Is Radical Islam Un-American?

In the years immediately following World War II, most American were understandably concerned about Communist infiltration at the highest levels of the U.S. government. For example, how could anyone forget the photograph taken at the Yalta Conference, Feb. 4-11, 1945, in which Alger Hiss, a deep-cover Soviet agent, was seen leaning over President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s shoulder, whispering advice to him as he negotiated with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin? Hiss served as FDR’s senior advisor on political affairs.

Yalta_Churchill_Roosevelt_Stalin

Prime Minister Winston S. Churchill, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Premier Josef Stalin sit side by side at the site of the Yalta Conference in February 1945. (Army).

Roosevelt arrived in Yalta carrying copies of the Morgenthau Plan, which advocated that the post-war occupation of Germany include measures to eradicate Germany’s ability to wage war, and to remove or destroy other key industries basic to military strength. The Morgenthau Plan was the brainchild of yet another deep-cover Soviet spy in the highest echelons of the Roosevelt administration, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Harry Dexter White.

But it was not until the Cold War and the U.S.-Soviet arms race became a fact of life that most Americans became fully aware of the dangers of Soviet expansionism and the extent to which Soviet agents had infiltrated the U.S. government. It was then that Congress took steps to facilitate the work of the House Un-American Activities Committee, created in 1938, with the passage of the Communist Control Act of 1954, and similar measures.

While newsmen take notes, Chairman Martin Dies Jr. of the House Committee Investigating Un-American Activities proofs and reads his statement replying to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's attack on the Committee, Oct. 26, 1938.

While newsmen take notes, Chairman Martin Dies Jr. of the House Committee Investigating Un-American Activities proofs and reads his statement replying to President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s attack on the Committee, Oct. 26, 1938.

The HUAC was abolished in 1975, but now, in the early years of the 21st century, we find ourselves confronted by an enemy every bit as ruthless as the enemies we faced in World War II and the Cold War, but far more numerous. If, as some Muslim apologists suggest, only five percent of the world’s Muslim population are radicalized, the number of potential airplane hijackers, suicide bombers and jihadists we face is approximately 70 million. In World War II, the combined military forces of the Germans, Japanese, and Italians numbered only 31.4 million.

A recent Investor’s Business Daily article describes the recent formation of the United States Council of Muslim Organizations. It provides a clear insight into how far Muslim infiltration of the U.S. has advanced. The report tells us that, “With an eye toward the 2016 election, the radical Muslim Brotherhood has built the framework for a political party in America that seeks to turn Muslims into an Islamist voting bloc.”

IBD cautions, “This development bears careful monitoring in light of the U.S. Brotherhood’s recently exposed goal of waging a ‘civilization jihad’ against America that explicitly calls for infiltrating the U.S. political system and ‘destroying (it) from within.’” The IBD article explains that this subversive plan was spelled out in hundreds of pages of documents seized by the FBI during a raid on a Muslim Brotherhood leader’s home in a Washington suburb after 9/11.

The article goes on to quote Nihad Awad, founder and executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations as saying, “Muslim voters have the potential to be swing voters in 2016. We are aiming to bring more participation from the Muslim community.”

"This Way to Socialism" by My Personal LitmusOne might ask, “Is that a proffer, available to the highest bidder?” Liberals and Democrats have always been known for their willingness to embrace almost any special interest agenda so long as that special interest brings enough money and votes to the table. Is it possible that they might be tempted to adopt the cause of radical Islam, ignoring the fact that they and their families are as much targets of radical Islam as conservatives and Republicans?

The Democratic Party has been very successful at tap-dancing around the disparate interests of a large coalition of special interests, each demanding some self-serving policy or program from government. However, it is probably too much of a stretch to think that they would be so reckless as to adopt the anti-American, counter-cultural, agenda of radical Islam. Given the danger that radical Islam represents, they would do so at their own peril. Even they are smart enough to understand that an ant should not contemplate swallowing an elephant.

Such was the case when the Communist Control Act of 1954 was under consideration. The Communist threat during the early years of the Cold War led most liberals to overlook the fact that the CCA suspended citizenship rights of Communist Party members. Few liberals and Democrats offered more than token opposition; most ardently supported the CCA, as they did the unconscionable internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II.

The Communist Control Act of 1954 made membership in the Communist Party a criminal act, conviction of which carried a fine of up to $10,000, imprisonment for five years, or both. However, it should be noted that, while no administration has ever attempted to enforce it, the U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of the CCA. Provisions of the act outlawing the Communist Party have not been repealed and could easily be customized in our efforts to protect our country and our culture from the internal threat posed by radical Islam.

