Search This Blog

Sunday, June 23, 2013

Obama’s Inspector General Negligence And The Covering Up Of Waste, Fraud And Abuse Of Power

Office Of Inspector General: 
The Office of Inspector General (OIG) seeks to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Department of Commerce's programs and operations. OIG also endeavors to detect and deter waste, fraud, and abuse.

OIG monitors and tracks the use of taxpayer dollars through audits, inspections, evaluations, and investigations. The Inspector General keeps the Secretary of Commerce and Congress fully and currently informed about problems and deficiencies relating to Commerce's activities and the need for corrective action.

OIG is certified by the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) as a 5 U.S.C. §2302(c) Whistleblower Protection Agency.

Published on Jun 22, 2013
Former Pentagon IG Joseph Schmitz discusses the latest Obama administration inspector general scandals, including retaliation against an IG at the State Department for exposing wrongdoing there. He is the author of the Inspector General Handbook, available now from the Center for Security Policy Press.

“Obama’s Inspector General Negligence” – Schmitz in the Wall Street Journal; Center Releases Timely Inspector General Handbook

WASHINGTON, DC, JUNE 5 2013 – Former Pentagon Inspector General (IG) Joseph E. Schmitz, author of the recently-published Inspector General Handbook: Fraud, Waste, Abuse and Other Constitutional “Enemies, Foreign and Domestic  (Center for Security Policy Press, May 2013), writes a blistering critique in today’s Wall Street Journal of the Obama administration’s failure to appoint accountable IGs:

For years, President Obama has neglected his duty to fill vacant inspector-general posts at the departments of State, Interior, Labor, Homeland Security and Defense and at the Agency for International Development. The president has nominated only two candidates to fill any of these six vacancies, and he subsequently withdrew both nominations. All told, an IG has been missing in action at each of those cabinet departments and the AID agency for between 18 months and five years.
In contrast to the challenges plaguing those major federal agencies without a Senate-confirmed IG, Schmitz points out that the Senate-confirmed Treasury Department IG for Tax Administration recently exposed the issue of targeting of conservative groups by the IRS.  On the other hand, the State Department, which lacks even an “acting IG,” is struggling with systemic breakdowns of integrity and accountability, as witnessed by the failure to protect our embassy in Benghazi.  As Schmitz notes in the Journal:

The story at the State Department underscores the problem. For Hillary Clinton’s entire four-year tenure as secretary of State, she relied on a retired foreign service officer, former Ambassador Harold Geisel, to function as an inspector general—though he could never hold the title.

Amid the several emerging scandals in Washington, the Center’s publication of Schmitz’s new book is especially timely. The Inspector General Handbook provides an in-depth look at how the inspectors general of both military and civilian agencies help to establish a culture of both integrity and accountability, while providing safeguards against the abuse of power in government.  

The Handbook‘s perspective is drawn from Schmitz’ experiences as the former head of the Pentagon’s Office of Inspector General—the most expansive IG organization in the world—from 2002-2005.

The Inspector General Handbook addresses the origins of the IG system in the US Military, and how it was subsequently applied to other branches with the intention of ensuring integrity and efficiency in government.  In addition to public officials, students of government and members of the legal profession, this timely book should be of interest to any citizen interested in accountability and efficiency in those agencies that serve the public interest.
The Inspector General Handbook (Center for Security Policy Press, $27.95, 584 pages) is available through

“Obama’s Inspector General Negligence” appears on page A13 in the June 5, 2013 US edition of the Wall Street Journal.

Source: Center For Security Policy


Joseph Schmitz: Obama's Inspector General Negligence

The president was on notice at least by 2010 that the State Department was impaired by a lack of IG independence.

With so many scandals breaking in Washington, one may well ask: Where were all the inspectors general when these bad things—at the IRS, at Justice, and at State before, during and after Benghazi, for instance—were going on? Where were the presidential appointees who, since the Inspectors General Act of 1978, are meant to root out gross mismanagement, fraud and other abuses at their federal departments and agencies, or among those whom the agencies regulate? The sad truth is that in the Obama administration many of the most important IGs mandated by Congress simply are not in place.

For years, President Obama has neglected his duty to fill vacant inspector-general posts at the departments of State, Interior, Labor, Homeland Security and Defense and at the Agency for International Development. The president has nominated only two candidates to fill any of these six vacancies, and he subsequently withdrew both nominations. All told, an IG has been missing in action at each of those cabinet departments and the AID agency for between 18 months and five years.

At a time when American confidence in the integrity and transparency of the federal government has been shaken, inspectors general can help Washington get back to basic principles of accountability—but only if the IGs are properly appointed and allowed to do their jobs.

Although there are 73 inspectors general in the federal system, less than half fall into a category that indicates their special importance for the effective functioning of the government. The nomination of these IGs typically involves a collaborative process between the president and his cabinet secretaries. Congress has also mandated that each cabinet-level inspector general "shall be appointed by the president, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, without regard to political affiliation and solely on the basis of integrity and demonstrated ability in accounting, auditing, financial analysis, law, management analysis, public administration, or investigations."

The story at the State Department underscores the problem. For Hillary Clinton's entire four-year tenure as secretary of State, she relied on a retired foreign service officer, former Ambassador Harold Geisel, to function as an inspector general—though he could never hold the title.


About the Office of Inspector General

Government's built-in watchdogs

The plural of inspector general is inspectors general, not inspector generals. Now that we've cleared that up, what is an inspector general and what do inspectors general do?

Within the federal agencies are politically independent individuals called Inspectors General who are responsible for ensuring that the agencies operate efficiently, effectively and legally. When it was reported in Oct. 2006 that Department of Interior employees wasted $2,027,887.68 worth of taxpayer time annually surfing sexually explicit, gambling, and auction websites while at work, it was the Interior Department's own Office of Inspector General that conducted the investigation and issued the report.

