Taking a break from what is normally called “technology” to post a little thankfulness for a “technology” the military uses quite effectively as the real, tangible force multiplier: The Recruiter.

It was easy enough, when taking management time on someone to check the enlistment contract of the sailor in question and make disparaging remarks about the lineage of the poor soul who was detailed to recruit and found themselves a little short of quota near the end of the month, and working under the emotional stress of the “system,” as defined by the analysts defined it….

In retrospect, I have, through introspection and reading the many weblogs over the last few years, have come to appreciate the role these people play in the maintenance of a solid, strong and continually improving best military in the world, and, in history.

While out making rounds today, I pulled into a local Marine Recruiter’s office. I did have an ulterior motive, but it was driven by the need to just step in and shake a few hands and say thanks for the hard work that makes the rest of it all possible. It also told me the quantity of pizza I will have delivered one day soon for lunch.

A Staff Sargent and two brand, spanking new Privates were present. The young man and young woman privates looked all the part of the very young who are carrying the load of the nation. No ribbons but the NDSM graced their khaki shirts, but they got the same hand shake and thanks, for they are the ones, with a global war staring them in the face.

So: My suggestion – stop by those strip mall storefronts and take a moment to tell them you appreciate their work, walking the halls of the high schools and making community meetings, much of it at the expense of their personal time at home, when the entire military is making deployments to the combat zone when they are not on “cake” jobs like “shore duty” stateside.

This work is vital, but not nearly as well recognized as an integral part of the system. I think this is especially important in areas far from military bases, as many of these little outposts of the Armed Services are like little islands unto themselves.

They are our edge to make the non-living technology work to defeat our enemies and help those others around the world less fortunate.

He was a man who saw his service to others more important than his own life in dire circumstances: Pvt George Watson, US Army.

In recognition of his last effort, his Medal of Honor citation reads:

Citation: For extraordinary heroism in action on 8 March 1943. Private Watson was on board a ship which was attacked and hit by enemy bombers. When the ship was abandoned, Private Watson, instead of seeking to save himself, remained in the water assisting several soldiers who could not swim to reach the safety of the raft. This heroic action, which subsequently cost him his life, resulted in the saving of several of his comrades. Weakened by his exertions, he was dragged down by the suction of the sinking ship and was drowned. Private Watson’s extraordinarily valorous actions, daring leadership, and self-sacrificing devotion to his fellow-man exemplify the finest traditions of military service.

In more detail, here are the circumstances of the story in Wikipedia:

A resident of Birmingham, Alabama, He had entered the Army September 1, 1942, and was a member of the 2nd Battalion, 29th Quartermaster Regiment. He was a passenger aboard the Dutch steamer USAT Jacob on March 8, 1943, which was near Porloch Harbor, New Guinea, when the ship was hit by Japanese bombers.

When the ship was abandoned, Watson remained in the water and, instead of trying to save himself, assisted soldiers who could not swim into life rafts.

Weakened by his exertions, he was dragged down by the suction of the sinking ship and drowned. His body was never recovered.

Pvt Watson is one of seven African-Americans to have been awarded the Medal of Honor in WWII. However, his award did not happen until 1990, when, of ten names of African-American heroes were submitted for upgrading/award for the MOH, did he become one of those seven, and all of them honored decades after their courageous acts. In 1997, President Clinton made the presentations. The other six awardees all served with line combat units. Pvt Watson, alone, of the Quartermaster Corps, received this high honor, from a non-combat unit.

To remember this hero, who had no known family, a field at Ft Benning, and the courthouse for Jefferson County, GA have been named for him.

A Military Sealift Command ship, the USNS WATSON (T-AKR-310) carries the name of Pvt Watson. A LMSR with “roll-on, roll-off” capability, it was built at NASSCO:

USNS Watson will be assigned to MSC’s Afloat Prepositioning Program which prepositions on ships equipment and supplies for the U.S. Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force and the Defense Logistics Agency worldwide. Prepositioning improves U.S. capabilities to deploy forces rapidly in any area of conflict.

Watson is scheduled to be loaded with U.S. Army cargo in September (1998). USNS Watson will be crewed by 29 merchant mariners from Maersk Lines Limited under contract to MSC. In addition, up to 50 military personnel can embark to “monitor and maintain the military equipment on board, ensuring its readiness.

By the year 2001, MSC will have taken delivery of 19 LMSRs as part of the U.S. Navy Strategic Sealift Acquisition Program. The program is in response to the need for expanded sealift capability identified in a congressionally mandated study done in the early 1990s. The 19 LMSRs will provide five million square feet of sealift capacity early in the next century.

Large, Medium-speed, roll-on/roll-off ships – T-AKR Description: Military Sealift Command’s newest class of ships – Large, Medium- speed, Roll-on/Roll-off Ships, or LMSR – will significantly expand the nation’s sealift capability in the 1990s and beyond. Nineteen LMSRs will have been converted or built at U.S. shipyards by the year 2001.

