Well, then I guess they do have a point that encryption wouldn’t have been very useful
Seriously, I think it’s time to completely overhaul the civil service system. We just had a cyber Pearl Harbor. Will anyone be punished? We know the answer to that one.
[Thursday-morning update]
The military-clearance OPM breach is an absolute calamity. And Obama can’t even bring himself to admit that the federal government screwed up.
In which he is an idiot (sorry, behind a paywall):
The head of the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) on Tuesday downplayed the potential national security significance of NASA
continuing payments to Russia to get astronauts to and from the International Space Station (ISS).“I have a much bigger problem with the Russian rocket engine,” Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) told reporters at the Capitol. “I don’t see what the impact is, financially, of the Russian riding as compared with $300 million worth of rocket engines. There’s no comparison.”
But this is what I found interesting:
McCain’s counterpart in the House, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas), told reporters Tuesday that U.S. dependence on Russia for space-related items is a national security issue. But Thornberry also said the challenge with paying for Russian rides to ISS is much like the RD-180 scenario: one faced with limited options.
“It ought to be a lesson for all of us about letting key capability atrophy and becoming dependent upon somebody else whose reliability can be called into question,” Thornberry said. “That doesn’t mean you snap your fingers and solve it any more than you snap your fingers and solve the Russian engine issue.”
Actually, we could. All we have to do is be more accepting of astronaut risk.
No, Obama hasn’t “abandoned” Israel. He’s turned on it:
Finally, in 2014, Israel discovered that its primary ally had for months been secretly negotiating with its deadliest enemy. The talks resulted in an interim agreement that the great majority of Israelis considered a “bad deal” with an irrational, genocidal regime. Mr. Obama, though, insisted that Iran was a rational and potentially “very successful regional power.”
The daylight between Israel and the U.S. could not have been more blinding. And for Israelis who repeatedly heard the president pledge that he “had their backs” and “was not bluffing” about the military option, only to watch him tell an Israeli interviewer that “a military solution cannot fix” the Iranian nuclear threat, the astonishment could not have been greater.
I’d sure like to see the video of the Khalidi birthday party.
…team up.
They recognize they have a common enemy, in Tehran, and in the White House.
[Update a while later]
By 3-1, Americans think that we are losing the war to ISIS. And there’s no indication that Obama even cares.
[Update a couple minutes later]
It’s going to be a long eighteen months. Fortunately, there’s a lot of ruin in a country, particularly this one.
The stink continues to grow.
As the professor says, it stunk from the get-go.
An open letter:
The president’s sophistry demonstrates a simple but profound truth: his commitment to the progressive values of tikkun olam is governed by its own “red lines,” and is entirely utilitarian. Which again raises the question: what was his purpose in stressing this shared progressive commitment in his address to you, and what was his purpose in subtly reminding you of the costs of failing to abide by its terms?
The answer, I hope, is obvious. On June 30, Obama will likely conclude a nuclear deal with Iran. This will spark a faceoff with Congress, which has already declared its opposition to the deal. Congress will inevitably pass a vote of disapproval, which Obama will inevitably veto. In order to defend that veto from a congressional override, however, he must line up 34 Senators—all Democrats. This calls in turn for a preemptive ideological campaign to foster liberal solidarity—for which your support is key. If the president can convince the liberal Jewish community, on the basis of “shared values,” to shun any suspicion of alignment with congressional Republicans or Benjamin Netanyahu, he will have an easier time batting down Congress’s opposition to the deal with Iran.
Progressive values have nothing to do with what is truly at stake in this moment of decision. Only one final question really matters: in your considered view, should the Islamic Republic of Iran be the dominant power in the Middle East, and should we be helping it to become that power? If your answer is yes, then, by all means, continue to applaud the president—loudly and enthusiastically—as he purports to repair the world.
He was really speaking for President Jarrett, I think.
Roger Simon isn’t impressed:
Alas Rand (I had higher hopes for him), like father Ron, has a mega-chauvanistic view of the world. The USA is so big and strong it causes everything, including, at one point, 9-11, and now ISIS, if you can believe that. Never mind that the Islamic State is just another avatar of Islamic imperialism’s desire for a world caliphate that has been going on for centuries, long before our country was in existence — the Battle of Tours (732), the Siege of Vienna (1683) and on and on. The violence has been there forever, too. As any literate person knows, it’s in the Koran and the Hadith. Beheadings were part of Mohammed’s game plan. It’s what he did and what he called for. This was not invented by a cabal of neocons in Chevy Chase, Maryland, in 2003.