The mission of the Office of Inspector General
Established by the Inspector General Act of 1978, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) examines all actions of a government agency or military organization. Conducting audits and investigations, either independently or in response to reports of wrongdoing, the OIG ensures that the agency's operations are in compliance with the law and general established policies of the government. Audits conducted by the OIG are intended to ensure the effectiveness of security procedures, or to discover the possibility of misconduct, waste, fraud, theft, or certain types of criminal activity by individuals or groups related to the agency's operation. Misuse of agency funds or equipment are often revealed by OIG audits.

To help them carry out their investigative role, Inspector Generals have the authority to issue subpoenas for information and documents, administer oaths for taking testimony, and can hire and control their own staff and contract personnel. The investigative authority of Inspectors General is limited only by certain national security and law enforcement considerations.

How Inspectors General are appointed and removed
For the Cabinet-level agencies, Inspectors General are appointed, without regard to their political affiliation, by the President of the United States and must be approved by the Senate. Inspectors General of the Cabinet-level agencies can be removed only by the President. In other agencies, known as "designated federal entities," like Amtrak, the U.S. Postal Service and the Federal Reserve, the agency heads appoint and remove Inspectors General. Inspectors General are appointed based on their integrity and experience in:
  • accounting, auditing, financial analysis;
  • law, management analysis, public administration; or
  • investigations
Who oversees Inspectors General?
While by law, Inspectors General are under the general supervision of the agency head or deputy, neither the agency head nor the deputy can prevent or prohibit an Inspector General from conducting an audit or investigation.

The conduct of the Inspectors General is overseen by the Integrity Committee of the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE).

How do Inspectors General report their findings?
When an agency's Office of Inspector General (OIG) identifies cases of egregious and flagrant problems or abuses within the agency, the OIG immediately notifies the agency head of the findings. The agency head is then required to forward the OIG's report, along with any comments, explanations and corrective plans, to Congress within seven days.

The Inspectors General also send semiannual reports of all their activities for the past six months to Congress.

All cases involving suspected violations of federal laws are reported to the Department of Justice, via the Attorney General.






Friday, June 7, 2013

Rep. Jim McDermott-"I'm Tired Of Reading The Constitution!"

Rep. Jim McDermott - "I'm tired of reading the Constitution!"

In case you have forgotten, you took an oath: The current oath was enacted in 1884:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."

Rep. Roskam: Lois Lerner Targeted My Business Partner~Lois Lerner A Pattern Of Abuse

Ways and Means to Hold Hearing with Organizations Targeted by Internal Revenue Service for Their Personal Beliefs
1100 Longworth House Office Building at 10:00 AM

Jun 04, 2013

Focus Of The Hearing
The hearing will focus on organizations that were targeted as part of the Internal Revenue Service’s practice of discriminating against applicants for tax-exempt status based on their personal beliefs. 

Hearing Advisory

Ways and Means to Hold Hearing with Organizations Targeted by Internal Revenue Service for Their Personal Beliefs 

itness List

Mr. John Eastman
Chairman, National Organization for Marriage

Ms. Dianne Belsom
Laurens County Tea Party

Ms. Becky Gerritson
Wetumpka Tea Party

Ms. Karen Kenney
San Fernando Valley Patriots

Mr. Kevin Kookogey
Founder and President, Linchpins of Liberty

Ms. Sue Martinek
Coalition for Life of Iowa

Public Submissions For Record
Please click here to submit a statement or letter for the record.

Here is a 'partial' list of non-profit organizations currently using the 501(c)4 status:
IRS approve non-profits given 501(c)4 status

Tommy Robinson of EDL:"The time for tolerating intolerance has come to an end: it is time for the whole world to unite against a truly Global Jihad"

Published on Jun 6, 2013
English Defense League leader Tommy Robinson made his American debut on The O'Reilly Factor - America's most-watched cable news program. Robinson talked about the growing Islamic threat in Great Britain and the cowardly political reaction to this menace. Robinson was terrific.

What is the EDL?
Mission Statement:
The world is a dangerous place to live in; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it. – Albert Einstein, refugee from Nazi Germany.

People have been asking what the EDL is all about, what does it want to achieve, how will it achieve those things?

Well now the English Defence League has a Mission Statement……

(1) HUMAN RIGHTS: Protecting And Promoting Human Rights

The English Defence League (EDL) is a human rights organisation that was founded in the wake of the shocking actions of a small group of Muslim extremists who, at a homecoming parade in Luton, openly mocked the sacrifices of our service personnel without any fear of censure. Although these actions were certainly those of a minority, we believe that they reflect other forms of religiously-inspired intolerance and barbarity that are thriving amongst certain sections of the Muslim population in Britain: including, but not limited to, the denigration and oppression of women, the molestation of young children, the committing of so-called honour killings, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and continued support for those responsible for terrorist atrocities.

Whilst we must always protect against the unjust assumption that all Muslims are complicit in or somehow responsible for these crimes, we must not be afraid to speak freely about these issues. This is why the EDL will continue to work to protect the inalienable rights of all people to protest against radical Islam’s encroachment into the lives of non-Muslims.

We also recognise that Muslims themselves are frequently the main victims of some Islamic traditions and practices. The Government should protect the individual human rights of members of British Muslims. It should ensure that they can openly criticise Islamic orthodoxy, challenge Islamic leaders without fear of retribution, receive full equality before the law (including equal rights for Muslim women), and leave Islam if they see fit, without fear of censure.