Reading Section 2 of the CCA, it is easy to see how the act could be tailored to meet the threat of Islamic jihad. By removing references to Communists and the Communist Party and substituting references to Islam, Section 2 of the Act could be paraphrased to read as follows:

Sec. 2. The Congress hereby finds and declares that Islam, although purportedly a religious sect, is in fact an instrumentality of a conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States. It constitutes an authoritarian dictatorship within a republic, demanding for itself the rights and privileges accorded to individuals of other religious denominations, but denying to all others the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Unlike political parties, which evolve their policies and programs through public means, the policies and programs of Islam are secretly prescribed by the foreign leaders of Islam. Its members have no part in determining its goals and are not permitted to voice dissent to Muslim objectives. Unlike members of political parties, members of the Islamic community are recruited for indoctrination with respect to Islamic objectives and are organized, instructed, and disciplined to carry out assignments given them by their leaders, including the order to kill and maim innocent men, women, and children by acting as suicide bombers. Unlike political parties, Islamic jihad acknowledges no constitutional or statutory limitations upon its conduct or upon that of its members. As a segment of the U.S. population, Islam is relatively small numerically and gives scant indication of its capacity ever to attain its ends by lawful political means. The peril inherent in the existence of Islam arises not from its numbers, but from its failure to acknowledge any limitation as to the nature of its activities, and its dedication to the proposition that the present constitutional government of the United States ultimately must be brought to ruin by any available means, including resort to force and violence. Holding that doctrine, its role as the agency of a hostile foreign power renders its existence a clear present and continuing danger to the security of the United States. It is the means whereby individuals are seduced into the service of Islam, trained to do its bidding, and directed and controlled in the conspiratorial performance of their revolutionary services. Therefore, the organization known as Islam shall be outlawed in the United States.

As the prominent sociologist Ernest van den Haag said at the time of passage of the CCA, there is “no place in a democracy for those who want to abolish [it], even with a peaceful vote.” Nor is there a place in a democracy for Islamists who acknowledge no respect for U.S. constitutional principles or the rule of law.

Perhaps the next Republican president will sign legislation expanding the Communist Control Act of 1954 to cover the activities of radical Islam. His signing statement might echo President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s CCA signing statement of August 24, 1954, declaring, “The American people are determined to eliminate from their midst organizations which, purporting to be “religious,” in the accepted sense of that term, are actually conspirators dedicated to the destruction of our form of government by violence and force…”

The Muslim infiltration of old Europe is such that some very old cultures are in serious danger of extinction. In Sweden, for example, one in every four Swedish women are victims of sexual assault, while more than three out of four convicted rapists in Sweden are Muslim immigrants from North African nations. They demonstrate no respect whatsoever for the people or the laws of nations that have thrown their doors open to them, making the great liberal experiment in multiculturalism a complete failure.

Radical Islam poses a clear and present danger to the lives and property of the American people, and to the continued existence of western civilization. So that the American people can be fully cognizant of the subversive activities of Islamic jihad and to the dangers posed thereby, the Congress should take immediate steps to outlaw Islamic fundamentalism and to document its eradication by reestablishing HUAC.

It matters little to Muslims whether the conquest of the West takes 10 years, 100 years or 1,000 years. They have endless patience and the only way to deal with the threat is to confront it courageously and forthrightly. Islam must be made to understand that they will never gain full acceptance in the Western world until such time as they renounce all forms of violence against non-Muslims, and Christians, Jews, and other religious denominations are accorded full religious freedom throughout the Muslim world. That is the line in the sand that must be drawn… nothing less will suffice.

Paul R. Hollrah is a two-time member of the Electoral College and a contributing editor for the National Writers Syndicate and the New Media JournalHis blog is found at OrderOfEphors.comHe resides in the lakes region of northeast Oklahoma.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Why Can’t Elected Officials Force DIA to Comply With the Law?

I stand amazed at how much the responses I’ve received from Sen. Roy Blunt, Sen. Claire McCaskill and U.S. Rep. Ann Wagner have varied since Jan. 13 when I contacted the offices of these people who purport to represent me and my fellow citizens in the Show-Me State in the U.S. Congress and asked for help in dealing with officials at the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Ann Wagner FB Screen shot 2014-01-13 at 8.22.07 AM

Click image above to read article.

