officers and their wives receiving expensive gifts from Fat Leonard.

  • Repeated incidents of Fat Leonard arranging and paying for debauchery with prostitutes.

From the recently unsealed indictment:

“On or about May 22 – 25, 2008, during a port visit by the U.S.S. Blue Ridge to Manila, Philippines, HORNBECK, DOLAN, LOVELESS, LAUSMAN, SHEDD, and Sanchez stayed at Francis’s expense at the Makati Shangri-La in Manila, Philippines, where for himself and the U.S. Navy attendees, Francis booked the Presidential Suite. In this venue, Francis hosted a raging multi-day party, with a rotating carousel of prostitutes in attendance, during which the conspirators drank all of the Dom Perignon available at the Shangri-La. Room and alcohol charges born by Francis exceeded $50,000 USD.”

Two of the conspirators emailed Francis to thank him for his hospitality from the private cooltoad.com accounts the group used to communicate regarding their criminal activities.

 


This photo of Presidential Suite, Makati Shangri-La Manila, sans prostitutes, is courtesy of TripAdvisor.

The investigation, opened in 2010, is ongoing, and the indictments continue to flow.

Most of the defendants have not yet gone to trial, and some that had already been convicted have yet to be sentenced. For those readers whose stomachs can endure a more detailed description, the US Justice Department indictments that have been released are available at both the Justice Department web page and the US Naval Institute web site.

The US Justice Department took and kept the lead in this long investigation, and it is pursuing prosecutions in Federal Court. However, if any of the accused officers should miraculously escape the wrath of the federal judges, the US Navy retains the right to re-arrest and charge them under military law with that great catchall “Conduct Unbecoming an Officer.” Some of the minor players have already pleaded out and have, in some cases, received punishments proportional to their crimes.

This Fat Leonard Conspiracy has dealt inestimable damage to our national security on multiple levels:

  1. When the details of deployments and ship schedules are known to our potential enemies, those ships are then more vulnerable to well-planned attacks, including terrorist attacks. That’s why ship schedules are classified in the first place.

  1. Ship deployments are supposed to be determined by our national security interests. When ships are diverted from the locations where they most benefit our national security, that damages our national security in strategic terms.

For example, strategic realities might have indicated that on a particular day, a particular aircraft carrier and her escorting cruiser and destroyers would have been ideally located off the coast of Japan. But because these officers were selling out our country for Lobster Thermidor and blow jobs, those same ships might have been instead in a port in Singapore or Malaysia. But hey, why let national security get in the way of free prostitutes?

  1. The service employees of GDMA, a corporation owned and operated by a criminal, had access to our US Navy vessels and the highly sensitive systems they carry.

We don’t know to what extent Fat Leonard or any of the implicated GDMA employees are involved with the communist Chinese government or with individuals that are involved with the Chinese communist government. By exposing our ships to service employees from foreign docking and ship services that were operated by a criminal, these US Navy conspirators unduly exposed our technology to those who would do us damage, and possibly on behalf of Communist China.

We may never know if the communist Chinese government received classified information about the highly sensitive systems on our US Navy vessels, but it would be an unusual misstep for the Chinese if they did not.

  1. Congress gives money to the US Navy on the assumption that the Navy is not wasting it. The next time the Navy goes to Congress for money, Congress will rightfully ask, “Is that price with or without the hookers?”

The US Navy, the Pentagon, and the current US administration hope to be able to contain any physical conflict with China to the Western Pacific, as opposed to Los Angeles or downtown Kansas City. That requires very expensive ships, very expensive maintenance on those very expensive ships, and the very expensive recruiting of skilled, patriotic young men and women to maintain and operate those very expensive ships. When US Navy officers engage in criminal financial malfeasance, they make it more difficult for the US Navy, the Pentagon, and the president to convince the taxpayers that they should all willingly pay more taxes to modernize the fleet.

It’s hard enough explaining the $13 billion going into the construction of our first of class USS Gerald Ford supercarrier. How can the taxpayers not question building and manning such a ship when they are wondering if and when another Fat Leonard Conspiracy will occur, or if there is even another one ongoing? How can the US taxpayers not wonder if the USS Gerald Ford will be in the hands of trustworthy leaders? How can we all not wonder if the extremely expensive new technologies on that aircraft carrier will end up being exposed to the ongoing, robust espionage efforts of Communist China and Putinesque Imperial Russia?

  1. Such criminal malfeasance on the part of officers at the very top of the US Navy undermines the entire military culture.

Repeatedly throughout the active years of the conspiracy, junior officers objected and made recommendations that their superiors shot down. In a chain of command, junior officers and enlisted service men and women can raise concerns, but they don’t get to question orders. Implicit in that is that the officers at the top can be trusted to be serving our nation and not themselves. When those at the bottom don’t or cannot trust the people at the top, there is a breakdown in authority and effective functioning.