British Muslims should be able to safely demand reform of their religion, in order to make it more relevant to the needs of the modern world and more respectful of other groups in society. It is important that they completely reject the views of those who believe that Islam should be taken in its ‘original’, 7th century form, because these interpretations are the antithesis of Western democracy. The onus should be on British Muslims to overcome the problems that blight their religion and achieve nothing short of an Islamic reformation. In line with this, we should do all that we can to empower those who are willing to take this path. We must also ensure that they do not fear reprisals from those who, in line with these 7th century interpretations, would force sharia law upon them.

The EDL calls upon the Government to repeal legislation that prevents effective freedom of speech, for freedom of speech is essential if the human rights abuses that sometimes manifest themselves around Islam are to be stopped.

We believe that the proponents of radical Islam have a stranglehold on British Muslims. These radicals dominate Muslim organisations, remain key figures in British mosques, and are steadily increasing their influence. Radical Islam keeps British Muslims fearful and isolated, especially the women that it encases in the Burqa. It misrepresents their views, stifles freedom of expression, and indoctrinates their children, whilst continually doing a discredit to those who do wish to peacefully co-exist with their fellow Britons.

(2) DEMOCRACY AND THE RULE OF LAW: Promoting Democracy And The Rule Of Law By Opposing Sharia

The European Court of Human Rights has declared that ‘sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy’. Despite this, there are still those who are more than willing to accommodate sharia norms, and who believe that sharia can operate in partnership with our existing traditions and customs. In reality, sharia cannot operate fully as anything other than a complete alternative to our existing legal, political, and social systems. It is a revolution that this country does not want, and one that it must resist. Sharia is most definitely a threat to our democracy.

The operation of Islamic courts, the often unreasonable demand that Islam is given more respect than it is due, and the stealthy incursion of halal meat into the food industry, all demonstrate that sharia is already creeping into our lives. Resentment is already beginning to grow, and could create dangerous divisions if nothing is done. The primacy of British courts must be maintained and defended, fair criticism of religious and political ideologies must be permitted, and consumers must be provided with the information necessary to avoid halal produce should they wish.

Restaurants and fast food chains that do offer halal options should offer non-halal alternatives as well, in order to show respect for other people’s religions, customs, and possible concerns about animal welfare issues (surrounding ritual slaughter). No one should be made to consume halal produce unwittingly, so it must always be labeled – in supermarkets, in restaurants, in schools, and in hospitals – wherever it is available. Free choice in these matters is, after all, a fundamental human right for everybody, not just the Muslim community.

Sharia law makes a fundamental distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims, and the EDL will never allow this sort of iniquitous apartheid to take root in our country. The EDL will therefore oppose sharia appeasement in all its forms, and will actively work to eradicate the sharia-compliant behaviours that are already being adopted, and enforced, in our society.

(3) PUBLIC EDUCATION: Ensuring That The Public Get A Balanced Picture Of Islam

A central part of the EDL’s mission is public education. The British political and media establishment have, for a long time, been presenting a very sanitised and therefore inaccurate view of Islam, shaped by the needs of policy-makers rather than the needs of the public. This has acted as a barrier to informed policy-making and made finding the solution to real problems impossible. In pursuing this self-defeating and destructive policy, the Government has effectively been acting as the propaganda arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. Whether or not is aware of the predicament that it has put itself in, it has so far failed to honestly admit its failures.

We are committed to a campaign of public education to ensure that all aspects of Islam that impact on our society can debated in an open and honest way. Demonisation of Muslims, or of Islam’s critics, adds nothing to the debate. We believe that only by looking at all the facts can society be most effectively and humanly governed. If there are aspects of Muslim tradition that encourage the activities of Islamic radicals and criminals then these need to be properly addressed without fear of accusations of racism, xenophobia, or the even the disingenuous term ‘Islamophobia’.

The public must be provided with a more realistic and less sanitised view of Islam that allows it to ensure that decision-makers are held to account for their policy-making choices, choices that affect the harmony and security of the nation.

The EDL promotes the understanding of Islam and the implications for non-Muslims forced to live alongside it. Islam is not just a religious system, but a political and social ideology that seeks to dominate all non-believers and impose a harsh legal system that rejects democratic accountability and human rights. It runs counter to all that we hold dear within our British liberal democracy, and it must be prepared to change, to conform to secular, liberal ideals and laws, and to contribute to social harmony, rather than causing divisions.

(4) RESPECTING TRADITION: Promoting The Traditions And Culture Of England While At The Same Time Being Open To Embrace The Best That Other Cultures Can Offer

The EDL believes that English Culture has the right to exist and prosper in England. We recognise that culture is not static, that over time changes take place naturally, and that other cultures make contributions that make our shared culture stronger and more vibrant. However, this does not give license to policy-makers to deliberately undermine our culture and impose non-English cultures on the English people in their own land.

If people migrate to this country then they should be expected to respect our culture, its laws, and its traditions, and not expect their own cultures to be promoted by agencies of the state. The best of their cultures will be absorbed naturally and we will all be united by the enhanced culture that results. The onus should always be on foreign cultures to adapt and integrate. If said cultures promote anti-democratic ideas and refuse to accept the authority of our nation’s laws, then the host nation should not be bowing to these ideas in the name of  ’cultural sensitivity’. Law enforcement personnel must be able to enforce the rule of law thoroughly without prejudice or fear. Everyone, after all, is supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law.

The EDL is therefore keen to draw its support from people of all races, all faiths, all political persuasions, and all lifestyle choices. Under its umbrella, all people in England, whatever their background, or origin, can stand united in a desire to stop the imposition of the rules of Islam on non-believers. In order to ensure the continuity of our culture and its institutions, the EDL stands opposed to the creeping Islamisation of our country, because intimately related to the spread of Islamic religion is the political desire to implement an undemocratic alternative to our cherished way of life: the sharia.

