About Me

My photo
Paul Hair is a national security expert and an author. He writes under his own name and as a ghostwriter. Connect with him at http://www.liberateliberty.com/. Contact him at paul@liberateliberty.com.

Friday, August 17, 2018

Trump Axes Brennan’s Clearance; Appears to Follow Obama Insider Threat Policy

John Brennan
President Trump revoked former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan’s security clearance on Aug. 15. Politicians and pundits are arguing about the decision. But as they do, they have missed a critical thing: the revocation of Brennan’s clearance appears to fit with former President Obama’s policy of preventing insider threats. Insider threats include any government employee who engages in the “unauthorized disclosure of national security information.” Trump’s official statement on the clearance revocation indicates that he suspects Brennan may be doing just that.

Obama issued Executive Order 13587 (“Structural Reforms to Improve the Security of Classified Networks and the Responsible Sharing and Safeguarding of Classified Information”) on Oct. 7, 2011. Under “Sec. 6. Insider Threat Task Force,” the EO states that:

There is established an interagency Insider Threat Task Force that shall develop a Government-wide program (insider threat program) for deterring, detecting, and mitigating insider threats, including the safeguarding of classified information from exploitation, compromise, or other unauthorized disclosure, taking into account risk levels, as well as the distinct needs, missions, and systems of individual agencies.

Notice that the EO lists government employees who engage in the “unauthorized disclosure” of classified information as insider threats.

Obama made this definition even clearer in the “Presidential Memorandum – National Insider Threat Policy and Minimum Standards for Executive Branch Insider Threat Programs” that he issued on Nov. 21, 2012. . . .

Read the entire post at The Loftus Party.

CIA Vet Debunks Claim that Brennan Has a Right to a Security Clearance

John Brennan
President Trump revoked former Central Intelligence Agency Director John Brennan’s security clearance on Aug. 15. Since that time, Brennan and his supporters have argued that Trump’s action is an attack on the First Amendment or free speech. Veteran CIA officer Kent Clizbe debunks this argument.

On the same day that Trump revoked his security clearance, Brennan said that, “This action is part of a broader effort by Mr. Trump to suppress freedom of speech & punish critics.”

Others have made similar comments, including former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper who said that, “The larger issue here, to me, has — throughout, has been infringement on First Amendment rights, and I think people ought to think seriously about that.”

Kent Clizbe was a CIA case officer during the 1990s, and worked for the CIA again as a contractor after the Sep. 11, 2001 attacks on the U.S. (He and I have also worked together as coauthors.) He described the idea of Brennan having some sort of right to a security clearance as “hogwash.”

“Your First Amendment rights have nothing to do with security clearances,” he said. “You give up your freedom to speak about classified information when you sign your clearance indoctrination papers. No one is denying Brennan the freedom to speak.” . . .

Read the entire post at The Loftus Party.

Friday, August 10, 2018

How to Prepare Bacon Like a Lady

Martina Markota
Martina Markota posted a video on Aug. 8 showing how to be a lady who makes “the best bacon ever.”

Markota first demonstrates how she prepares bacon. After that she shows her way of preparing a BLT sandwich. As she says in the caption for the video, It’s “one of my recipes for the best bacon ever. [Y]ou can use it for many things but [I] figured my first cooking video [I’]d make a sandwich.”

The bacon and BLT look great. But there’s more to watch and listen to than just the food preparation demonstration.

One of the things that pops out of the video is the first sentence she says without apology or hesitation: “It is very important for a woman to know how to cook.” . . .

Read the entire post and watch the video at The Loftus Party.

Monday, July 23, 2018

Missoulian Spotlights Novel RE ‘Love Between an Adult and Teenager’

Barb Wire Logo
American culture continues its downward spiral. And a July 7 interview in the Missoulian about University of Montana professor Casey Charles and The Monkey Cages, his novel about “love” between a man and a teenage boy, demonstrates that there will be no depth too low for it to sink.

The Missoulian is a newspaper in Missoula, Montana. It credits Keila Szpaller as the author of “University of Montana professor discusses new novel about gay witch hunt in Boise.” The entire interview is worth reading because I so thoroughly disagree with it. It shows how we really have reached a point where debate is worthless since we no longer share any common beliefs as a society.

The first paragraph sets the tone for the entire interview: “In his new novel The Monkey Cages, author and University of Montana professor Casey Charles takes on a taboo subject, love between an adult and teenager.”

Perhaps some things really should be taboo; perhaps we really should despise certain things. In fact, no “perhaps” about it. And in a way we all know this. It’s just that we are at polar opposite ends on what we should despise. Part of our society believes we should despise evil; the other part believes we should despise good. . . .

Read the entire column at Barb Wire.

Tuesday, June 19, 2018

Netflix Plans Lesbian POTUS Movie. ‘The First Transgender Superhuman’ Beat It to the Punch.

Netflix Logo

Netflix announced in May that it is planning to debut First Ladies, a movie about a female president and her lesbian lover. And while the concept of a sodomite president is meant to be groundbreaking, it really isn’t. “The First Transgender Superhuman” featured a U.S. president strongly hinted to be a sodomite.

The Daily Caller reported on May 18 that “Jennifer Aniston Will Be Playing Lesbian President in New Netflix Original.” The article said that Aniston will portray “the first woman and lesbian President of the United States.” It added that “Her partner will be played by Tig Notaro as the first lady. The two of them will be portraying Beverly and Kasey Nicholson as the president and first lady.”