These conspirators, ranging in rank from First Class Petty Officer to Vice Admiral set a horrific example for the US Navy and all military branches with their criminal behavior. Our best young people are not inspired to stay in the Navy and do their best job for their country when their senior leaders are stabbing them in the back. It’s bad enough that our enlisted men and women risk their lives serving at such low wages to defend our country when our politicians so infrequently display any sense of patriotism or selflessness. Having their own senior officers, whose judgments their lives depend on, betray them so coarsely makes it that much harder for those young Americans to continue serving our country selflessly.

There may be much more that we will never know about the Fat Leonard Conspiracy, but there are two known and glaring facts worthy of our attention.

  1. That such a broad conspiracy involving so many people could continue for at least five years speaks poorly of US Navy financial oversight, Navy security oversight, Navy counter-intelligence efforts, and the US Navy’s culture and leadership in general.

  1. That senior Navy officers and Navy Criminal Investigation Division agents willingly helped schedule and then attended wild parties in Hong Kong, Malaysia, and the Philippines, where they were serviced by prostitutes procured by GDMA indicates a frighteningly amateurish level of conduct by trained professionals. Did the Communist Chinese government conduct honeypot operations against these Navy officers with the help of GDMA? We can’t say for certain, but it’s entirely plausible and a good bet. If Holmes were Chinese, he certainly would not have missed the opportunity for such an easy intelligence coup.

The biggest question in all of this is to what degree the US Navy will improve its oversight and its promotion selection process. So far, the changes have been minor. The US Navy needs to conduct a serious investigation not just into these crimes, but into the culture that allowed them to occur.

This problem may seem far removed from our daily lives, but it touches all of us.

We are not helpless. We can let our elected officials in our home districts know that we are revolted by this criminal malfeasance that has bilked we taxpayers of untold millions, and we can demand an investigation into how these crimes went on for so long. This web site has complete instructions on how to reach each representative and senator—How to Contact Your Elected Officials.

These politicians might not care much about our US Navy or our national security, but they all care a great deal about being re-elected. They want our votes. Let’s make them earn those votes for a change. No government will ever be any better than we, the people, force it to be.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Bayard & Holmes Official Photo

Piper Bayard is an author and a recovering attorney. Her writing partner, Jay Holmes, is an anonymous senior member of the intelligence community and a field veteran from the Cold War through the current Global War on Terror. Together, they are the bestselling authors of the international spy thriller, THE SPY BRIDE.

Watch for their upcoming non-fiction release, CHINA — THE PIRATE OF THE SOUTH CHINA SEA.

 

cover-3-china-the-pirate-of-the-south-china-sea

Keep in touch through updates at Bayard & Holmes Covert Briefing.

You can contact Bayard & Holmes in comments below, at their site, Bayard & Holmes, on Twitter at @piperbayard, on Facebook at Bayard & Holmes, or at their email, BH@BayardandHolmes.com.

©2017 Bayard & Holmes. All content on this page is protected by copyright. If you would like to use any part of this, please contact us at the above links to request permission.

A Grain of Salt–Spy Ships, Officials, and Russian Missiles

Bayard & Holmes

~ Piper Bayard

Big Media, Big Politics, and Big Business all profit financially and politically when they keep the public worked up in fear and/or outrage. They are not our friends. Let’s take some of their power back with a few facts.

Outrage

Throughout media, “US officials” report that a Russian spy ship has “appeared” off the East Coast – the first such sighting during the Trump administration.

Facts

  • Russian spy ships have been “appearing” off the US East Coast since the invention of the radio – literally over ninety years.
  • If we want to get technical, Russian spy ships have been “appearing” off of US coasts ever since Russia could sail to the US coast.
  • It is entirely possible that this is the first time journalists have bothered to notice Russian spy ship patrols.
  • According to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, territorial waters extend 12 nautical miles (22.2 km; 13.8 mi) from the mean low water mark of a coastal state.
  • The Russians, Chinese, North Koreans, Iranians, and Emperor Palpatine can legally park their entire navies 14 miles off the US coastline and have a bacchanalia if they want to, and they are breaking no international laws.
  • The Russian spy ship Viktor Leonov was 30 miles off the US coast as of February 15, 2017.
  • There are no allegations that any Russian ships have violated US territorial waters.
  • US ships regularly cruise coastal waters of Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, and every other country on the planet that has a coastline.
  • Merriam-Webster defines “official” as “one who holds or is invested with an office.”
  • Merriam-Webster defines “office” as “a position of responsibility or some degree of executive authority.”
  • Well over 800,000 people in the Intelligence Community hold top secret clearances, which would indicate “position[s] of responsibility or some degree of executive authority.”
  • If I had cited to “officials” in my freshman journalism class, I would have flunked and become the department poster child for shoddy journalism. 

 

Bayard & Holmes Opinion

Where the hell have “journalists” been for the past ninety years? This is like watching seven-year-olds discover Knock-Knock Jokes. These same “journalists” couldn’t even find Russia on a map before it hacked the DNC last August.

Actual photo of journalists finally noticing Russian spy ships off of US coast.