Our armed forces stand up and risk their lives every day in order to protect our culture and democratic way of life. They are also reflective of England’s diversity, and are a shining example of what a people can achieve when united together. The EDL is therefore committed to opposing any and all abuse that our men and women in uniform are subjected to, and will campaign for legal remedies to ensure that those working within these important institutions are not exposed to abuse or aggression from within our country.

(5) INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK: Working In Solidarity With Others Around The World

The EDL is keen to join with others who share our values, wherever they are in the world, and from whatever cultural background they derive. We believe that the demand for sharia is global and therefore needs to be tackled at a global as well as national level, so that this demand will never be succumbed to. The EDL will therefore have an international outlook to enhance and strengthen our domestic efforts, whilst at the same time contributing to the global struggle against Islamic intolerance of Western cultures, customs, religions, politics, and laws.  

The time for tolerating intolerance has come to an end: it is time for the whole world to unite against a truly Global Jihad.

Thursday, June 6, 2013

WOW-Must See Video-Trey Gowdy "Training Won't Fix Character Issues With IRS, Replacing It Might!"

Gowdy on IRS Conference Spending 'a character issue'

Conservative Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) fought back tears today as he dressed down a top IRS official at the Oversight Committee hearing today on Capitol Hill.
This was powerful–
Twitchy calls it a boom-worthy performance:

Published on Jun 6, 2013
Rep. Gowdy discusses how IRS spending on conferences is not a question of training, but a moral and character issue.

FROM: Michael E. McKenneyActing Deputy Inspector General for Audit
SUBJECT: Final Audit Report – Review of the August 2010 Small Business/Self-Employed Division’s Conference in Anaheim, California (Audit # 201310024) 
This report presents the results of our review to identify the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS)spending on conferences during Fiscal Years 2010 through 2012 and review selected conferences to determine whether the conferences were properly approved and the expenditures were appropriate. Our review focused on the Small Business and Self-Employed Division’s All Managers Continuing Professional Education Conference in Anaheim, California, from August 24 through 26, 2010, and addresses the Major Management Challenge of Achieving Program Efficiencies and Cost Savings. 
This audit focused on the Anaheim conference because it was the most expensive IRS conference held during the three-year period (Fiscal Years 2010 through 2012) and because theTreasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) received an allegation of excessive spending related to this conference.
 In its response, the IRS indicated that the use of event planners, the receipt of room upgrades,and the welcome reception and breakfast provided by the hotels did not entail the use of any additional Government resources. TIGTA disagrees with this statement. As noted in this report, TIGTA believes that the costs for the conference could have been reduced if the IRS had not requested the numerous concessions from the Anaheim hotels and had instead negotiated for a lower room rate. The requests for proposal sent by the event planners to the hotels on behalf of the IRS specifically requested numerous upgraded rooms and other concessions but specified that per diem, the most that the IRS could pay for each room, would be paid. Further,Department of the Treasury guidance implemented in November 2012 places limitations on the use of event planners because their use can increase costs. As noted in our report, event planners
received an estimated $133,000 from the hotels, which was based on the cost of rooms paid for  by the IRS.Management’s complete response to the draft report is included as Appendix XI. 
Copies of this report are also being sent to the IRS managers affected by the report recommendations.  
If you have any questions, please contact me or Gregory D. Kutz, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Management Services and Exempt Organizations).


FDR speaks to the United States about the D-Day invasion:

Old Time Radio Programs, Complete Broadcast Day, D Day, June 06 1944:

Eisenhower D-Day message:

This is an excellent link to the Army Website with some great information with links:

Victory At Sea episode 15 D-Day

National Archives and Records Administration - ARC 39013, LI 208-UN-106 - D-DAY - DVD Copied by Thomas Gideon. Series: Motion Picture Films from "United News" Newsreels, compiled 1942 - 1945. Gen. Eisenhower and his aides map the Normandy invasion. German pictures show the extent of their coastal defenses. Tanks, guns, locomotives, and other military equipment is massed on the English beaches. Troops practice loading operations. Landing craft is tested in the English Channel. Pictures of practice landing and airborne operations are used to dramatize the actual invasion on June 6, 1944.

Department of Defense * PIN 20338 * D-DAY CONVOY

Although the term D-Day is used routinely as military lingo for the day an operation or event will take place, for many it is also synonymous with June 6, 1944, the day the Allied powers crossed the English Channel and landed on the beaches of Normandy, France, beginning the liberation of Western Europe from Nazi control during World War II. Within three months, the northern part of France would be freed and the invasion force would be preparing to enter Germany, where they would meet up with Soviet forces moving in from the east.

With Hitler's armies in control of most of mainland Europe, the Allies knew that a successful invasion of the continent was central to winning the war. Hitler knew this too, and was expecting an assault on northwestern Europe in the spring of 1944. He hoped to repel the Allies from the coast with a strong counterattack that would delay future invasion attempts, giving him time to throw the majority of his forces into defeating the Soviet Union in the east. Once that was accomplished, he believed an all-out victory would soon be his.

On the morning of June 5, 1944, U.S. General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the supreme commander of Allied forces in Europe gave the go-ahead for Operation Overlord, the largest amphibious military operation in history. On his orders, 6,000 landing craft, ships and other vessels carrying 176,000 troops began to leave England for the trip to France. That night, 822 aircraft filled with parachutists headed for drop zones in Normandy. An additional 13,000 aircraft were mobilized to provide air cover and support for the invasion.