I wrote the three short stories for my book Mortal Gods: Ignition, which Freedom Press International published in 2016. “The First Transgender Superhuman” was the second tale in the anthology and featured the following passage:

The President looked back at his body man who was sitting with the dignitaries. His body man looked back and shrugged his shoulders. He wore a navy suit with a white shirt and pink tie, complete with the small lapel pin he always wore.

So no wife for the President but he does have a body man sporting a pink tie and an unidentified “lapel pin he always wore.” Hmmm. What is that hinting at about the president and his body man?

There’s a reason the President is so obsessed with finding the first transgender superhuman, and there’s a reason he’s so obsessed with sodomy in general (complete with a cabinet-level Secretary of Equality who uses “zir” as a pronoun): he’s a sodomite.

Netflix and the people producing First Ladies may think they’re doing something new with the concept of a sodomite POTUS. They aren’t. I featured one as a main character in “The First Transgender Superhuman,” a story published over two years ago.

Monday, June 18, 2018

I’m Doing the Opposite of What DC’s Vertigo Comics & Everyone Else Are Doing

Excerpt of “Safe Sex” #1 Cover.
In early June, Vertigo (an imprint of DC Comics) announced that it was doing a “line-wide relaunch,” which would be headlined by seven comic books. These comic books will feature stories focusing on white supremacy, subservient housewives, lesbian sex workers, an irreverent story about God and Jesus, and similar topics. A lot of people were unimpressed with the announcement, similar to how they are unimpressed with the way creators are treating established intellectual property such as Star Wars, Marvel Comics and so forth. Many of these same people vocally encourage creators to change what they are doing. I’m not among these people. Instead, I am focused on creating my own intellectual property, full of new characters, universes, and stories that are entirely the opposite of what Vertigo and everyone else are doing.

The official press release announcing the Vertigo relaunch provides summaries of all seven of the new titles. It also has previews of first-issue covers. Industry trade publications greeted the announcement with enthusiasm. But again, many other people did not.

I’ve written a lot about culture over the years. If you’ve followed me, you can guess what my view is on the announcement. If you haven’t followed me, suffice it to say that nothing in the Vertigo press release appeals to me.

In the same way, all I have to say about the directions that Star Wars, Marvel Comics, Nancy Drew, and pretty much every other popular IP are taking is that I disagree with them. But I don’t care if they don’t change those directions. And that’s because my focus is on creating my own fiction.

And my fiction is entirely different than what you find in mainstream arts and entertainment.

I’m not making a hyperbolic statement. Again, read the Vertigo press release. I can almost guarantee you that however the seven different comic books present white supremacy, subservient housewives, sexual behavior, theology, and so forth, my views on all such topics will be the opposite of the creators writing stories about them.

In fact, stories I’m working on (or have already written) incorporate the issues of black supremacy, illegal aliens, good little housewives, and more.

You see, I’m no longer interested in “rescuing” someone else’s IP, or “dialoguing” with people who don’t share my views and who openly hate me and everything I believe. Contrary to the popular saying that “we need to find common ground,” we actually need to go our separate ways.

Going our separate ways involves multiple steps. One such step is beginning to create our own culture. And that’s exactly what I’m doing.

I don’t like anything that Vertigo, DC Comics, or other big companies are doing. But I don’t want them to stop. I hope they destroy themselves. Meanwhile, I’m creating new characters, new worlds, and new tales—new things that are entirely the opposite of what you’ll find everyone else doing.

And if that appeals to you, I encourage you to give my fiction a shot.

Tuesday, April 17, 2018

CIA Director Pompeo Confirms U.S. Killed ‘Couple Hundred’ Russians in Syria

CIA Director Mike Pompeo.
Official CIA Photo.
CIA Director Mike Pompeo confirmed in an April 12 Senate hearing that U.S. forces killed “a couple hundred Russians” in Syria in early February. Media had reported the same thing for weeks but provided no official sourcing. SCI previously assessed that the media reports likely were wrong because of the lack of sourcing and other details. However, with the CIA director saying in official testimony that the U.S. did indeed kill hundreds of Russian mercenaries in Syria in early February, SCI revises its assessment.

SCI published, “Why that Story You Heard about the U.S. Killing Russian Mercenaries in Syria Likely Is Wrong, on March 5. The assessment noted that the account the media were providing “was suspect from the start.”

One of the reasons SCI doubted the veracity of the media reports was because of a claim made by Polygraph.info (a propaganda website run by government-supported Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty). Polygraph.info said it had audio recordings, provided by a source inside the Russian government, that backed up the claim that hundreds of Russian mercenaries were killed in Syria. The SCI assessment said:

Is it possible that a U.S. government propaganda network would be able to develop a human intelligence source close to the Kremlin without Russia figuring it out? A HUMINT source who would feed Polygraph.info audio recordings that would then be publicly disclosed without compromising his identity in the process? Maybe. But it would be very difficult—and that makes the Polygraph.info report highly suspect. In fact, I’d lean towards saying that someone played the people at Polygraph.info.

A second reason SCI doubted media reports was because they acknowledged that no government official would confirm their allegations. From the SCI assessment:

The final sentence from The Washington Post article should have raised alarms for anyone following the story. That sentence indicates two things: (1) if the Post was indeed receiving actual intelligence from U.S. officials, that in itself would appear to be an illegal act. And it subsequently calls into question what the motivation is of those officials disclosing the intelligence. (2) The same (or other) government officials refused to say what they thought of the apparently illegally disclosed intelligence, indicating that they might not be ready to make an analytical judgment on what it means, or that they were using it to manipulate public opinion.