 

Outrage

“Russia Deploys Missile, Violating Treaty and Challenging Trump” ~ The New York Times

 

Facts

  • Versions of this headline are being paired throughout media with “news” of the Russian spy ship.
  • Russia did indeed deploy a new intermediate-range missile, which can be considered a violation of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.
  • Russia deployed this missile in December, 2016, before Trump took office.
  • The Obama administration was aware of the Russian missile program in 2014.
  • The Obama administration warned Russia in 2014 that it was violating the treaty.
  • The Obama administration warned Russia again in 2015 that it was violating the treaty.
  • Russia now has two batteries of the new cruise missiles.

 

Bayard & Holmes Opinion

While the arms treaty issues will certainly pose a challenge to the Trump administration, Putin threw down the Arms Gauntlet during the Obama administration. Obama responded with a frown. This recent missile deployment is not about Putin “challenging” Trump like some sort of international cock fight, as the headline implies. It was just time for Putin to test his new toys. He’d have done it no matter who won the election.

Unfortunately for all of us, Trump threw down the Screw-You Gauntlet when he started his administration by publicly telling off all of the top media muckity-mucks. The media has picked up that gauntlet, and the public is nothing but a pawn in the Media War.

 

Bottom Line

Spy ships are old news, and Putin has had his missile agenda for a very long time. Media and politicians also have their agendas. None of these agendas include an informed, educated public.

Take it all with a grain of salt!

Outrage with a Grain of Salt–NSC, Bannon, & the Washington Post

Bayard & Holmes

~ Piper Bayard

The Unholy Threesome of Big Media, Big Politics, and Big Business is never happier than when the public is outraged. Outrage means profits. Outrage means political steam. Outrage means the propaganda of foreign billionaires that would mold us and countries that would dismember our nation is getting through. Public outrage means the media has served its foreign and domestic masters well.

 

Canstock, Journal des Voyage (1879-80)

 

Such realities as political leaders selling out to foreign billionaires, Taliban and drug lords growing fat on American taxpayer dollars, and the entire city of Flint, Michigan facing a third year without clean drinking water are swept aside in the torrent of outrage over Harambe, bathrooms, and now hysteria-inducing headlines about President Trump. With media outlets great and small churning out “fake news” and “alternative facts” attributed to “unnamed officials,” “an official who spoke on condition of anonymity,” or even “a source close to officials familiar with the case,” Americans are starved for reliable information.

Social media exacerbates this truth famine by offering a public eager to feed its hysteria addiction with shares and retweets.

Even the most popular media outlets, such as the Washington Post,* publish outright lies with clickbait headlines, only to retract the entire stories two days later. But at that point, their aims are fulfilled. The stories are already viral slop in the social media Trough of Outrage, and a society addicted to its own anxieties has sucked it up without pausing to breathe. And the retractions? Crickets. The damage is done.

Enough.

To counteract this unprecedented tsunami of deceit, we invite people to look beyond the outrage to evaluate a few facts. We label Outrage, Facts, and Opinion accordingly so that there are no misunderstandings. We also include links to articles that we believe might help our readers understand today’s evolving world dynamic.

If we stick together and take the outrageous bombardment with a grain of salt, we eventually might slog our way out of this Information Cesspool.

 

Outrage

President Trump appointed Steve Bannon to the National Security Council and “ousted” the country’s most senior military and intelligence officials as regular members of the Principals Committee.

Facts

  • The National Security Council (“NSC”) is a combination of White House staff, military staff, intelligence staff, and anyone else the president wants on it. Its purpose is to advise and assist the president on national security and foreign policy and to help the president coordinate those policies among the various branches of government. Its members include a wide variety of experts and officials in areas from drug control policy to economic policy to Justice Department issues.
  • The Principals Committee is a subset of the NSC. Members of the Principals Committee are required to attend all meetings of the NSC regardless of the meeting agenda.
  • President Trump removed the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Director of National Intelligence from the Principals Committee of the NSC.
  • President Trump added White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon to the Principals Committee of the NSC.
  • Steve Bannon is the former editor of Breitbart. He is also a former US Navy officer and was a special assistant to the Chief of Naval Operations at the Pentagon. He holds a master’s degree in National Security Studies from Georgetown University School of Foreign Service and an MBA from Harvard Business School. He has worked as an investment banker for Goldman Sachs.
  • At this point in time, Trump can legally appoint Mickey Mouse to the NSC if he so desires. Just because no one ever has appointed Mickey Mouse to the NSC doesn’t mean it’s illegal or unconstitutional. It’s Trump’s council.

What this means for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Director of National Intelligence:

Oh, happy day!

We all know how in every bureaucracy, corporate or governmental, people at all levels clamor for the opportunity to leave their work piling up on their desks to attend meetings, particularly when those meetings have nothing to do with their specialties? . . . Yes. Exactly. . . . The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Director of National Intelligence are no different. They have full plates without being required to attend meetings that have nothing to do with the military or intelligence communities. Trump’s order relieves them from such an inefficient waste of their time.

 

Actual photo of DNI emerging from three-hour meeting on economic policy.