By dawn on June 6, 18,000 parachutists were already on the ground; the land invasions began at 6:30 a.m. The British and Canadians overcame light opposition to capture Gold, Juno and Sword beaches; so did the Americans at Utah. The task was much tougher at Omaha beach, however, where 2,000 troops were lost and it was only through the tenacity and quick-wittedness of troops on the ground that the objective was achieved. By day's end, 155,000 Allied troops--Americans, British and Canadians--had successfully stormed Normandy’s beaches.

For their part, the Germans suffered from confusion in the ranks and the absence of celebrated commander Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, who was away on leave. At first, Hitler, believing that the invasion was a feint designed to distract the Germans from a coming attack north of the Seine River, refused to release nearby divisions to join the counterattack and reinforcements had to be called from further afield, causing delays. He also hesitated in calling for armored divisions to help in the defense. In addition, the Germans were hampered by effective Allied air support, which took out many key bridges and forced the Germans to take long detours, as well as efficient Allied naval support, which helped protect advancing Allied troops.

Though it did not go off exactly as planned, as later claimed by British Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery--for example, the Allies were able to land only fractions of the supplies and vehicles they had intended in France--D-Day was a decided success. By the end of June, the Allies had 850,000 men and 150,000 vehicles in Normandy and were poised to continue their march across Europe.

The heroism and bravery displayed by troops from the Allied countries on D-Day has served as inspiration for several films, most famously The Longest Day (1962) and Saving Private Ryan (1998). It was also depicted in the HBO mini-series Band of Brothers (2001).

Sources: Text
D-Day History

From the Army website:


CMH: Normandy

The U.S. Army Center of Military History's in-depth description of the invasion at Normandy.
Go to the website

The National D-Day Memorial

Bedford, Va. This small town in rural Virginia lost 19 men on D-Day from a population of less than 4000, the highest per capita loss of anywhere in the United States.
Go to the website

The National D-Day Museum

The National D-Day Museum celebrates the American spirit, the teamwork, optimism, courage and sacrifice of the men and women who won World War II and promotes the exploration and expression of these values by future generations.
Go to the website

The United States National Archives and Records Administration

Washington D.C. and College Park, Md.
Go to the website

The U.S. Army Center of Military History (CMH)

Fort McNair, Washington D.C.
Go to the website

The U.S. Army Heritage and Education Center (AHEC)

Carlisle, Pa.
Go to the website


U.S. Army colonel jumps at Normandy reenactment

June 13, 2012
Read more about United States Army colonel jumps at Normandy reenactment

Liberty Ride offers American cyclists glimpses of WWII

June 12, 2012
Read more about Liberty Ride offers American cyclists glimpses of WW II

Normandy monument dedicated to Maj. Richard Winters

June 8, 2012
Read more about Normandy monument dedicated to Maj. Richard Winters

Army Salutes D-Day Vets at Twilight Tattoo

June 7, 2012
Read more about Army Salutes D-Day Vets at Twilight Tattoo

On anniversary of D-Day invasion, Army recognizes WWII vets in Nation's Capital

June 7, 2012
Read more about On anniversary of D-Day invasion, Army recognizes WWII vets in Nation's Capital

Warriors of yesterday, today commemorate D-Day together

June 6, 2012
Read more about Warriors of yesterday, today commemorate D-Day together

Special Forces Soldier lands in France for D-Day commemoration

June 6, 2012
Read more about Special Forces Soldier lands in France for D-Day commemoration

68th Anniversary of D-Day - Commemorations in Normandy, France

June 5, 2012
Read more about 68th Anniversary of D-Day - Commemorations in Normandy, France

Fort Bragg paratroopers participate in D-Day anniversary in France

June 4, 2012
Read more about Fort Bragg paratroopers participate in D-Day anniversary in France

Special Operations paratroopers honor World War II veterans

June 4, 2012
Read more about Special Operations paratroopers honor World War II veterans

Retired Fort Bragg Soldiers shares almost 70 years of memories

November 11, 2010
Read more about Retired Fort Bragg Soldiers shares almost 70 years of memories

‘Forgotten D-Day’ vets receive highest French medal

August 13, 2010
Read more about ‘Forgotten D-Day’ vets receive highest French medal

D-Day, Original Rendezvous with Destiny

July 13, 2010
Read more about D-Day, Original Rendezvous with Destiny

Army Reserve in Normandy

June 8, 2010
Read more about Army Reserve in Normandy

Army Reserve Soldiers in Normandy France

June 7, 2010
Read more about Army Reserve Soldiers in Normandy France

1ID troops remember D-Day

June 7, 2010
Read more about 1ID troops remember D-Day

WWII vet recognizes his unit's esprit de corps in basic training graduates

May 17, 2010
Read more about WWII vet recognizes his unit's esprit de corps in basic training graduates

More than 60 years later, World War II Soldiers awards Purple Heart posthumously

March 30, 2010
Read more about More than 60 years later, World War II Soldiers awards Purple Heart posthumously

WWII paratrooper visits Fort Bragg

March 5, 2010
Read more about WWII paratrooper visits Fort Bragg

29th ID remembers D-Day on 66th anniversary

June 7, 2009
Read more about 29th ID remembers D-Day on 66th anniversary

Servicemembers join D-Day veterans, French citizens to commemorate sacrifice of World War II troops

June 6, 2009
Read more about Servicemembers join D-Day veterans, French citizens to commemorate sacrifice of World War II troops

D-Day 65th Anniversary

June 6, 2009
Read more about D-Day 65th Anniversary

WWII Poster Gallery

Links Open in a New Window
Keep ’em Coming and Coming Right! Poster Action! Men of 18 and 19… Choose Your Combat Branch. Poster America Calling. Take your place in Civilian Defense. Poster Enlist in a Proud Profession! Join the United Stares Cadet Nurse Corp. Poster