Features: Large, Medium-speed, Roll-on/Roll-off Ships, or LMSRs, can carry an entire U.S. Army Task Force, including 58 tanks, 48 other track vehicles, plus more than 900 trucks and other wheeled vehicles. The ship carries vehicles and equipment to support humanitarian missions, as well as combat missions. The new construction vessels have a cargo carrying capacity of more than 380,000 square feet, equivalent to almost eight football fields. In addition, LMSRs have a slewing stern ramp and a removable ramp which services two side ports making it easy to drive vehicles on and off the ship. Interior ramps between decks ease traffic flow once cargo is loaded aboard ship. Two 110-ton single pedestal twin cranes make it possible to load and unload cargo where shoreside infrastructure is limited or nonexistent. A commercial helicopter deck was added for emergency, daytime landing.

Not only is this ship named for him, as the first of the several units in the class, they will all honor Pvt Watson as the WATSON Class T-AKR-310 ships.

Pvt George Watson’s Medal of Honor is maintained at the US Army Quartermaster Museum at Ft. Lee, VA.

His legacy is to continue to provide help to others on the field of combat.

Bonus reading: Eagle1 talks about a response by government and industry to seaborne threats.

From the TWS Administrators:

Air Force is now in beta testing stage, Invites are
being sent out to those that have pre-registered,
During beta testing access is by invitation only.
Should be fully online Jan 01, 2008

Loyde Mcillwain
Senior Administrator
TWS Inc

If I were and AF type, I’d get over there and pre-register right away and get onboard.

The Navy – TWS has been a great tools to get in contact with old shipmates…

Update from Loyde in the comments:  you have to be invited to get in now.  Keep checking the site for use in Jan’08!

Welcome, any Lizards who stop by to critique my work!

I had a brief moment of clarity (at least I’ll call it that) yesterday, while listening to the talk shows once more going over the General Kerr issue at the Republican debate this week.

Here it is: The Clintons (past administration, and the one to maybe come) realize something about the military experience, and are intent on using it for that very purpose. I submit this is wrong. Yes, it’s a social experiment they are after. Why? Because that has been the very power of the organization in history.

I have blogged a lot about the society changing work of Eleanor Roosevelt, not directly, but through the stories I have put here about Ben Garrison, and other African-American units that served our nation well in WWII, and then allowed the true integration of the Armed Services, ahead of the general population.

The Tuskegee Airmen are well known. Add to that the USS MASON (DE-529), Subchaser PC-1264, the 761st (“Black Panther”) Armored Battalion and the 555th (“Triple Nickel”) Parachute Battalion. These units, set up by President Roosevelt, showed these men could fight for the country just as well as another other able bodied man in the US.

One thing about race: Throughout history, there has never been any doubt about whether you are born that way, or it is something you chose. This is the big disconnect we are facing. The jury is still out on which it is for homosexuality. Political pressures and the MSM would have you believe there is no choice about it. The “scientific evidence” is sketchy and from small sample sizes, so, at best inconclusive. There are those who, having lived the “life style” will adamantly tell you it’s a “nurture” thing, and you don’t have to be that way, others will say those people, like Andy Cominsky, have been “brainwashed.” I’ll say, that the discussion on the reasons for being homosexual being debated now, have only become a topic of public debate and concern in the last few decades. That, in my book, smacks of someone trying to make something factual that is not.

Here’s one of my observations of the scientific community in recent times: On one hand, they will regale you with tales of the long suffering individual, driven by a revelation, suffering public and peer disdain for years, and then, the “discovery” comes that completely vindicates them, and they are elevated from the ranks of the dregs of the community, and placed on high pedestals! They become revered and followed. Later, some small voice comes forward and says “I don’t think that’s it.” The scientists attack that impetuous one, who would challenge…but, the cycle repeats. At some point, the theory of the youngster is found to be more correct (those two words chosen specifically), the elder is de-throned, at the worst, or provided a place of honor for having provided some insight, at best, and the history of science continues.

On the other hand….the “scientists,” almost without taking a breath, will launch into a discussion of how. let’s say Darwin, is 100% correct and there is no need to revisit the “theory” of evolution any more, IT IS SETTLED!

I see the current discussion on the condition of being gay as the second case, even while there is much to be looked at with true scientific discipline, untainted by any groups desire to elevate themselves to a special status, above the “all men are created equal” measurement.

Toss the entire “Global Warming Climate Change” issue in with Darwin’s Theory of Evolution model of “it’s that way because a POLITICIAN told me” category. Side note: Yeah, I waited all those months just so I could evacuate before the many Cat 5 hurricanes headed to the “plywood state” and they never came….

Now, back to the topic: Bill Clinton went for it first with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as a political payback for a voting block that went his way in 1992. It was a realistic compromise to get elected, with nothing to do with National Defense. Since end of the draft in 1971, the military had been an all volunteer force. There were adequate numbers of people enlisting. The DADT had nothing to do with abandoning a previous organizational ban, so we could put more manpower into the fight. We weren’t in a fight, and the Clinton Administration was drawing down the military as fast as it could.

Using the totalitarian management structure of the military, Bill Clinton, as the Commander-in-Chief, had pretty much Carte Blanche to make it happen, including the power to place his leadership at the top of the military to make sure they went along. That is the prerogative of any president, and I’m not faulting him for using the system in place, but I would argue about his motivation to repay a political debt, not to strengthen the military.