 

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Director of National Intelligence still have permanent invitations to every meeting they would like to attend, and they are still full members of the NSC. In other words, if they want to participate in any and all NSC meetings, they are welcome to do so, but if they are busy fighting jihadis, Russians, or over-reaching Chinese, they don’t have to put everything on hold to attend meetings on economics, the UN, or drug control policy.

Bayard & Holmes Opinion

We are delighted on behalf of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Director of National Intelligence. Also, we have no idea why Trump would appoint Bannon to the National Security Council. We do know that foreign individuals and hostile countries are inundating Americans with propaganda these days, even in the most “prestigious” journalistic rags. Propaganda is, indeed, a national security issue . . . Let’s face it. If anyone knows about propaganda, it’s the former editor of Breitbart. Only the editors of the New York Times or Washington Post would be as qualified. Perhaps Bannon has been persuaded to use his superpowers on our behalf?

  *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Outrage

Steve Bannon ordered the Department of Homeland Security to ignore the Federal Court injunctions and continue enforcing Trump’s temporary ban on immigration from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.

Facts

  • The office of Director of Homeland Security is a Cabinet position. Cabinet positions answer directly to the president.
  • Retired Marine General Kelly is the Director of Homeland Security. His boss is President Trump.
  • Steve Bannon is nowhere in the chain of command and has no authority to “order” anyone in the government or outside the government to do anything.

Bayard & Holmes Opinion

Aside from those pesky chain-of-command issues, does anyone seriously believe a doughy rich boy like Bannon can order this guy to do anything? Just saying.

 

General John Kelly, USMC

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Outrage

Trump exempted countries where he holds business interests from the “Muslim ban.”

Facts

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Outrage

White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon circumvented presidential chain of command and paid a personal and unscheduled visit to DHS Director Kelly’s office to confront him over green card waivers to Trump’s presidential memorandum on immigration.

Facts

  • This was published by the Washington Post on January 28.
  • The columnist who wrote about this outrageous behavior, Josh Rogin, attributed the information to “two administration officials familiar with the confrontation.” No word yet on who those “two administration officials” might be. They could literally be the “official file clerks to the secretary of the new guy in Human Resources.”
  • White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer stated there had been no confrontation in person or otherwise between Bannon and Kelly.
  • On February 4, the Washington Post amended the article and issued a statement admitting that neither Rogin nor anyone else at the publication checked their facts, and that the White House denied the confrontation took place.

Bayard & Holmes Opinion

We are amazed that Josh Rogin ever passed a freshman journalism class. Sadly, we are not amazed that Washington Post hired him. WaPo has recently upgraded its normal procedures for “not checking facts” in the interests of maintaining its standards and traditional dedication to journalistic integrity.

Bottom Line

Washington Post isn’t the only media outlet hiring creative writers these days. We all need to take everything we read and everything we hear with a grain of salt.

Piper’s Favorites of the Week:

The World as Seen by Donald Trump – Le Monde Diplomatique

The Intellectual Yet Idiot – Incerto

Read Draft Text of Trump’s Executive Order – Huffington Post

Everything I Need to Know About Russian Interference I Learned from College Pranks – Defense One

An Invasion by Any Other Name: The Kremlin’s Dirty War in Ukraine – The Interpreter, Institute of Modern Russia

What outrageous rumors have you heard this week? Do you have any you would like us to look into?

* ‘Fake News’ And How The Washington Post Rewrote Its Story On Russian Hacking Of The Power Grid

 

Analyzing News: How to Consider the Source

Bayard & Holmes

~ Piper Bayard and Jay Holmes

After the election, many people realized they had been lied to by a biased political media that slanted polls, rigged debates, and buried important facts. Some of those people asked us how they can judge articles and find real information about the issues that affect their lives. We’ve come up with a two-part series of guidelines to help people out.

canstock-2016-nov-news-media

Golden Rule: Of the first ten rules of evaluating media, one through nine are “consider the source.”

Who owns the source?

The government used to have restrictions that prevented any one media outlet from monopolizing the broadcasting industry.

The fear was that a small number of companies owning all of the media would lead to media restricting and/or manipulating the news. During the 1980s, the US government relaxed those restrictions on media consolidation, and in 1996, the Telecommunications Act allowed corporations to suck up even more media outlets. Now, media is substantially consolidated, and a handful of corporations own and control pretty much all of the radio and television stations and major networks.

Also at play was the Fairness Doctrine. As a part of FCC broadcasting rules, it required that any broadcaster that aired controversial topics must provide time to present the opposing views. The Fairness Doctrine has not been enforced since 1985.

Many would say that between the relaxed regulations and the non-enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine, the original fears behind those now largely historical restrictions have been realized.

Every media source has an owner, a controlling shareholder, and/or influential donors.

While they all want to make money, some also want to create the world in their own image. Those who only want to make money will choose whatever message sells to their audience, and they will deliver it with gusto. Those who want to imprint posterity with their personal views will cultivate a like-minded audience and herd them toward certain long-term goals.

We’ll pick on two prominent examples, CNN and FOX.