“…pass the ammunition”. The Army Needs More Lumber. Poster O'er the Ramparts We Watch. United States Army Air Forces. Poster United we are strong. United we will win. Poster Help smash Hitler Now! Invasion of Europe. Look! That's where we need every ton of metal you can mine and smelt! Poster

The Beaches

D-Day Airborne and Beach Assault

Detailed map of NormandyThe Normandy beaches were chosen by planners because they lay within range of air cover, and were less heavily defended than the obvious objective of the Pas de Calais, the shortest distance between Great Britain and the Continent. Airborne drops at both ends of the beachheads were to protect the flanks, as well as open up roadways to the interior. Six divisions were to land on the first day; three U.S., two British and one Canadian. Two more British and one U.S. division were to follow up after the assault division had cleared the way through the beach defenses.

Disorganization, confusion, incomplete or faulty implementation of plans characterized the initial phases of the landings. This was especially true of the airborne landings which were badly scattered, as well as the first wave units landing on the assault beaches. To their great credit, most of the troops were able to adapt to the disorganization. In the end, the Allies achieved their objective.

Airborne Assault

Airborne assault map with detailed information
 The AIRBORNE ASSAULT into Normandy as part of the D-Day Allied invasion of Europe was the largest use of airborne troops up to that time. Paratroopers of the U.S. 82d and 101st Airborne divisions, the British 6th Airborne Division, the 1st Canadian Parachute Battalion, and other attached Allied units took part in the assault. Numbering more than 13,000 men, the paratroopers were flown from bases in southern England to the Cotentin Peninsula in approximately 925 C-47 airplanes. An additional 4,000 men, consisting of glider infantry with supporting weapons and medical and signal units, were to arrive in 500 gliders later on D-Day to reinforce the paratroopers. The parachute troops were assigned what was probably the most difficult task of the initial operation -- a night jump behind enemy lines five hours before the coastal landings.

To protect the invasion zone's western extremity and to facilitate the "Utah" landing force's movement into the Cotentin Peninsula, the U.S. 82nd and 101st Airborne divisions descended on the peninsula by parachute and glider in the early hours of D-Day. The paratroopers were badly scattered.

Many were injured and killed during the attack, and much of their equipment was lost. But the brave paratroopers fought fiercely, causing confusion among the German commanders and keeping the Germans troops occupied. Their efforts, hampered by harsh weather, darkness and disorganization, and initiative of resourceful soldiers and leaders, ensured that the UTAH BEACH assault objectives were eventually accomplished. The British and Canadian attacks also accomplished their primary goal of securing the left flank of the invasion force.

Utah Beach

UTAH BEACH was added to the initial invasion plan almost as an afterthought. The allies needed a major port as soon as possible, and UTAH BEACH would put VII (U.S.) Corps within 60 kilometers of Cherbourg at the outset. The major obstacles in this sector were not so much the beach defenses, but the flooded and rough terrain that blocked the way north.

Omaha Beach

OMAHA BEACH linked the U.S. and British beaches. It was a critical link between the Contentin peninsula and the flat plain in front of Caen. Omaha was also the most restricted and heavily defended beach, and for this reason at least one veteran U.S. Division (lst) was tasked to land there. The terrain was difficult. Omaha beach was unlike any of the other assault beaches in Normandy. Its crescent curve and unusual assortment of bluffs, cliffs and draws were immediately recognizable from the sea. It was the most defensible beach chosen for D-Day; in fact, many planners did not believe it a likely place for a major landing. The high ground commanded all approaches to the beach from the sea and tidal flats. Moreover, any advance made by U.S. troops from the beach would be limited to narrow passages between the bluffs. Advances directly up the steep bluffs were difficult in the extreme. German strong points were arranged to command all the approaches and pillboxes were sited in the draws to fire east and west, thereby enfilading troops while remaining concealed from bombarding warships. These pillboxes had to be taken out by direct assault. Compounding this problem was the allied intelligence failure to identify a nearly full-strength infantry division, the 352nd, directly behind the beach. It was believed to be no further forward than St. Lo and Caumont, 20 miles inland.

V (U.S.) Corps was assigned to this sector. The objective was to obtain a lodgment area between Port-en-Bessin and the Vire River and ultimately push forward to St. Lo and Caumont in order to cut German communications (St. Lo was a major road junction). Allocated to the task were 1st and 29th (U.S.) Divisions, supported by the 5th Ranger Battalion and 5th Engineer Special Brigade.

Gold Beach

GOLD BEACH was the objective of the 50th (Northumbrian) Division of the British 2nd Army. Its primary task was to seize Arrolnanches (future site of a Mulberry) and drive inland to seize the road junction at Bayeux, as well as contact U.S. forces on their right and Canadians on their left. The initial opposition was fierce, but the British invasion forces broke through with relatively light casualties and were able to reach their objectives in this sector. A major factor in their success was that the British assault forces were lavishly equipped with armour and "Funnies" of the 79th Armoured Division. The "Funnies" were the specialist vehicles, armed with 290 mm mortars, designed for tasks such as clearing obstacles or minefields and destruction of large fixed fortifications. Perhaps the most famous is the "Flail" tank, which was a Sherman equipped with a large roller to which was attached lengths of chain. These tanks were designed to clear terrain to their front, and detonate mine fields and other booby traps without danger to the tanks or infantry following.