Thus began the change, were, as an analog to the service of the minority units in WWII, and the later full integration into service life by President Truman, it became a lever to show the general populace a better way to handle our social interactions. In that case, once more, I’ll point out it was over a matter of a fact of true, scientifically understood heredity.

Now, along comes Hillary. If she is to attain the office of President, she will most likely declare openly gay people will be allowed to enter the service. Why? Once more, to illegitimately use the power of the Commander-in-Chief’s authority to return a political favor for getting the gay vote.

What does that say about her (and Bill’s) view of the Armed Services? Those organizations, setup in The Constitution, to “provide for the common defense” are nothing more that dating services. Join the service and get to shower with people, without having to ask their permission. In any other part of society, doing so would have one arrested for a sex crime. It’s all about consent.

The only reason it is important is to get to power by promising access to the homosexual community.

What about the years of training the military has gone through, trying to prevent “fraternization.” That became an issue with the massive infusion of women in the service, and the incredibly deep rooted human desire for sexual contact. Why didn’t the military want this, even among heterosexuals? It makes for difficult, and many times impossible, decision making moments, where the leadership needs to be scrupulously fair. Sometimes that “fairness” needs to be played out in terms of making sure who you send to a dangerous situation is being done for the right reasons, and not because you are in a relationship with someone in your unit.

Adding openly homosexual people to the already PCed military environment is just one more obstacle to good order and discipline, which is detracted from by raging hormones left unchecked.

Once more, the “here’s your orders, now get on with it” methodology has the near term possibility to just making it more palatable for the military to take on more of the social interaction phenomena, rather than being focused on combat readiness. Maybe they see it as an offshoot for the “busy gay ‘professional,’ who doesn’t have time to set up a full time relationship.” Yeah, that’s the ticket – Join the military and let everyone around you in the barracks know you’re “like that” and let the shy ones come to you.

One thing this plan doesn’t include, is respect for the people, who joined the military to serve the nation, and not as a dating service, who do not want those who are sexually attracted to them staring at them in the head facilities.

At least DADT offers the gay person the opportunity to serve and all they have to do is take their “relationships” off base. The same is actually expected off all the other service members already. The reason a DADT policy for heterosexuality isn’t necessary is because the vast majority of all humans aren’t homosexual and therefore it would be pretty ridiculous to tell them not to say what their sexual preferences are. They don’t do it now. It wasn’t part of their enlistment contract and it serves no organizational purpose.

The only purpose of the Armed services are to serve the people by defending them. If that’s what someone wants to do, then keep it zipped. It’s expected of everyone. The UCMJ has all the “rules” and it applies to all in uniform.

And, don’t forget that the Democrats all want to scream and yell about the “waste, fraud and abuse” of the DoD. How about we begin to add up all the costs for the course development, the manpower and facilities, the contractor fees, and the hows spent byt real troops sitting in classrooms getting lectured on being sensitive and not using certain words. Can someone explain how that helps the US military defend the nation better? I’d like to hold that “metric” up for the “you’re wasting our money crowd and see what they have to say.

Here it is: The Clintons (past administration, and the one to maybe come) realize something about the military experience, and are intent on using it for that very purpose. I submit this is wrong. Yes, it’s a social experiment they are after. Why? Because that has been the very power of the organization in history.

I have blogged a lot about the society changing work of Elanor Roosevelt, not directly, but through the stories I have put here about Ben Garrison, and other African-American units that served our nation well in WWII, and then allowed the true integration of the Armed Services, ahead of the general population.

The Tuskegee Airmen are well known. Add to that the USS MASON (DE-529), Subchaser PC-1264, the 761st (“Black Panther”) Armored Battalion and the 555th (“Triple Nickel”) Parachute Battalion. These units, set up by President Roosevelt, showed these men could fight for the country just as well as another other able bodied man in the US.

One thing about race: Throughout history, there has never been any doubt about whether you are born that way, or it is something you chose. This is the big disconnect we are facing. The jury is still out on which it is for homosexuality. Political pressures and the MSM would have you believe there is no choice about it. The “scientific evidence” is sketchy and from small sample sizes, so, at best inconclusive. There are those who, having lived the “life style” will adamantly tell you it’s a “nurture” thing, and you don’t have to be that way, others will say those people, like Andy Cominsky, have been “brainwashed.” I’ll say, that the discussion on the reasons for being homosexual being debated now, have only become a topic of public debate and concern in the last few decades. That, in my book, smacks of someone trying to make something factual that is not.

Here’s one of my observations of the scientific community in recent times: On one hand, they will regale you with tales of the long suffering individual, driven by a revelation, suffering public and peer disdain for years, and then, the “discovery” comes that completely vindicates them, and they are elevated from the ranks of the dregs of the community, and placed on high pedestals! They become revered and followed. Later, some small voice comes forward and says “I don’t think that’s it.” The scientists attack that impetuous one, who would challenged…but, the cycle repeats. At some point, the theory of the youngster is found to be more correct (those two words chosen superficially), the elder is de-throned, at the worst, or provided a place of honor for having provided some insight, at best, and the history of science continues.