CNN was founded by Ted Turner. Ted Turner is an avowed leftist and an open Fidel Castro admirer, not to mention “Hanoi Jane” Fonda’s ex. He also founded the Moscow Independent Broadcasting Network and Russian channel TV-6. In addition, Turner contributed $1 billion to the UN. He is consistent in fusing his progressive, global first personal stance with his penchant for sucking in the billions.

Evidence of this leftist foundational bias showed in the recent election with CNN’s treatment of Clinton, the Global First candidate. CNN ran daily “Trump a Dystopian Nightmare; Clinton a Mildly Disturbing Daydream” headlines, consistently characterized Clinton’s breaches of the Espionage Act as “the email controversy,” and assisted Clinton by feeding her debate questions. How much the management of CNN participated in that last skanky move is left to the reasonable imagination, but it’s all in step with Ted’s leftist history and ideology that he should be a rich capitalist, and globalized socialism should be good enough for the rest of us.

Ted Turner is the staunch rival of Australian-American Rupert Murdoch, who, with his family, owns both 21st Century Fox and News Corp through the Murdoch Family Trust. Altogether, Murdoch’s family trust owns over eight hundred companies in over fifty countries.

Rupert Murdoch’s political gate swings both ways, so to speak, in that his holding companies own conservative political media in America, such as Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, and he supports the conservative party in Australia. However, in the UK, Rupert has switched back and forth, using his influence on behalf of Conservative Party leader Margaret Thatcher, then Labour Party leader Tony Blair, then back to Conservative Party leader David Cameron. Such willingness to play both sides of the aisle indicate someone who is not operating with any conviction or motive except to discover what $13 billion can buy that $12 billion can’t. Murdoch’s agenda appears to be making money more than molding politics.

Fox News is renowned for its right wing spin, and it is expert at playing to its audience. It couches what are frequently legitimate facts in so much pandering, drama, and hysteria mongering that it’s difficult to sort through it all to get to the kernels of truth. Whatever that truth may be, Fox is going to make sure its audience gets excited about it and comes back for more, all to the benefit of the Murdoch Family Trust.

Another highly influential player in the “social engineering through media” effort is foreign billionaire felon George Soros. Soros has his hands in over 30 media outlets, and he is deeply involved in purchasing American politicians. We encourage you to research him on your own.

Bottom Line:  The power behind the media throne determines the message. Whether that message is born from vanity or greed, everything funnels through that message.

What political ties does the source have?

People have always been worried about the government controlling the media. The government doesn’t have to control the media in the US, or in the West, for that matter, because the media is run by people who are kindred spirits and like minds to the politicians.

Presidents have long recognized that fact and made the most of it by appointing journalists, their spouses, their siblings, and their children to positions in government. One president appointed over two dozen journalists to his White House staff, and more as ambassadors. Media plays its part in the wedding of power, as well, taking on family members of politicians and their political spawn. For example, one president’s offspring obtained a position as a rookie correspondent at major network for a mere four times the normal rookie correspondent salary. It’s a modern day way of marrying kingdoms to each other to ensure power management.

Bottom Line: Look at which journalists are financially and politically married with which politicians to determine which message they will favor.

Who advertises in the source?

Media is big business. So is advertising. This affects news stories in two ways.

  1. Media won’t publish anything that they think will anger their audience. Audiences link their feelings and attitudes about products advertised to the stories they find in media and retaliate if they disapprove. A simple google search turns up multiple groups promoting the boycott of almost every network. Media will sidestep stories that might lead to a boycott. When pushed to publish something chancy because every other outlet is publishing it, media will spin the facts to please their audience.
  2. If a company is a big advertiser, the media outlet will not publish negative information about that advertiser’s products. For example, if Ford Motor Company advertises heavily with XYZ media outlet, and their vehicles start exploding when hit from behind, XYZ media outlet will either avoid the story or spin it in a way that helps Ford look blameless. Advertising money is a crucial source of company income, and no outlet will risk losing it.

Bottom Line: Media doesn’t want to anger either its audience or its advertisers. Both result in losing money.

Who is their audience?

In this world of echo chambers reinforced by social media cliques, politicians have been able to carve up society into black and white factions, sometimes literally. A significant percentage of people are not interested in information that does not confirm their pre-conceived notions, as evidenced by the fact that almost all of us know people who have declared during this election that they want nothing to do with “those” voters. That makes it easy for media to define and divide audiences and to appeal to their preferences.

To continue with our CNN vs. FOX thread, CNN viewers are concerned with political correctness and pro-global progressive agendas, while FOX viewers prefer more conservative, pro-American stories. Stories and headlines are structured to please those audiences. For example, during the election, CNN earned its pseudonym, the Clinton News Network, while FOX served as the anti-Clinton bullhorn. In other words, if Trump walked on water, the CNN headlines would read “Trump Can’t Swim!” Likewise, if Hillary ran into a burning building to save a child, FOX headlines would read “Hillary Snatches Baby!”

Bottom Line: What message does the majority of the audience want to hear?

And now the hardest questions to face when considering a source . . . What do I want to hear and why?