Juno Beach

JUNO BEACH was the landing area for 3rd Canadian Division. The Canadians were very concerned about their role in the invasion (as were most of the planning staff) as the memory of 2nd Canadian Division's destruction at Dieppe was still fresh. But many lessons had been learned, and the 3rd Canadian Division, in spite of heavy opposition at Courselles-sur-Mer, broke through and advanced nearly to their objective, the airfield at Carpiquet, west of Caen. The Canadians made the deepest penetration of any land forces on June 6th, again with moderate casualties.

Sword Beach

SWORD BEACH was the objective of 3rd (British) Infantry Division. They were to advance inland as far as Caen, and line up with British Airborne forces east of the Orne River/Caen Canal. The Orne River bridges had been seized in late at night on the 5th of June by a glider-borne reinforced company commanded by Maj. John Howard. As at the other beaches, British forces penetrated quite a ways inland after breaking the opposition at water's edge. Unfortunately, the objective of Caen was probably asking too much of a single infantry division, especially given the traffic jams and resistance encountered further inland. 1st Special Service (Commando) brigade commanded by Lord Lovat, linked up in the morning with Howard's force at Pegasus bridge on the British left. Fierce opposition from the 2lst Panzer and later the 12th SS Panzer division prevented the British from reaching Caen on the 6th. Indeed, Caen was not taken until late June.

Colorado Gun Owners Fight Back… Deliver Twice as Many Signatures as Needed to Recall Senator

Colorado Gun Owners Fight Back…
Deliver Twice as Many Signatures as Needed to Recall Senator

In this photo taken May 24, 2013, Paradise Firearms owner Paul Paradis holds a flyer depicting Colorado's State Senate President, Democrat John Morse, together with a petition to recall him, right, at his gun shop in Colorado Springs. (AP | Ed Andrieski)
Yesterday 16,000 signatures were delivered to recall Colorado State Senator John Morse. Morse has been a huge backer of the sweeping and numerous gun control bills that were passed in Colorado earlier in the year and signed into law by Governor John Hickenlooper. 

Below is just a reminder of Mr. Morse’s thinking, or lack of thinking, as he spoke about massive gun control laws as though they would “stop bullets piercing children’s bodies.”

According to opponents of the Democrat Senate President, they turned in twice as many signatures as needed on Monday.

Bill Adaska, a retired engineer from Denver who volunteered to gather the signatures for Morse’s signature in his district, said “This shot will be heard around the world. This is the race, right here, that’s going to show Washington and Chicago that when you come after our guns, we’re going to take you out.”

The Washington Post reports on Morse and his response to the recall:

Morse backed the gun control measures, and sponsored an even stricter measure to gun owners liable in some cases for damage caused by their weapons. Morse scuttled that liability measure when it appeared it didn’t have enough support to clear the Senate.

A defiant Morse responded Monday to the recall petition by insisting he won’t resign and that national gun groups have targeted him in an effort to scare politicians nationwide away from addressing gun control.

“This turns into a national race,” Morse predicted.

Even if he loses his seat, Morse said, the gun measures were too important not to adopt after a bloody 2012. He insisted that he’s never aspired to another office and wouldn’t mind losing his political career over the gun bills.

“Keeping Coloradans safe from gun violence is very worth your political career,” Morse told reporters.

Perhaps Morse should be concerned with protecting Coloradans from politicians who don’t uphold their oath and are tyrannical while at the same time respond emotionally to an issue rather than intellectually.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) sent out political mailers in support of Morse’s recall, but the effort was a result of grassroots efforts, not the NRA.

Rob Harris, organizer of the recall effort, said “I ran this campaign. The NRA did not run this campaign. We the people are making a stand against the people who refused to represent their constituents."

No state lawmaker has ever faced a recall vote in Colorado history. Accordingly, voters would determine whether he should be recalled and who would replace him.

Any proposed candidate to take Morse’s place would only need 1,000 signatures.

There are more efforts to oust Democrat lawmakers. Senator Angela Giron of Pueblo has signatures for her recall due next week.

Two other Democrat lawmakers who were targeted for recall appear to be safe as the efforts to recall them seem to not have enough support to bring their recall to a vote.

The next step in the Morse case is that the Colorado Secretary of State has 15 business days to verify the signatures. Morse could challenge the signatures before a recall election is set. The latest date that for a recall vote of Morse would be early October.

Way to go Colorado! If lawmakers aren’t obeying the law, start kicking them out. That, my friends is a means to a peaceful revolution. 

Tim Brown is the Editor of Freedom Outpost and a regular contributor to The D.C. Clothesline. 
Gun control supporters facing recall bids in Colo. 
In Colorado, gun control votes followed by increasingly popular political tool: the recall
Associated Press -
In this photo taken May 24, 2013, a large sign posted at the entrance of Paradise Firearms in Colorado Springs, Colo., invites customers to sign a recall petition against Colorado Democratic State Senate President John Morse. In gun-friendly Colorado, gun-rights activists with support of the National Rifle Association are seeking Morse's ouster for his support of
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (AP) -- A Democratic campaign office here usually would be quiet this time of year, a few weeks after the state's legislature wrapped up work and lawmakers headed off to summer vacations. 

But even though it's not an election year, the office is in full campaign mode, with volunteers working the phones and reviewing maps in anticipation of a new front of modern campaigning — the recall phase. 

A handful of Democratic state lawmakers in Colorado face recall petition efforts in what looks to be the first wave of fallout over legislative votes to limit gun rights. In an era in which recall efforts are booming, from governor's offices down to town councils and school boards, the Colorado efforts will serve as the first test of gun-rights groups' ability to punish elected officials who expanded gun control laws after last year's Aurora, Colo., and Newtown, Conn., shooting massacres. 

