Order diazepam no prescription, In 2005, Stewart Baker joined the Department of Homeland Security as Assistant Secretary of Policy for the entire Department of Homeland Security under Secretary Michael Chertoff. The position, Kjøpe diazepam online, which evolved from the Assistant Secretary for Border and Transportation Security Policy and Planning position, has the following responsibilities, according to the DHS website:

• Leads coordination of Department-wide policies, order diazepam without prescription, programs, Cheap generic diazepam, and planning, which will ensure consistency and integration of missions throughout the entire Department.

• Provides a central office to develop and communicate policies across multiple components of the homeland security network and strengthens the Department’s ability to maintain policy and operational readiness needed to protect the homeland.

• Provides the foundation and direction for Department-wide strategic planning and budget priorities.

• Bridges multiple headquarters’ components and operating agencies to improve communication among departmental entities, eliminate duplication of effort, osta alennus diazepam, and translate policies into timely action.

• Creates a single point of contact for internal and external stakeholders that will allow for streamlined policy management across the Department.

Baker would hold the position for the next four years, Kjøpe billig diazepam, tackling a variety of issues from border and travel to cybersecurity and the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) to bioterrorism.  In his upcoming book, Skating on Stilts: Why We Aren’t Stopping Tomorrow’s Terrorism, Baker offers an intriguing view of our homeland security posture that ties back to the central theme that technology is both our savior and our enemy as it empowers not only us but our foes.  Coming from Baker, Indiana IN Ind. , who has been described by the Washington Post as “one of the most techno-literate lawyers around, Buy diazepam online without prescription, ” the analysis of homeland security technology from a policy/legal prism is refreshing.  This is not a Luddite's view of why technology harms, but an expert's finely woven story of "how the technologies we love eventually find new ways to kill us, and how to stop them from doing that."

A subtheme throughout the book is that information sharing, Georgia GA Ga. , or lack thereof, Købe diazepam, has hindered our nation’s efforts to fight terrorism, especially when “privacy” has played a role.  In setting up a discussion of what led to his time at DHS, Baker recounts some of the failures leading up to 9/11, diazepam online, including the information sharing wall put up at the Department of Justice between intelligence and law enforcement elements of the agency, Diazepam kopen, as well as challenges at the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. His view is of someone who has spent time in the intelligence world as the General Counsel of the National Security Agency and as General Counsel of the Robb-Silberman Commission investigating intelligence failures before the Iraq War. The account dives into the intricacies of Justice and its overseers, West Virginia WV W.Va. , as well as how bureaucracy and personalities can so easily define our government’s most sensitive policies. Kaufen diazepam, The book then looks at his days at DHS and attempts to strengthen border and travel programs and policies for acronym-named programs, including Passenger Name Records (PNR), the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), buy cheap diazepam online, Electronic System of Travel Authorization (ESTA), North Dakota ND , Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), and Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System II (CAPPS II),  among others.  If you have ever doubted Washington's love of acronyms and initialisms, order diazepam online, this read will certainly change your mind.

In evaluating efforts in the aviation space, Baker is critical of a number of groups that he deems to have stood in the way of the Department’s mission during his tenure, including the private sector, European governing bodies, bureaucrats, Congress, and privacy/civil liberties groups, all of whom he argues are all about the status quo and not open to change.  Some of his criticisms are valid while others seem to simplify the views of the various actors.  For example, in dismissing some of the tourism industry’s concerns related to travel policies, he argues that the industry did not want innovation in government security on the border, order diazepam no prescription. Diazepam online cheap, Having been in the trenches at the U.S. House Homeland Security Committee during many of these debates, I would argue that the balancing of the numerous parties’ interests and concerns was not always that simple or easy to discern, acquistare a buon mercato diazepam, especially when assessing the right security path forward.  Some programs mentioned in the book, Illinois IL Ill. , such as WHTI, succeeded, in part, online diazepam, because they were implemented once necessary infrastructure had been deployed. Order diazepam no prescription, His strongest concerns are reserved for privacy and civil rights advocates and the government policies they either tout or hate.  There is a great deal of skepticism for “hypothetical civil liberties” and “hypothetical privacy concerns,” without evidence of demonstrated abuses by the government. He cites numerous incidents, ordering diazepam no rx, some of which certainly demonstrate the tension between privacy and security co-existing.  A few of the examples he uses have even been explored here at HLSWatch, Köpa billiga diazepam, including complaints about whole body imaging machines in airports.  See, e.g. Order diazepam no prescription, The Right to Be Left Alone (October 27, 2009) and “Where are all the white guys?” (November 10, 2009). Reading the book, privacy and civil liberties supporters may find it hard to balance Baker's call for imagination when tackling homeland security policy and decisionmaking without calling for a similar level of creative thinking when addressing how those policies and decisions will affect privacy and civil liberties.