On the other hand….the “scientists,” almost without taking a breath, will launch into a discussion of how. let’s say Darwin, is 100% correct and there is no need to revisit the “theory” of evolution any more, IT IS SETTLED!

I see the current discussion on the condition of being gay as the second case, even while there is much to be looked at with true scientific discipline, untainted by any groups desire to elevate themselves to a special status, above the “all men are created equal” measurement.

Toss the entire “Global Warming Climate Change” issue in with Darwin’s Theory of Evolution model of “it’s that way because a POLITICIAN told me” category. Side note: Yeah, I waited all those months just so I could evacuate before the many Cat 5 hurricanes headed to the “plywood state” and they never came….

Now, back to the topic: Bill Clinton went for it first with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as a political payback for a voting block that went his way in 1992. It was a realistic compromise to get elected, with nothing to do with National Defense. Since end of the draft in 1971, the military had been an all volunteer force. There were adequate numbers of people enlisting. The DADT had nothing to do with abandoning a previous organizational ban, so we could put more manpower into the fight. We weren’t in a fight, and the Clinton Administration was drawing down the military as fast as it could.

Using the totalitarian management structure of the military, Bill Clinton, as the Commander-in-Chief, had pretty much Carte Blanche to make it happen, including the power to place his leadership at the top of the military to make sure they went along. That is the prerogative of any president, and I’m not faulting him for using the system in place, but I would argue about his motivation to repay a political debt, not to strengthen the military.

Thus began the change, were, as an analog to the service of the minority units in WWII, and the later full integration into service life by President Truman, it became a lever to show the general populace a better way to handle our social interactions. In that case, once more, I’ll point out it was over a matter of a fact of true, scientifically understood heredity.

Now, along comes Hillary. If she is to attain the office of President, she will most likely declare openly gay people will be allowed to enter the service. Why? Once more, to illegitimately use the power of the Commander-in-Chief’s authority to return a political favor for getting the gay vote.

What does that say about her (and Bill’s) view of the Armed Services? Those organizations, setup in The Constitution, to “provide for the common defense” are nothing more that dating services. Join the service and get to shower with people, without having to ask their permission. In any other part of society, doing so would have one arrested for a sex crime. It’s all about consent.

The only reason it is important is to get to power by promising access to the homosexual community.

What about the years of training the military has gone through, trying to prevent “fraternization.” That became an issue with the massive infusion of women in the service, and the incredibly deep rooted human desire for sexual contact. Why didn’t the military want this, even among heterosexuals? It makes for difficult, and many times impossible, decision making moments, where the leadership needs to be scrupulously fair. Sometimes that “fairness” needs to be played out in terms of making sure who you send to a dangerous situation is being done for the right reasons, and not because you are in a relationship with someone in your unit.

Adding openly homosexual people to the already PCed military environment is just one more obstacle to good order and discipline, which is detracted from by raging hormones left unchecked.

Once more, the “here’s your orders, now get on with it” methodology has the near term possibility to just making it more palatable for the military to take on more of the social interaction phenomena, rather than being focused on combat readiness. Maybe they see it as an offshoot for the “busy gay ‘professional,’ who doesn’t have time to set up a full time relationship.” Yeah, that’s the ticket – Join the military and let everyone around you in the barracks know you’re “like that” and let the shy ones come to you.

One thing this plan doesn’t include, is respect for the people, who joined the military to serve the nation, and not as a dating service, who do not want those who are sexually attracted to them staring at them in the head facilities.

At least DADT offers the gay person the opportunity to serve and all they have to do is take their “relationships” off base. The same is actually expected off all the other service members already. The reason a DADT policy for heterosexuality isn’t necessary is because the vast majority of all humans aren’t homosexual and therefore it would be pretty ridiculous to tell them not to say what their sexual preferences are. They don’t do it now. It wasn’t part of their enlistment contract and it serves no organizational purpose.

The only purpose of the Armed services are to serve the people by defending them. If that’s what someone wants to do, then keep it zipped. It’s expected of everyone. The UCMJ has all the “rules” and it applies to all in uniform.

And, don’t forget that the Democrats all want to scream and yell about the “waste, fraud and abuse” of the DoD. How about we begin to add up all the costs for the course development, the manpower and facilities, the contractor fees, and the hows spent byt real troops sitting in classrooms getting lectured on being sensitive and not using certain words. Can someone explain how that helps the US military defend the nation better? I’d like to hold that “metric” up for the “you’re wasting our money crowd and see what they have to say.

Anyhow, a vote for Hillary is a vote to actually turn the US Armed Forces into a sexual experimentation labs of epic proportions and combat efficiency be damned. Not because a law says so, but because her character will allow her to do it, and the vote gives her the power. What sexual preference/proclivity/perversion will next gain the favor of Hillary and therefore be made “legal” in the military to gain some more votes?

I’d prefer the method they used when they started to vilify smokers in the late 80s: If any one person in a space objects to smoking, then no one can. How about we apply the same principle here for people who think they joined the military to fight for the country, and not to be ogled by gay people?

Ropeyarn was not passed on the virtual 1MC until the working party got wrapped up….

“Sea Story?”

Not a very exciting one, but a slice of life for sea going sailors, nonetheless.