In Colorado, gun-rights activists wasted no time seeking recalls to oust state Senate President John Morse and three other Democratic lawmakers. The targeted lawmakers weren't necessarily the main advocates for ratcheting back gun rights, but all come from districts with enough Republicans to give opponents hope they can boot out the Democrats and replace them with lawmakers friendlier to guns. Colorado is the only state outside the East Coast to have adopted significant statewide gun controls this year. 

"Colorado seems to be the testing ground for some of the gun measures, so this has national implications," said Victor Head, a plumber from Pueblo who is organizing a recall attempt against a Democratic senator. 

Two of four recall efforts in Colorado already have evaporated from lack of support. But in Colorado Springs, Morse opponents are piling up signatures in gun shops and outside libraries and grocery stores. The National Rifle Association sent a political mailer saying it was coordinating the recall effort with local groups, though the local recall petitioners have denied that. The NRA did not return calls for comment on their involvement in the Colorado Springs effort. 

Morse has mounted a campaign to urge voters not to sign petitions. In an indication of the national stakes, that push is largely funded by a $20,000 contribution from a national progressive group called America Votes. The Morse campaign said the donation came through the group's local Colorado office. 

The recall group's main funding comes from a $14,000 contribution from a nonprofit run by a local conservative consultant, Laura Carno. She said that contribution was made possible by some out-of-state donors. 

"People in other states that are further down this road, like New York and Massachusetts, are calling up and saying 'What can we do to help?'" Carno said. "This isn't what Colorado stands for." 

In an interview, Morse seemed resigned to facing a recall vote after signatures are verified. He believes national gun-rights supporters are using his district to make a national statement about the political peril officials face if they take on gun control

"That's what's going on here. They want to take out the Senate president," Morse said. 

The organizer of the Morse recall effort, Anthony Garcia, didn't disagree. Garcia doesn't live in Morse's district but in the northern Colorado town of Brighton. Garcia said Morse was targeted not just because of his votes for gun control but because he is a prominent Democrat from a competitive district. 

"It's as much about saying Colorado is angry as it is about getting one guy out," Garcia said. 

"Legislators need to know when citizens are outraged that they can't ignore the people." 

Immediate accountability seems to be a common thread in recall attempts, said Joshua Spivak, who tracks recall elections nationwide at the Hugh L. Carey Institute for Government Reform at Wagner College in New York. Technology makes it easier to organize, Spivak said, and modern-day voters watching political activity in real time on Twitter and TV aren't content to wait until another election to show their displeasure when they feel ignored. 

Spivak said at least 169 officials at all levels of government faced recalls last year, up from 151 the year before. The number this year could go even higher, he said. 

Technology isn't the only explanation. 

"The other reason," Spivak said, "is that they succeed." 

Most recalls actually fail, as in the case last year of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican who survived a recall election after attacking collective bargaining rights for state employees. But compared with re-election campaigns, when incumbents face up to 75 percent likelihood of winning, Spivak said recall elections have a much lower rate of success for incumbents. 

In Colorado last year, seven recall efforts made it to ballots, all local races, Spivak said. Of those seven, two officials were ousted and two more resigned. 

Nationwide, 108 recalled officials last year lost or left office after a recall. That makes the recall a powerful tool — and one likely to be used more often, Spivak said. 

Back in Colorado Springs, a couple of Morse opponents defended the recall attempt as the best way for citizens to keep their representatives accountable. 

"I believe in gun rights. And he didn't listen. He's supposed to represent the people, and when he doesn't do that, what are supposed to do? Nothing?" asked Bianca McCarl, a 40-year-old merchandiser who is supporting Morse's recall.

Assuming the Morse recall goes to ballots, with an election to be held by late summer, the incumbent holds a slight party registration advantage in the district. He believes most voters liked his gun votes. 
Read More 
Pro-gun camp submits petitions to recall Colorado legislator 
Have more signatures than he got votes in 2010

DENVER — A recall campaign submitted stacks of petitions Monday to oust Colorado Senate President John Morse in what could become a national referendum on gun rights.

Organizers said they turned in more than 16,000 signatures, well in excess of the 7,178 valid signatures needed to force the recall and even more than the 13,866 votes received by Mr. Morse in the 2010 election.

“It just goes to show how interested people are in making sure Morse is recalled,” said recall organizer Rob Harris.

Mr. Morse, a Democrat from Colorado Springs, became a recall target for his role in pushing three gun-control measures signed by the governor in March. Another recall effort against Democratic state Sen. Angela Giron of Pueblo is scheduled to submit petitions June 10.

The Secretary of State’s office has 15 business days to verify the signatures. If the recall effort meets the threshold, Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper will be charged with calling a special election or placing the recall on the November ballot.

Any recall election is expected to draw national interest from groups on both sides of the firearms debate.

The Washington-based Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee fired off a statement Monday describing organizers as “extremists in Colorado who want to waste hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars.”

Additional articles:
Read more: Gun control supporters facing recall bids in Colorado - The Denver Post
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content:
Follow us: @Denverpost on Twitter | Denverpost on Facebook


Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Dr. Karen Kenney's Response To IRS Questions About Illegal Activites Her Tea Party Promotes, "We’re the San Fernando Valley Patriots, not Occupy Oakland."

Dr. Karen Kenney in response to the IRS letter to her Tea Party organization wanting her to list 'committed violations of local ordinances, breaches of public order or arrests" as well as details of how her Tea Party organization 'conducts or promotes' illegal activities:

"We’re the San Fernando Valley Patriots, not Occupy Oakland."

"My personal favorite was question No. 33, which in relation to protests asked for a listing of our “committed violations of local ordinances, breaches of public order or arrests” then requested details on how we “conduct or promote” illegal activities.

I think the IRS needs to fix its labeling machine: We’re the SanFernando Valley Patriots, not Occupy Oakland."