We all have personal biases that make us want to believe some things more than others. Many of us have suffered abuses by religious or government institutions that left behind a filter on all incoming information, propelling us to the right or the left. Many of us have personal traumas that define our perceptions of those of other races, religions, political factions, etc. Add to that the fact that it is difficult to conceive of qualities in others that we do not possess ourselves, and most of us have difficulty imagining the depth of depravity some politicians and media moguls possess. All of these elements and countless others contribute to our collection and interpretation of information.

Bottom Line: The best we can do is recognize our own biases and seek out diverse sources, open our minds, and keep the answers to the questions above at front and center in our analysis.

In summary, when evaluating the media source, ask the following questions:

  1. Who owns the source?
  2. What is that person’s message?
  3. Is the source pandering to its audience or trying to mold it?
  4. Which politicians are in the journalists’ beds?
  5. Who advertises in the source?
  6. Who is the source’s audience?
  7. What is my own bias?

Several of our readers have asked where we get our information.

  • Holmes reads government releases and can see right away what is public. Sometimes, he notifies Piper of public information, such as a proposed F-16 offer to India, and Piper posts the information on Twitter and FB. We might blog about it, as we did with the F-16 and Lockheed Martin.
  • Piper scans Twitter for open source news of the world. She then asks Holmes about what she finds to see if he can add anything or to discuss potential postings for readers.
  • Holmes responds with, “I can’t comment on that,” “Yep. That’s accurate, and here’s the rest of the story,” or “Joder! Puta madre! That’s public? Someone is talking too much.” *murder-death face*

We can’t share Holmes’s sources, but these are Piper’s go-to Tweeps for open source information:

The Gray Man @IntelOperator. The Gray Man is a knowledgable and highly respected member of the intelligence community who tweets information on national security, world events, and animal adoption.

Jamestown @CifJamestown. Jamestown is an educated, friendly tweep with information on foreign and domestic policy and terrorism. I often find things on this timeline that I do not find elsewhere.

Dani Homados @homados. Dani is a fine veteran and a lovely gentleman with solid tweets on military, national security, and world events.

El Cid Barett @ElCidBarett. Barett, a.k.a. Lisa, is one of the most colorful and graphic tweeps on Twitter for information on military, national security, science, and women’s fashions.

Chris Magill @cmagill. Chris is in information security, or InfoSec. As his bio reads, he can “…find the hacker, shoot, stop the bleeding, explain HIPAA, send the press release on time and on budget.” He tweets excellent information about cybersecurity and has a sense of humor that will keep you rolling.

Sniper Barbie @LadyRed_6. Sniper is a sharp and pleasant lady with a thorough scoop on cybersecurity. Piper wants the Barbie and accessories in her profile pic.

And, of course, Piper Bayard @PiperBayard. Piper tweets part of the great info she finds, along with original posts from Holmes and whatever quirky or interesting things she digs up.

Some tweeps are members of the military and/or intelligence communities, and some are not. Regardless, we would emphasize that all information they tweet is open source. You will notice that relatively few of the tweets reference mainstream media sources. If we really want to know what’s happening, we have to be open to a variety of sources and remember that even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Next week, we will focus on questions to ask when evaluating the content of articles. Do you have any questions regarding evaluating a source? Do you have any favorite methods or suggestions?

Duterte, Dating, & Diplomacy in the Nuclear Age

Bayard & Holmes

~ Jay Holmes

Dating and Diplomacy in the Age of Nuclear Missiles…

Part ten million one of a seemingly infinite series.

Note: For the deepest emotional experience, please play “Sweet Dreams” by the Eurythmics as you read this article.

Diplomacy is at times a bit like dating. We’ve all felt that thrilling infatuation. Sometimes it leads to a great night or weekend, or, if you’re very lucky, a few good decades. But in romance, as in foreign policy, some relationships start poorly and go to hell all too quickly. At least in those cases, when the first date is horrific, you have a chance to avoid a bad marriage with an abusive creep. Don’t pass on the chance.

 

Philippine Pres. Rodrigo "Rody" Duterte Image by Gvt. of the Philippines, public domain

Philippine Pres. Rodrigo “Rody” Duterte
Image by Gvt. of the Philippines, public domain

 

Many of our readers are now quite familiar with the challenges and problems facing the US and other nations in the South China Sea. The short description of those problems is “China.”

Many readers are also familiar with that colorful new celebrity on the world stage, Rodrigo “Rody” Roa Duterte. Normally, sensible people avoid weird-acting dudes called “Rody,” but this particular weird dude is now the leader of one of our key Asian allies, the Republic of the Philippines.

Most Americans and Westerners became aware of Rody this summer when, within a matter of a few weeks, he publicly called the US Ambassador to the Philippines a “gay son of a bitch” and then, for an encore, he called US President Obama “that son of a whore.” Foreign policy gurus the world over are all prompted to ask the same obvious question. I can answer that obvious question here and now. US Intelligence services have definitive evidence that, in spite of the strong similarities between them, Rody Duterte is not the long lost brother of North Korea’s Kim Jong Un.