The book goes on to describe how the Department and Administration tackled (or failed to tackle) cybersecurity and biosecurity and the differences between the approaches, Montana MT Mont. . In both sections, Diazepam discount, privacy and information sharing are undercurrents, though we also see some interesting discussions of such topics as patent protections, self-regulation, and the evolution of security in each of these areas.  The discussions are intriguing and provide both a history and analysis of why we are where we are on those issues.   The cybersecurity and related CFIUS discussion brought back some memories to this self-proclaimed cybergeek, including some of my first interactions with Baker when he was in private practice and I was at the Justice Department.

One last observation: while the focus on the book is obviously on the time that Baker served at the Department under Secretary Chertoff, it leaves much to the imagination of what work Secretary Ridge and his team- from their early days in the White House after 9/11 until the changing of the guard to Secretary Chertoff - undertook and how that may have contributed to some of Secretary Chertoff's and Baker's successes, challenges, and mindset.  In addition, despite the focus on privacy and civil liberties, there is little mention of the other DHS offices, including the Privacy, Civil Liberties, and General Counsel’s offices, who may have been engaged in many of the battles noted by Baker. The book is not lacking in detail or intrigue because of these exclusions, though I wonder how they affected the decisions of Baker and his policy team. Perhaps these items are the subject of another book for another time, order diazepam no prescription.

Stewart Baker provides insight into a D.C. perspective of homeland security and the struggle of a Department to tackle technology, privacy, and information sharing. The book provides some valuable lessons for those who are on the frontlines of homeland security policy as they attempt to tackle future threats. For an observer of homeland security development, Skating on Stilts: Why We Aren’t Stopping Tomorrow’s Terrorism is a must-read. The book will be released on June 15th and is available for pre-order on Amazon.com.  In the meanwhile, excerpts from the book and other missives from Baker can be found at a blog with the same name, http://www.skatingonstilts.com/.

Similar posts: Order clomid online cheap. Cheapest viagra prices. Propecia over the counter. Buy cheap viagra online. Buy clomid cod. Cheapest viagra in the world.
Trackbacks from: Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription. Order diazepam no prescription.

Buy cheap clomid online, Tomorrow afternoon, I am scheduled to participate in a panel discussion on crisis management and technology at Portland State University's Mark O. Hatfield School of Government. The event, South Dakota SD , sponsored by the campus chapter of Pi Sigma Alpha -- the political science honor society, Cheap clomid pills, asks what role technology can or should play in helping us respond to 21st century crises.

The organizers tell me their focus remains squarely on crisis management not technology. The question in their minds is not whether technology has a place in managing crises, Maryland MD Md. , but how we should define that place. How, they wonder, will we know whether or not technology is helping us? From a practitioner's perspective, this struck me as a very good question, and one that does not get asked often enough, buy cheap clomid online. Minnesota MN Minn. , From where I sit, crisis management succeeds or fails on how well leaders manage its four phases, which I define as:

• Awareness


• Ambiguity


• Adaptation


• Accountability

Awareness involves signal detection, clomid pills, which in turn depends upon the salience of signals to those responsible for detecting and responding to them. Clomid online kopen, Technology can improve signal to noise ratios, but may dull the sense of salience as people become overwhelmed by inputs, especially if those responsible for designing or operating the system lack contextual intelligence (see Nye 2008), billig clomid apotek.

Ambiguity not uncertainty is the dominant feature of complex systems and their relationships with their environments, Ordering clomid pills, and no more so than in when these systems are in crisis. Successful decision-making in crisis situations depends not so much on the ability to gather information or even to organize it as it does on seeing the meaning or patterns hidden within it. Buy cheap clomid online, Humans remain far better at reconciling the relevance of inconsistent, incomplete, competing, and even conflicting information than cybersystems. Ensuring such systems support the strengths of the people responsible for making decisions rather than using them to overcome weaknesses seems to me an essential step in preventing these systems from compounding rather than correcting our problems, pharmacie clomid bon marché.