Congresswoman Wagner’s staff has been most responsive.  In fact, I received a phone call the same day I sent her both an email message and a message via Facebook.  Since then, I’ve exchanged multiple email messages with members of her staff.

Sadly, the congresswoman’s staffers have, so far, been able to generate only a cursory reply letter (dated Feb. 28 and received March 3) from James L. Kaplan, DIA’s Chief of Congressional Relations.

Senator Blunt’s staffers, on the other hand, have been a bit less responsive than Congresswoman Wagner’s, but not the worst among the Missouri delegation.  My correspondence with them began when I used the senator’s online communication tool to submit the following message:

Eighteen months ago, I filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Defense Intelligence Agency.  In it, I requested copies of unclassified documents related to polygraph contracts.  To date, I have been thoroughly stonewalled.  Now, I need Senator Blunt’s help to find out why.

Beyond that, I included a link to an article in which I had outlined my experience to date with the DIA.  Senator Blunt’s staffers responded — via snail mail letter dated Feb. 12, not the much-quicker email — by sending me a Privacy Act Release Statement which I had to complete and return by snail mail.

Blunt-Blunt-McCaskill-LtrsIn an auto-signed letter dated March 11 and received a few days later, Senator Blunt informed me that he made contact with DIA officials and that they had responded to his inquiry.  Attached to it was a letter from Kaplan that was virtually identical to the one Congresswoman Wagner had received from Kaplan 11 days earlier.

639 Days (so far)

Click on image above to read about my DIA FOIA saga.

Dragging up the rear in this race to serve their constituent are members of Senator McCaskill’s staff.  Despite the fact I had reached out to “Claire Bear” on the same day and in the exact same manner as I had Senator Blunt, it took her staff 92 days — or 34 days longer — to reply with a letter (dated April 9) almost identical to the initial reply received from her Republican counterpart.

So, what is all of the fuss about?  As of today, I’ve waited exactly 21 months for DIA officials to comply with requirements of the Freedom of Information Act and fulfill my request for copies of unclassified documents related to Department of Defense purchases of polygraph equipment since Jan. 1, 2000.

And why have DIA officials worked so hard to keep this information out of my hands? Read my book, THE CLAPPER MEMO, and you’ll begin to understand their reluctance.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

DIA Continues to Stonewall Freedom of Information Act Request — 639 Days (So Far)

Unless something unexpected happens during the next two days, a Freedom of Information Act request I submitted to the Defense Intelligence Agency will turn 639 days old Wednesday, and a citizen’s access to unclassified details about government purchases of polygraph machines will continue to be squelched.

James R. Clapper Jr.

James R. Clapper Jr.

I don’t expect a response sooner than Friday since DIA officials will be in Tampa until Thursday, attending GEOINT, the nation’s largest intelligence gathering that was originally set to take place six months ago but was postponed due to the government shutdown. Truth be told, I don’t anticipate a response at all after almost two years of waiting. DIA officials don’t want to make their top boss, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., look any worse than he already does after lying to Congress and allowing things like the Edward Snowden scandal to occur on his watch. But I can dream, can’t I?

What unclassified information do I want so badly that DIA officials do not want me to have? It’s described below as it appeared in my FOIA request July 16, 2012:

“…copies of any and all initial and follow-up contracts (i.e., solicitations, contracts, statements of work and task orders) related to the Portable Credibility Assessment Screening System (PCASS) or Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System (PCASS) that have been awarded by any Department of Defense agency to Lafayette Instrument Company of Lafayette, Indiana, and any other contractors, academic institutions, laboratories and subcontractors from January 1, 2000, to present.”

Don’t get me wrong. DIA officials did respond to my initial request. In a piece May 24, 2013, I described how their response fell far short of expectations by providing only 12 pages of documentation dating back only as far as June 25, 2010 — not Jan. 1, 2000, as requested — and how, coincidentally or not, the agency’s response arrived one week after the release of my second nonfiction book, THE CLAPPER MEMO, for which I was seeking the information. In addition, I highlighted a portion (below) of the appeal letter I mailed the same day:

PolygraphIn responding to my request, you included only 12 pages of documentation dating back as far as June 25, 2010. That, by any stretch of the imagination, is UNSATISFACTORY; therefore, I must contest the $155.80 assessment for “professional search and review time of 3.5 hours at $44.00 per hour, reproduction and release costs of 12 pages at 15¢ per page.” Until such time as a genuine effort is made on behalf of your agency to provide the requested documentation, I shall not remit payment as requested.