Parking. Yes, a mundane part of life, but, back in the day, when the giant Soviet Union commanded most of our professional focus, and that of the nation’s leaders, we were headed for a 600 ship Navy. So, figure 600 hundred ship have sailors, and chiefs and officers. And some of these actually drove to work while the ships were pierside, the plant secured and shore services providing the “hotel services” needed to keep operating.

At all of the naval stations I was stationed at, the parking “scheme” was: Officer (blue sticker) parking up front, with Chief Petty Officer parking next, and then the enlisted/general parking. The game rules were:

Park where your sticker allowed, or get a ticket from Base Security.

If you were an officer, you had two places to park, Officer and Enlisted.

If you were a CPO, you had two places to park, CPO and Enlisted.

If you had a red sticker of the enlisted ranks, or were a visitor or civil servant, you had one place to park.

Makes sense. The modification to the rule was officers couldn’t park in CPO parking. That wasn’t as big an issue on regular days, but, when special occasions arose, such as changes of command, or ship arrivals (from deployment), the up front, closest to the ships parking was usually roped off for those the special occasion was being held for. The closet parking was, with minor exception, the Officer lots.

Arriving at work, to find cones/barricades/tape up, and usually a roving enlisted watch preventing you from parking in the officer’s lot, then you couldn’t “fall back” to the CPO lots. You had to go sharking for a spot in the general/enlisted lot. Somehow, it just didn’t make much sense, but it was what it was, because a large percentage of the Base Security force happened to be retired chief petty officers. The “club members” took care of the current up and coming retirees, who had made it through the process of the CPO Initiations.

That was one bite in the butt, and I survived, but another situation seemed to be rather prevalent, and, in a conspiratorial sense, linked to the issue brought up in the paragraph above:

On normal days at the pier, you might arrive and find all of the officer spots taken, or darn few left. While transiting from the vehicle to the pier between the cars, it became apparent there was a number of cars sporting red base stickers, not blue. Now, when turning and glancing at the vicinity of the CPO lot, you’d most likely see a ticket or two under windshield wipers for those brazen E-6 and below who dared to venture onto the hallowed ground, yet a dearth of same on offenders taking spaces from the arriving officers. Something about the Base Security force being largely comprised of retired CPOs….

It was what it was, but on some days, when the work before Officer’s Call was a large task, the frustration sometimes emerged in a vocal sense.

I did, having arrived at a reasonable Oh, Dark Thirty, time, before sunrise one fine Navy day, find the spot in the front row of the Officer’s lot, that had had a portable sign at the head of the spot, in accordance with the NAVSTA SOPA regulations, saying “CHENG, DD979,” laying face down on the ground and a car with a red sticker occupying the spot I was allowed. I drove around and found a spot in the way away at the back end of the Enlisted lot, then hiked, before the sun rose, to the ship at the D&S piers. I let the XO know this was unsat, and he looked at me and said something like: “Well, my spot wasn’t taken.” Note: SOPA allowed the CO, XO and CMC parking signed to per placed on the pier we were moored at. Not only was it separated from the other parking lots (obviously), there were guards posted (from the ship’s companies of the ships at the pier) who controlled who came on and off the pier, in vehicles or on foot. The XO seemed to have not grasped that fact in the moment.

Anyhow, later that day, I re-expressed my issue, pointing out the Base Security sure had time to ticket non-CPO vehicles, but couldn’t move their donut munching bodies a few tens of yards closer to the water’s edge to police the officer’s lot. I point out it was a matter of laziness, not the inability to patrol, because they had been making sure the CPOs had their lots protected from intrusion, and, on top of that, I got aboard about 20 minutes later, which cut my work time. He made a call.

It wasn’t like I needed the exercise, it’s more I always managed to make a long day longer, but getting there early enough to get a few “hours” of work done (I found out a Navy work hour was really about 10 minutes long, when the crew was aboard and it was “working hours” – when it was not work and not a duty day, I could get an “hours” worth of work done in about 10 minutes).

Now that we have fewer ships, and even with the base consolidations, I know (and saw last year), such turf wars are not as big of an issue, because on a “work day” around the D&S piers on Norfolk, the enlisted lot was only half full. Plenty of parking to go around. I guess I’m only left to wonder if the same retired CPOs are still patrolling the lots….

In April 2006, Park Service Director Mary Bomar ordered an internal investigation into claims that the planned Flight 93 Memorial is actually a terrorist memorial mosque, built abound a giant Mecca-oriented crescent. Bomar’s investigation was a total fraud, concluding, for instance, that it isn’t possible to calculate the orientation of the crescent because the site-plan has not been geo-referenced. (Page 2, PP2 of September 2006 summary report. Page 1 here.)

In fact, the original Crescent of Embrace site-plan was drawn on a topo map that the Memorial Project provided to all participants in the design competition. A topo map is the epitome of a geo-referenced map. North marked on a topo map is true north, which is the only piece of information needed to calculate the orientation of the crescent. Just connect the tips of the crescent, form the perpendicular bisector, and calculate how many degrees it points from north (53.4).