Rody’s anti-American outbursts were prompted by the fact that the US government, in an underwhelming response to the alleged 3,000+ recent murders by Rody death squads, had suggested to him that he might please consider following the Philippines constitution when conducting his campaign against “crime, corruption, and drugs.”

The Philippines does indeed have serious problems with violent crime, corruption, and drug addiction. When Rody Duterte was the mayor of Davao City, he gained fame, and infamy, by conducting a violent campaign against criminals. Some questioned if, while killing drug dealers and drug addicts, he hadn’t accidentally murdered a few innocent Philippines citizens that happened to oppose his political career. Accidents do happen. In Davao City and Manila, they seem to happen a lot.

While Duterte has only recently become an annoying clown to Americans and Westerners, he’s been aggravating folks in the Philippines and neighboring states for a few years.

As Mayor of Davao City, when journalists questioned him about possible connections to extrajudicial death squads, he casually responded “Yeah, I am death squad.” Prior to being elected to the presidency of the Philippines, Duterte bragged to reporters that he would kill up to 100,000 criminals if elected President.

In May of 2015, New York-based Human Rights Watch accused Duterte of being involved in more than a thousand killings. It accused him of being what he said he was. In a television interview, Duterte responded by saying that the group should go ahead and file a complaint with the UN, and then he would show the world how stupid they are by killing them.

In 1989, a 36-year-old Australian lay minister named Jacqueline Hamill was held hostage, raped, had her throat slashed, and was shot during a prison riot in the Philippines. In April of 2016, during his Presidential campaign, Duterte, referred to the rape and murder of Jacqueline Hamill, saying, “I was angry because she was raped, that’s one thing. But she was so beautiful, the mayor should have been first. What a waste.” Yes, the mayor that he was referring to was himself. He thought he should have been the first to rape Jacqueline Hamill.

So what are the impacts to Rody’s ignorant and barbaric behavior?

It depends on whom we ask. During a recent social call on American Artist John Alexander, I asked him to describe Duterte. John described him as “A Post-Modernist Head Hunter.” That seemed reasonably artistic to me.

When asked what they thought of Rody Duterte, the Philippine people responded by electing him President. We should not ignore this obvious evidence of the Philippine people’s desperation concerning rampant crime and corruption in the Philippines.

For China, Rody had to seem like a wonderful opportunity.

A week before the September 6, 2016 Asian Summit in Laos, Rody dramatically warned China that it would “face a reckoning” for its aggression in the “Philippine Sea.” Then, a couple of days before the summit, he switched over to his Anti-American rhetoric, demanding that the US stay out of Philippine domestic policy. After returning from the summit, Rody seemed to have experienced a Chinese-style epiphany. Rody then said that the Philippines remained committed to a peaceful solution to the conflict in the South China Sea, and he urgently advised “the US to not escalate matters in the South China Sea.” The wording sounded like vintage Chinese diplomatic dogma.

So what caused the wild vacillation in Rody’s passionate political opinions?

The Chinese government does not believe in the “prayer and meditation method” of achieving epiphanies. They do believe in cash and ruthless pragmatism in the shameless pursuit of unrestrained self-interest when conducting diplomacy. I can only wonder what China might have whispered to Duterte during the Asian Summit in Laos.

For the current US administration and for any future US administration, Duterte adds to the complexity of dealing with China in the South China Sea.

The US obviously hopes to continue to help the Philippines build a credible defense capability. The US has pursued this goal by sending military aid, investing many millions of dollars in military base construction for the Philippine military, and sending military advisors in large numbers to the island nation. Those US military advisors are not happy with the Philippine government’s glib attitude concerning the casual murder of civilians in the Philippines. Duterte loves the American cash, free military equipment, and the advisors as long as the advisors don’t attempt to advise him to be civilized.

Any US President will have to worry about Rody Duterte’s wild behavior.

For his part, Rody seems thrilled at the prospect of taking advantage of the US desire to resist Chinese hegemony in the West Pacific. At the same time, he cozies up to China. Older Americans will recognize the similarity to the routine Cold War diplomatic dilemma. The US often showered cash and military equipment on pathetically bad despots in order to simply keep those countries from allying with the USSR.

My best guess is that this US administration and the next will try to deal with Duterte as best they can without being suckered into a spending competition with China.

The Philippine people have elected and tolerated Rody Duterte in the hope of reducing corruption, crime, and drugs in the Philippines. If Rody pulls that off, then the Philippines will have an opportunity to prosper, but if his brutal methods don’t create real results, then the Philippine people will tire of him and elect someone else.

Buying an ally with cash and free military equipment is never a sound basis for a reliable alliance. Buying that ally and only getting an enemy for your cash is worse. We in the US will have to dispassionately evaluate Rody Duterte and the Philippines and act accordingly. This is no time for the US to “lead with the check book.”

Lt. Cmdr. Edward Lin Charged with Spying for China…And US Made It Easy

Bayard & Holmes

~ Jay Holmes

Once again, the US government has allowed your tax money and the nation’s security to be compromised in ridiculous fashion.