In a letter dated Feb. 28 and received March 3, DIA Chief of Congressional Relations James L. Kaplan even had the nerve to stonewall my Congressional representative, U.S. Rep. Ann Wagner.

While I could wax poetic about my frustration related to this stonewalling, I won’t. Instead, I’ll point you to my second nonfiction book, THE CLAPPER MEMO, and recommend you read it if you truly want to understand why I’m so interested in the documents being withheld from me and why so many high-profile people have endorsed my book.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

WE’RE CLUCKED: Obama’s ‘Chickens’ Have Come Home

By Paul R. Hollrah, Guest Writer

In a March 26 article in The Jerusalem Post, writer Caroline Glick reports on the efforts of Vassar College earth sciences professor Jill Schneiderman’s abortive attempt to arrange a field trip to Israel to study water-supply issues in the Holy Land.

Sick ChickenThe trouble started when Professor Schneiderman conducted a pre-trip seminar for students who intended to participate in the field trip to Israel.  When the Vassar student chapter of an anti-Semitic hate group, Students for Justice in Palestine, picketed her seminar, pressuring earth science students to drop Schneiderman’s class and to forego any plans to travel to Israel, Schneiderman complained to Vassar administrators, seeking redress for her students whose civil rights and academic freedom were under attack by the SJP.

Instead of taking action against the thuggish actions of the pro-Palestinian students, college administrators once again demonstrated the sort of cowardice that has become so common among college and university administrators across the country.  They referred the issue to the college’s Committee on Inclusion and Excellence.  But when those vested with the responsibility for “inclusion and excellence” at Vassar convened to discuss the anti-Semitic outrage, Professor Schneiderman was, as she noted in a post on her blog, “knocked off-center by a belligerent academic community dedicated to villifying anyone who dared set foot in Israel.”

As Schneiderman and her Vassar students proceeded with plans for their trip to Israeli, the University of Michigan student government was voting on a motion to suspend debate, indefinitely, on a resolution submitted by an anti-Jewish student group, calling upon the University to boycott and divest from all companies that do business with Israel… precipitating yet another confrontation in which Jewish interests came in second to the interests of Muslims on a traditionally-liberal college campus.

According to the aforementioned Post article, a Michigan students group calling itself Students Allied for Freedom and Equality “responded with rage and violence,” staging sit-ins at the student government offices and cursing Jewish members of the council, hurling epithets such as “kike” and “dirty Jew.”

HONOR DIARIESThen, on March 27, fascism reared its ugly head on the Dearborn campus of the University of Michigan.  On that evening the Council on American-Islamic Relations was successful in blocking the screening of a documentary film, “HONOR DIARIES.”  The film tells the story of the unspeakable horrors endured by women throughout the Muslim world, including such brutal practices as female genital mutilation, honor violence, honor killings, the forced marriage of eight- and nine-year-old girls to 30- and 40-year-old men, the lack of educational opportunities for women, and restrictions on their freedom of movement.

However, according to a Fox News report, CAIR wasn’t doing its own dirty work, or even its own research.  The group relied on facts and arguments presented by Richard Silverstein, a liberal blogger who argued, “One has to ask why a film about the purported abuse of Muslim women was produced by Jews… ”  In other words, how could a group of Jews possibly produce a film that profiles human rights abuses against Muslim women?  It flies directly in the face of Muslim sensibilities… the truth of the matter be damned.

In the end, those who sponsored the screening of the film were fearful that the showing would be seen as “Islamophobic.”  Wishing not to offend the Islamic community… and perhaps in fear of violent retribution… university administrators canceled the screening, proving once again that intimidation works.  But, as the Fox report asks, “Who is being offended when we are talking about mutilation and women setting themselves on fire to escape marriage before puberty?”

Then, just days later, Frontpage Mag reported that Brandeis University, a longtime bastion of liberal orthodoxy, had conferred an honorary degree on leftist anti-Semite writer, Amos Oz, who has described religious Jews as “Hezbollah in a skullcap.”  Brandeis is the very same “progressive” institution which yielded to pressure from Muslim Brotherhood front groups, such as CAIR and the Muslim Students Association, causing the university to withdraw a similar honor intended for Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a noted Somali critic of Islam and co-producer of “HONOR DIARIES.”