Also known are the crash-site coordinates, which is all that is needed to calculate the direction to Mecca (55.2° clockwise from north). All of this is trivially easy to verify. Just use the Mecca-direction calculator at Islam.com to get a graphic of the direction to Mecca from the crash site and place it over the crescent site plan:

Somerset PA is ten miles from the crash-site. The “qibla” is the direction to Mecca. Red lines show the orientation of the crescent. The crescent points 1.8° north of Mecca. (Click for larger image.)

A request for oversight

Because it is the director’s office that has been covering up the Mecca-orientation of the crescent, oversight can only come from Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne himself. Several people sent letters to Secretary Kempthorne two weeks ago, showing how the giant Mecca-oriented crescent remains completely intact in the so called redesign. But Mr.
Kempthorne also needs to know that he is getting bad information from his subordinates in the Park Service. Thus a request for all readers of this post: if you have a minute, please copy and paste this entire post into an email for Secretary Kempthorne.

We don’t need for the secretary to understand all the terrorist memorializing features in the design, or the numerous proofs of intent that architect Paul Murdoch included so that his accomplishment will be undeniable once it is a fait accompli. It is enough that he be concerned about features that can be readily interpreted as terrorist
memorializing, whether they are intended or not. As Congressman Tancredo put it: we need “a new design that will not make the memorial a flashpoint for this kind of controversy and criticism.”

But even getting to the most basic facts about what is in the present design requires getting past Mary Bomar’s fraudulent report, which tries to pretend that there is nothing that can even be interpreted as untoward.

Mary Bomar’s intellectually dishonest “experts”

In addition to claiming that topo maps are not geo referenced, Mary Bomar’s internal investigation cites a small number of academic experts, all of whom spout nothing but the most absurd non sequiturs. One is Dr. Daniel Griffith, professor of “geo-spatial information” at the University of Texas. About Alec Rawls’ analysis of the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent,
Dr. Griffith writes:

… Mr. Rawls’s arithmetic calculations appear to be correct … [but] … just because calculations are correct does not make the resulting numbers meaningful.

Dr. Griffith’s point, it seems, is that the mere fact of Mecca orientation does not imply intent. Who said it did? The way Murdoch proves intent is by repeating his Mecca orientations (scroll down to the last section here). But intent is not the only thing that matters. Even without terrorist memorializing intent, it is inappropriate to plant a giant Mecca oriented crescent on the crash site.

The Memorial Project knows this, but it is committed to defending the crescent design, so it keeps using its doubts about intent as an excuse for denying the facts. Dr. Griffith, for instance, is telling every reporter who will listen that there is no such thing as the direction to Mecca. “Anything can point toward Mecca,” he told the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, “because the earth is round.” One billion Muslims face Mecca five times a day to pray, and Griffith pretends there is no such thing as facing Mecca!

Of course he knows better. The first thing that Griffith’s report does is calculate the direction to Mecca:

I computed an azimuth value from the Flight 93 crater site to Mecca of roughly 55.20°.

Bomar expert #2

Dr. Kevin Jaques, specialist in Islamic sharia law from the University of Indiana, acknowledges that the Mecca-oriented crescent is similar to the mihrab around which every mosque is built, but says:

…just because something is ‘similar to’ something else does not make it the ‘same’.

Yes, well, similar–very, very similar–is exactly the problem.

Like Daniel Griffith, Mr. Jaques is trying to make hay of the fact that Mecca orientation does not by itself imply intent. So what? Intentional or not, it is unacceptable for the central feature of the Flight 93 memorial to be a geometric match for the central feature of a mosque. Jaques is pretending that the questions he raises about intent somehow make the facts irrelevant.

Professor Jaques also dismisses the likeness between the Mecca-oriented crescent and a traditional Islamic mihrab

Population 436 the movie

by noting that lots of religious structures have prayer-direction indicators, not just mosques:

The biggest hole in [Rawls’] argument is that all of the elements he points to are common architectural features that one would find in a church or synagogue. The mihrab originated in pre-Islamic buildings and can be found in temples, churches, and synagogues around the Mediterranean.

This is logic? Because Christian churches are often oriented to the east, that somehow makes it okay to build the Flight
93 memorial around a half-mile wide Mecca oriented crescent? If this is “the biggest hole in [Rawls’] argument,” then there are no holes in Rawls’ argument.

Project spokesmen know the truth, and are lying about it

Memorial Project spokesmen have followed the lead of these academic frauds, using doubts about intent as a pretext for denying the facts. Asked about Rawls’ Mecca orientation claim, Patrick White, vice president of Families of Flight 93, denied it:

Rawls’ claims are untrue and “preposterous,” according to Patrick White, Families of Flight 93 vice president. “We went through in detail all his original claims and came away with nothing.”

In fact, Patrick White is fully aware of the Mecca orientation of the giant crescent. At the Memorial Project’s public meeting in July he argued that the almost-exact Mecca orientation of the giant crescent cannot be intended as a tribute to Islam because the inexactness of it would be “disrespectful to Islam.”

Joanne Hanley has done the same:

“Alec Rawls bases all of his conclusions on faulty assumptions,” said Joanne Hanley, the superintendent of the Flight 93 National Memorial. “In addition, the facts are twisted and people are misquoted, all to serve his intended purpose.”