And of course ISIS is part of a straight line that goes from the Muslim Brotherhood (founded in Egypt in 1928, long before the current crop of Republicans were even alive) to Al Qaeda via Zawahiri and on into the modern age with ISIS, all working from the same ideological playbook, as are Boko Haram, Hamas, al Shabab, al Nusra, etc., etc.
Rand, again like father Ron, is essentially racist in blaming this on America and not recognizing other cultures have belief systems to which they truly adhere and that those belief systems may be dangerous, even evil. America did not evolve Islamist ideology anymore than it did Nazism, but the Islamists have the potential to wreak just as much havoc if they are not stopped. I don’t blame Dr. Jasser for being upset. I’d be furious. People like him, at immense personal risk, have been working for the necessary reform of Islam every waking moment of their lives.
Yes. It is profoundly racist to deny the Arabs (and other people) moral agency, but that’s, of course, always the attitude of the Left. It is sad to see Senator Paul fall for the same thing. On foreign policy, he seems to be running for the wrong party’s nomination.
[Update a few minutes later]
More links from Elizabeth Price Foley.
No, Bush didn’t lie about WMD:
Yes, I keep repeating this stuff. Because it bears repeating. In Iraq, Obama took a war that we had won at a considerable expense in lives and treasure, and threw it away for the callowest of political reasons. In Syria and Libya, he involved us in wars of choice without Congressional authorization, and proceeded to hand victories to the Islamists. Obama’s policy here has been a debacle of the first order, and the press wants to talk about Bush as a way of protecting him. Whenever you see anyone in the media bringing up 2003, you will know that they are serving as palace guard, not as press.
Yup.
What a shock that the State Department decided to do a dump on a Friday afternoon on a holiday weekend. Nonetheless, there were some interesting revelations there about Sid “Vicious” Blumenthal, who Hillary employed (one way or another) despite a request (demand?) from the White House that she not so do. But, as always with the Clinton’s what’s more interesting about what is released is what is not there:
“You were aware that Ambassador Stevens — of his cable that said that the consulate could not withstand a coordinated attack, is that right?” Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte, N.H., asked Panetta.
“Correct,” said Panetta.
“General, you had said that you previously were aware of that?” Ayotte said to Dempsey.
“Yes, I was aware of the communication back to the State Department,” Dempsey answered.
Clinton, on the other hand, insists to this day that she knew nothing. And there is nothing in the newly-released emails to contradict her sworn testimony on the matter. That should not come as a surprise to anyone. After all, because Clinton kept her communications on a separate, secret system, the only emails that State Department officials possess are the ones Clinton has given them. Clinton and her lawyers, of course, chose the emails that she gave to the State Department and then destroyed all of her email communications, including backups. Could anyone possibly be surprised that nothing Clinton turned over to the State Department — and ultimately to the public — contradicted her testimony under oath?
It is shocking. On the other hand, since the server was hacked by foreign powers, they may just be waiting for an opportune time to blackmail her.
And as he notes, in this case, while the cover up is very bad, probably felonious, the crime is even worse.
[Update a few minutes later]
Sort of related: The Pentagon saw ISIS as a strategic asset:
The revelations contradict the official line of Western governments on their policies in Syria, and raise disturbing questions about secret Western support for violent extremists abroad, while using the burgeoning threat of terror to justify excessive mass surveillance and crackdowns on civil liberties at home.
The country’s in the very best of hands.
And poor Obama, why do bad things always happen to good people like him? The “JV team” is on the verge of creating a terrorist state in the Middle East.
I would say that, given that they’re orchestrating attacks on us at home, ISIS (ISIL, whatev) is functionally waging war on us. Under traditional Westphalian rules, we would respond with our own declaration of war, and destroy their state. But it’s hard to do that with “no boots on the ground.” Apparently, Westphalia is over. It had a good run.
[Update a while later]
Hillary’s real Libya problem isn’t Benghazi, as criminally negligent as it was, it’s the total failure of Libya itself. Which, of course, is the result of a Libya policy she used to want to take credit for.