So what’s happening on our college and university campuses?  Haven’t the most-liberal colleges and universities always been places where Jewish academics hold forth and children of Jewish families are prepared for lucrative careers in medicine, academia, and the law?

For answers we might refer to a Feb. 1 article by Glick, “Column one: The New York Times Destroys Obama.”  In that column, Glick quotes extensively from a Times report by David Kirkpatrick on Barack Obama’s handling of the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi.  Glick writes that Kirkpatrick “tore to shreds the foundations of President Barack Obama’s counterterrorism strategy and his overall policy in the Middle East.”

Glick reminds us that “Obama first enunciated those foundations in his June 4, 2009 speech to the Muslim world at Cairo University.”  It was his first venture abroad as president and is best remembered for his warm embrace of Islam, for his unprecedented bow to the King of Saudi Arabia… described in the Washington Times as a “shocking display of fealty to a foreign potentate”… and for the cold shoulder he delivered to Israel, America’s most steadfast ally.

The thought that a newly-inaugurated president of the United States would take a major overseas trip, passing within 50 miles of Israeli territory, and not pay a courtesy call on the Israelis… the only functioning democracy in the Middle East… was a snub of gargantuan proportions and a major diplomatic faux pas.  It was also a portent of things to come in Barack Obama’s foreign policy.

Reassuring his friends in the Muslim world of his belief that the violent extremists in the Muslim world were but a “small but potent minority of Muslims,” Barack Obama went on to say that he had traveled to Cairo “to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition.”  Instead, he asserted, “they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.”

The Israelis, listening to his words from less than 220 miles away, must have been shocked and dismayed to hear Barack Obama refer to Islam… the most violent and intolerant force on the face of the Earth, where Christians, Jews, and others are brutally murdered and persecuted simply because they are not Muslims… as sharing American principles of justice and progress, tolerance, and the dignity of human beings.

Barack Obama Caricature by Political GraffitiThen Barack Obama went on to say that Islam had “carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment.  It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed… And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”

It was then that he shocked Americans, describing how “Islam has always been a part of America’s story…”  He reassured Muslims that “The United States has in itself no character of enmity against the (Sharia) laws, religion, or tranquility of Muslims.”  He claimed that, “since our founding, American Muslims have enriched the United States.  They have fought in our wars, served in government, stood for civil rights, started businesses, taught at our universities, excelled in our sports arenas, won Nobel Prizes, built our tallest building, and lit the Olympic Torch.  And when the first Muslim-American was recently elected to Congress, he took the oath to defend our Constitution using the same Holy Koran that one of our Founding Fathers – Thomas Jefferson – kept in his personal library.”

So, if we wonder how radical Muslims have come to feel as if they are welcomed with open arms at our institutions of higher learning, and if we are wondering why Muslims feel as though they can shut down major portions of Americans busiest cities by holding prayer sessions in the middle of public thoroughfares, we may have struck on the answer.  It is Barack Obama who has set the stage and who has invited them to take full advantage of American tolerance and generosity.

Since the first day that Barack Obama occupied the White House, he has extended the hand of friendship to the most brutal and intolerant people on the face of the Earth.  In doing so, he has denied the Judeo-Christian origins of our great nation.  He has caused the gloom of a declining culture to fall across the face of America; his chickens have come home to roost.

Paul R. Hollrah is a two-time member of the Electoral College and a contributing editor for the National Writers Syndicate and the New Media JournalHis blog is found at OrderOfEphors.comHe resides in the lakes region of northeast Oklahoma.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman’s Conflict of Interest Slows Benghazi Investigation

Like so many people, I’ve wondered why members of the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives have dragged their feet so long on investigating the Benghazi debacle.  Now Dick Morris offers the answer:  House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) is to blame!  Watch the video!

In a just-released video, Morris reports that Rogers has been dragging his feet on the matter, because his wife, Kristi Clemens Rogers, was president and CEO of Aegis, L.L.C., the company that had the security contract at the time the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was attacked.

Shocked?  Don’t be!  This isn’t the first time the Michigan congressman has been accused of acting in ways that would benefit his wife.  TechDirt reported on another issue less than a year ago under the headline, Oh Look, Rep. Mike Rogers Wife Stands To Benefit Greatly From CISPA Passing….

And does anyone think it’s a coincidence that the House Intelligence Committee chairman is giving up his seat for a job in talk radio after his current term ends?  I’m not!