But she too has admitted the Mecca-orientation of the giant crescent, telling Mr. Rawls in a 2006 conference call that she wasn’t
concerned about the almost-exact Mecca orientation of the crescent because:

“It isn’t exact. That’s one we talked about. It has to be exact.” (Crescent
of Betrayal, download 3, page 145.)

These are your subordinates Mr. Kempthorne. Please do not let them get away with this fraud. Congressman Tancredo is demanding answers from Director Bomar and many of us are hoping that you will do the same. There is not much
time. Construction on Paul Murdoch’s terrorist memorial mosque is about to begin.

Sincerely,

[Your name]

Before we go to unmanned combat aircraft, the F-35 is coming online. I’d speculate it may well be the last manned fighter we put into service. But, that’s not the point. It brings some incredible technology to the table, and will serve the USAF, USMC and Navy in three different modifications.

Specifically, the really interesting technology that “caught my eye” was this:

Designed for a “HUD-less” cockpit, the heads up display travels with the pilot’s head, yielding pictures like this to the occupant: Heck, not only will you be able to see vital info, regardless of where you position your head…you’ll be able to “talk” to the plane….Next: The development of the “sensitivity module” to detect when you are verbally abusing your ride….and the CDR thought alcohol abuse was a too intrusive issue…Moving pictures, that talk to you, about the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter:

embedded by Embedded Video

Albert J. Myer, born Sept 28th, 1828, grew up to be a very accomplished citizen of this United States. So much so, a ship was named after him. You see, Albert Myer began his career in the US Army as a surgeon, but later, as a Major, became the father of the US Army Signal Corps just before the Civil War began. But, if that wasn’t enough, he also spawned the US Weather Bureau, which we know today as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).For those of you who were part of the Boy Scouts, you might recall the practice of “wig wag” to send Morse code across long distances. Albert Myer was also the inventor of this form of communications. In fact, it was that specific innovation that got this Army surgeon the post to begin the Signal Corps. From Wikipedia:

In 1858, the Army expressed interest in Myer’s invention and appointed a board to examine “the principles and plans of the signalling, mode of use in the field, and course to be pursued in introducing to the army.” Myer appeared before the board, chaired by Lt. Col. Robert E. Lee, in 1859 and convinced them to authorize field testing of his invention. He conducted field tests starting in April of that year around New York Harbor. The tests were successful and Secretary of War John B. Floyd recommended to Congress that the Army adopt Myer’s system and that Myer be appointed as chief signal officer. Congress approved Myer’s appointment as major and chief signal officer and the Signal Corps was formed, despite opposition in the Senate by Jefferson Davis from Mississippi. Myer was sent to the Department of New Mexico for further field trials of his system in a campaign against the Navajos.

The story of the “wig wag” system’s use, it not without its irony. Also noted in Wikipedia:

Ironically, the first use in combat of Myer’s signaling system was by Confederate Captain Edward Porter Alexander at the First Battle of Bull Run. Alexander had been a subordinate of Myer’s and assisted in the New York field trials.

Following the Civil War, General Myer was then charged with setting up weather monitoring stations to warn mariners of bad weather:

The U.S. Congress, on February 9, 1870, authorized “… meteorological observations at the military stations in the interior of the continent and at other points in the states and territories of the United States, and for giving notice on the northern lakes and seaboard by telegraph and signals of the approach and force of storms”. This duty, previously conducted by the Smithsonian Institution, was assigned to General Myer’s Signal Corps, due in part to his previous interests in storm telegraphy. It was the birth of the U.S. Weather Bureau, now the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Myer headed the Signal Corps from August 21, 1867, until his death of nephritis at Buffalo, New York, in 1880. He is interred in the Walden-Myer Mausoleum at Forest Lawn Cemetery in Buffalo.

The legacy of General Myer’s accomplishments are remembered by honoring him with the renaming of Ft Whipple at Arlington, VA to Ft Myer. You might have heard of it, or visited there while in DC.

The Army named a ship after General Myer, too. No, that’s not a typo. The Army has many ships, but that’s a topic for another post, another day. The ship, USNS ALBERT J MYER (T-ARC 6) was a cable laying ship.Initially completed in late 1945 as one of the NEPTUNE Class cable ships, built for the US Army, but was put up in Fleet Reserve. She was put to active use sometime in 1950 in the North West Pacific. In 1952, she was transferred to the US Navy and the Military Sealift Command for the deployment of the submarine cables for the sensor arrays of SOSUS.

The MYER remained in the service of the country until 1994, conducting cable laying and repairs before decommissioning that year. In 2005, she was broken up for scrap.

Some additional research on the ALBERT J MYER can be found here

Lex is discussing an article by Ralph Peters regarding the old and new worlds.

One of Lex’s commenters, John, says those who want to get involved should have “experience” in the real ejection seat, before being in charge of the UAVs:

Insist that anyone above the video game player level for UAVs have recent seat time as an attack, FAC, ANGLICO to keep the focus and urgency on supporting the guys [and gals] in the mud.