On Friday, April 8, 2016, the US Navy charged an active-duty maritime reconnaissance officer with passing US military secrets to a foreign government. The US Navy filed multiple charges, including espionage, against Lieutenant Commander Edward Lin during an Article 32 hearing in Norfolk, Virginia.

 

Lt. Cmdr. Edward Lin Image by US Naval Institute

Lt. Cmdr. Edward Lin
Image by US Naval Institute

 

Originally, the US Navy had not released the suspect’s name or the name of the country for which he (allegedly) spied because the Navy had designated the case as a “‘National Security Case.”

A “National Security Case,” according to the US military, is one which “ . . . to any serious degree, involves the compromise of a military or defense advantage over any foreign nation or terrorist group; involves an allegation of willful compromise of classified information, affects our military or defense capability to successfully resist hostile or destructive action, overt or covert; or involves an act of terrorism.”

The Navy explained that, “NCIS and FBI are still investigating the details of this case, and, therefore, we cannot provide any additional details at this time.” Since then, unidentified Navy officers have identified the accused as Lt. Cmdr. Lin and the beneficiary of Lin’s espionage work as Communist China.

You remember China? It’s that country that has been rapidly expanding its military and is claiming large areas of international waters as their national domain. Yes, that China.

Though redacted, the charging document describes a depressing story in which Lin transported secret information out of the country without permission and then lied about his whereabouts when he returned to duty. The charging documents allege that Lin successfully committed espionage twice and attempted espionage on three other occasions. Lin is currently in pre-trial confinement at the Naval Consolidated Brig in Chesapeake, Virginia.

Given that Lin had a high security clearance and served on E-P3E Aries II reconnaissance aircraft, he likely did tremendous damage to the US.

The technical and operational information that Lin was entrusted to safeguard constitutes an intelligence coup for Communist China. The reporting on this case will understandably focus on Lin’s access as an officer in the Commander, Patrol and Reconnaissance Group.

However, Lin had access to a whole other trove of treasure for China.

He served as the Congressional Liaison for the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Finance Management and Comptroller from 2012 to 2014. In his position as liaison to Congress, Lin would have had access to a vast array of sensitive information from every part of the US Navy.

It would be easy to assume that Edward Lin went to great lengths to succeed at such a villainous subterfuge. He didn’t. It was all too easy, and anyone could do it.

Most of the outrage – all of which Lin and my beloved Navy deserve – will be directed toward Edward Lin. In my opinion, Lin is just one small aspect of a much larger problem that we should not continue to ignore.

How did the US Navy, the FBI, and the rest of the US government manage to miss Lin’s (alleged) spying for what was likely more than a decade?

In the case of the FBI, we can forgive them if their pathetically small counterintelligence efforts missed Lin. Given their lack of resources and minimal mandate, the only surprise from the FBI counterintelligence team would be if they ever actually stumble upon an espionage operation. I am not knocking the FBI agents tasked with counterintelligence. They are undoubtedly as well trained and dedicated as other FBI agents, but they simply lack the means to conduct anything like an effective counterintelligence operation.

As for the US Navy, the Department of Defense, the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branches, I am much less forgiving. For one thing, Lin was a Taiwanese-born Taiwanese citizen until he was 14 years old. I disagree with the current policy that allows foreign born naturalized citizens to so easily gain high security clearances. I’m sure it’s the more politically correct thing to do, but it’s an asinine policy.

This is not the first time that the United States has lavished secret information on a Taiwanese born “alleged” spy.

Refer to the Wen Ho Lee* case if you are uncertain of the wisdom of this policy. In any event the proof is in the pudding, or in this case, the proof is in the feast that Lin served up to hostile Communist China.

If Lin is indeed guilty, then he deserves a life sentence of hard labor at Leavenworth or some obscure distant location. Most of my cohorts in the US Military and the US Intelligence Community will likely disagree with me and would prefer for Lin to be executed.

I can’t agree to that because I don’t support the death penalty. All judicial proceedings depend on the integrity and wisdom of those involved in prosecutions, and I can’t ignore that people are not perfect. For example, the government that is prosecuting Lin is the same government that was stupid enough and careless enough to make it easy for Lin to rob the taxpayers blind and endanger our national security. We now know about Edward Lin, which begs a question . . . Who do we not know about?

Regardless of the outcome of Lin’s trial, we, as American citizens, should start demanding better security standards to protect our national security and the billions of dollars in technology that we are all financing. Until our politicians have reason to think that the public is paying attention to our pathetically poor security policies, they will have no motive to fix it.

I hope that all of our readers will look beyond Edward Lin and tell their Congressweasels and their White House to start acting like adults on issues of national security. Edward Lin, if guilty, is a dangerous criminal, but this is a democracy, and We the People allowed him to do what he did.

 *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

* Note to Wen Ho Lee:  I am not the New York Times. Don’t dream of sending lawyers in my direction. You and I have met before. I meant what I said . . . Does your hand still hurt?