SEE ALSO:  Dots Connect Bradley Manning, Benghazi, Afghanistan and Nation’s Top Intelligence Official.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Author Needs Honest Answers From Speakers at Nation’s Largest Intelligence Gathering

Originally scheduled to take place six months ago but postponed due to the government shutdown, GEOINT 2013* Symposium is now set for April 14-17 in Tampa, Fla.  Touted as the largest intelligence event in the U.S., according to a news release issued by the United States Geospatial Intelligence Foundation, this event stands as a target-rich environment for someone like me who needs some honest answers from a handful of the event’s keynote speakers.

GeoInt_2013Atop the list of speakers from whom I’d like answers is Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., the man whose name appears in the title of my second and most-recent nonfiction book, THE CLAPPER MEMO.  I’d like to ask DNI Clapper why, as Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence seven years ago, he issued a memo declaring the polygraph the only authorized credibility assessment tool for use by Department of Defense personnel when a newer, more reliable and more effective credibility assessment technology was — and still is — available to U.S. military and intelligence personnel.

Second on my list is Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn. I’d like to ask the Army three-star general why I’ve had to wait 632 days (so far) for DIA officials to fulfill my Freedom of Information Act request for unclassified information related to DoD purchases of portable polygraph equipment during the past 12 years.  Specifically, I asked for the following information in my request July 16, 2012:

“…copies of any and all initial and follow-up contracts (i.e., solicitations, contracts, statements of work and task orders) related to the Portable Credibility Assessment Screening System (PCASS) or Preliminary Credibility Assessment Screening System (PCASS) that have been awarded by any Department of Defense Agency to Lafayette Instrument Company of Lafayette, Indiana, and any other contractors, academic institutions, laboratories and subcontractors from January 1, 2000, to present.”

Unfortunately, DIA’s only fulfillment to date, a mail parcel that I received May 9, 2013, fell far short of expectations.  It contained only 12 pages of documentation dating back only as far as June 25, 2010 — not to Jan. 1, 2000, as requested.  Coincidentally, the date that appeared atop the letter, May 2, 2013, was the exact day THE CLAPPER MEMO, the book for which I was seeking the information, was released.  Coincidence?  I think not.

Of course, there are others on the list of keynoters with whom I’d like to speak.

I’d like to ask three flag officers — Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, commander of U.S. Central Command, Adm. William H. McRaven, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, and Lt. Gen. Raymond P. Palumbo, Director for Defense Intelligence for Warfighter Support in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence how they can look in the mirror each day while knowing a tool proven more effective and reliable than the century-old polygraph is being kept out of the hands of their front-line warriors.

U.S. Rep. C.A. "Dutch" Ruppersberger (D-Md)

U.S. Rep. C.A. “Dutch” Ruppersberger (D-Md)

Finally, I’d like to ask Maryland Congressman C.A. “Dutch” Ruppersberger why he, as Ranking Member of the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, hasn’t shown more interest in this topic.  He was, after all, among the several dozen members of Congress who received copies of my book in which I point fingers and name names.

Based on the findings of my exhaustive four-year investigation into the federal government’s use of so-called credibility assessment technologies, including the polygraph, THE CLAPPER MEMO has received rave reviews from people who know what it’s like to have a “dog in the fight.”

To learn more about the book, visit http://TheClapperMemo.com.  To order a copy, click here or on the graphic below.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Senator McCaskill Proves Herself Long on ‘Wind,’ Short on Wisdom

After watching the video that accompanied a news release I received this afternoon from Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), I found the news release’s headline, “McCaskill Hears About Success of New Reform to Curb Military Sexual Assault,” incredibly misleading.

How was it misleading?  The Show-Me State’s senior senator did more bloviating than she did listening.  In fact, she rambled on for two and a half minutes about the so-called “reforms” in the military justice system’s approach to prosecuting alleged instances of sexual assault before Army Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond T. Odierno got a word in edgewise. And the video was only three minutes and two seconds long!

I guess that’s how she plays the game.

To learn more about the Senator McCaskill’s misguided push for reforms in the prosecution of cases of sexual assault cases — real and imagined — in the military, read my series, “War On Men in the Military.”

To learn more about one case, in particular, that resulted in the wrongful conviction and imprisonment of Army Sgt. 1st Class Kelly A. Stewart, order a copy of Three Days In August.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct '11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May '13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.

Bob McCarty is the author of Three Days In August (Oct ’11) and THE CLAPPER MEMO (May ’13). To learn more about either book or to place an order, click on the graphic above.