Good comment, but the opportunities to have this sort of experience to execute oversite diminish quickly as the UAVs are brought online. In the beginning, there will be lots of “old hands” with the time in the saddle, given the current global unpleasantness, but once that settles down, they will work their way up the ranks, and have less time in the cockpit, and more holding a pen of pounding a keyboard.

It’s the next big challenge.

I began to comment, but, suffering from a little bit of blogger’s cramp, thought it might work over here, to get another post on the board.

Granted, my “stuff” was really low speed, high drag in comparison, yet, it’s all about the mindset. Some of the transitions in how we, as the Surface Warfare community had to rethink the “world:”

Moving from “conventional CICs” to the NTDS world was another. The data link surely put more info in the hands of “higher,” that had previously been the domain of the all knowing, on scene commander. I was around for that transition, to some degree, when the bulk of the destroyer fleet became so enabled with the introduction of the 963s. Blogged a few of the observations of the beginning and 5 years later conditions, too.

I was an “early adopter” of the over-the-horizon capability as a LTJG with the control of 8 RGM-84 HARPOONs, too. I went from that job, where it was all shiny and new, where we got litlle more instruction on how to point and shoot, to a training command where I saw some really innovative tools developed (the “Harpoon Interactive Tactical Simulator” (HITS)) that helped us wrap our brains around a moving search pattern, that couls also be static, even with the .85 mach “sensor platform” underway to the vicinity of the target. Years later, with improvements suggested to us (and paid for) by the Brits, the B models added to our ability to get 500 lb warheads on target. The came fancy tools like the AN/SWG-1A to interface with the seekers. Now we could engage with simultaneous precision, from one platform.

Not so fancy? Well, before that was 5″/38s and /54s at not much more than the horizon visual ranges. Now we were out in the 60+ mile realm and we needed off ship “eyeballs” to help out. A transition.

I was part of a staff sent to sea to figure out BBBG tactics with Tomahawk, when doing “OTH-T” with mountains of national sensor data coming in via hard copy from Radio was the order of the day – oh, and the info was then plotted on paper charts. That had been good for the old gunnery days, but wholly unsatisfactory for the missile age. As a result, a magic computer came from behind the Green Door to help out: POST. Now we had to teach ourselves really technical stuff about emitters, so operators could set the right filters to locate and engage targets. A transition. Along the way, then LCDR Harry Harris, now of GTMO fame, made an interesting remark when I finished my briefing to ADM Jerimiah.

After the Gulf War, pilots had an entirely new appreciation for the TLAM variant of the Tomahawk cruise missile, the thing that, before that war, couldn’t possibly do the job TACAIR was there for. A transisiton (and more pilots coming home).

Later, I was around when the CEC system, integrated into the NTDS networks, which was a (insert sailor adjective here) mess the first time they tried it. I was there. I had told them at the planning meeting there was going to be a problem and they needed to do some more analysis (i wasn’t nay saying, just looking for success). They told me not to worry. In the test, they told the NTDS side to shut down. It’sa ll been worked out, but it took some rethinking when a really novel system entered the arena of tactical tools for a fast paced world. Before I had been at that level for the safety of CEC, one of my project manager worked it, and I saw some incredible briefs on the technology. We, back then in the early 90s, were putting a lot of stock into computing technology to help us down high speed, sea skimming threats. Has I been on the sea going side, I’m sure I would have had some qualms about trusting Eddie Electron so much. A transition.

In another job, I had to tell ship COs that the only way they were going to save their ship from Exocets was to put NSSMS into a full auto configuration. I had some COs tell me to stuff it. I held up the TACMEMO, paid for with a lot of taxpayers money, that proved it was the only hope. I suspect we use more auto features these days. A transisiton.

My interests in computer technology tends to heavily lean towards display technology, to include virtual environments. I have a bad habit of paying more for video and sound cards for my systems as most would plunk down for a whole computer system. I had my first hands on experience with a personal VR system in the 1993 time frame. Since then, not only has the display technology improved remarkably, but the rate of data transmission and bandwidth has increased. Those are things that will make the combat UAVs (CUAVs) a reality. Challenges to overcome as to the employment, the supporting data transmission paths, and the like? Oh, yes. Can they provide the same “quality of service” to that ground pounder with and enemy looking to grab him by the belt buckle? With time, I’m sure it will happen. Along the way, there will be barriers and hurdles to clear. Along the way, some really smart young people will show up and tell us how to use them in ways our old paradigms would never allow us to see. The convergence of so many new, light-weight capabilities and materials is incredible. That will all lend itself to this next leap forward.

I suspect the technology will allow a “driver” to be immersed to such a degree, he or she will get a startlingly accurate feel for the environment, and the soldier or Marine on the ground will be happy with the results.

For years, the military and the computer gaming market have been headed for the same end game. Along the way, they have joined forces, and it was over a decade ago that that happened. Net result? Look at some of the UAV hand controllers….

The first challenge: Think how to employ this technology, not why we shouldn’t….and let our junior speak their minds, too.

FbL has the “gouge,” and we all know an ounce of gouge is worth ponds of other stuff…

It is reason to celebrate, the big total was over $192K, with >$32K arriving for the cause, without “team” designation.

Don’t forget, this is a year ’round need, so keep the interest up as you can all year long!