Most crises are adaptive not technical challenges (Heifetz & Laurie 2001). Kentucky KY Ky. , Although many crises present us with problems that require technological assistance, their hallmark remains the need to see our relationship with the problem and its environment differently from the way we did before our situation became apparent. Dietrich Dörner (1997) demonstrated that most of our problems managing adaptive challenges arises not from their scope or scale so much as our inability to see them as complex webs of interdependent variables that interact in subtle but important ways, New Mexico NM N.Mex. . His experiments demonstrate that we are particularly ill-equipped to manage situations in which these interactions produce exponential rather than quasi-steady changes in the situation, buy cheap clomid online. He further concludes, Acquistare online clomid, that when confronted with such problems, we have an altogether too predictable tendency to direct out attention in ways that are either too narrow and fixed or too broad and fleeting to do much good. Adaptive challenges, Washington WA Wash. , then, Comprar clomid baratos, require us to keep the big picture in perspective and to engage others in its management. This is not something that cybersystems necessarily help us do better, as they engage people with a representation of the problem not its essential elements, Rabatt kaufen clomid.

In the end, Clomid online cheap, every crisis demands an accounting of what went wrong, and, if we are truly honest and maybe a bit lucky, South Carolina SC S.C. , what went right as well. Buy cheap clomid online, Such judgments are as inherently subjective just as their conclusions are (or should be) intensely personal. Cheapest clomid in the world, Getting people to accept responsibility, learn from their experiences, and take steps to strengthen the relationships they depend upon to resolve crises is an innately human process, acheter clomid discount. Cybersystems may help us engage one another over great distances in real time and keep records of our interactions, Order clomid cod, but they do not necessarily clarify our intentions or make it any easier for us to acknowledge the hard lessons we must learn if we are to grow.

Despite my concerns, I remain optimistic that technology can help us improve the effectiveness if not the efficiency of crisis interventions, cheap clomid no rx. But only if we do not ask too much of it or too little of ourselves along the way.

References:

DÖRNER, D, buy cheap clomid online. Massachusetts MA Mass. , (1996). The Logic of Failure. New York: Basic Books, clomid kopen.

HEIFETZ, Clomid over the counter, RA & LAURIE, DL (2001). Buy cheap clomid online, The Work of Leadership. Harvard Business Review, goedkope clomid apotheek. Cambridge, Mass.

NYE, Jr., JS (2008). The Powers to Lead. New York: Oxford University Press.

Similar posts: Order cheap diazepam online. Buy viagra. Buy propecia c.o.d.. Buy soma online cheap. Buy propecia without prescription. Viagra.
Trackbacks from: Buy cheap clomid online. Buy cheap clomid online. Buy cheap clomid online. Buy cheap clomid online. Buy cheap clomid online. Buy cheap clomid online.

.

Similar posts: Buy viagra cod. Order cheap diazepam online. Buy viagra. Buy propecia c.o.d.. Buy soma online cheap. Buy propecia without prescription.
Trackbacks from: Buy cialis. Buy cialis. Buy cialis. Buy cialis. Buy cialis. Buy cialis.

Monday’s post about whether the internet is creating terrorists ended with the observation “Jihad Jane is likely not an anomaly but a troubling preview of the future of terrorism.”

The Los Angeles Times article by Bob Drogin and Tina Susman cited in the same post Cheap viagra online without prescription, , conveys a similar concern, aided by multiple anecdotes.

I think both essays illustrate the emerging dominant view: The “Internet is making it easier to become a terrorist.”

------------------------

A few months ago, I attended a lecture about terrorism by David Tucker, a colleague at the Naval Postgraduate School. Buy generic viagra,   In a passing comment, Tucker suggested there might be less to the perceived relationship between the internet and radicalization than meets the eye.

There was an immediate -- and in some ways intellectually hostile -- reaction by the audience of public safety leaders. They thought the role the internet plays in radicalization was so obvious that questioning it was akin to -- well, challenging the Creation story in the Book of Genesis, Vermont VT Vt. .

OK, that’s an exaggeration, cheap viagra online without prescription. But Tucker’s thought was not well received.

Tucker then did what he often does with such controversaries. He looked for data. Buy viagra without prescription, In an article I will synthesize below, Tucker found “some evidence to suggest that the web sites do aid in radicalization.” But he cautions the data is limited and may be misleading. Cheap viagra online without prescription, Importantly, without a critical analysis of claims and evidence purporting to demonstrate that the internet is creating terrorists, we may end up wasting resources on the wrong problem, and ignoring potentially more effective ways to mitigate the creation of additional terrorists.

Tucker concludes his article saying there is very little evidence to support the claim “the internet is transforming how terrorists interact .... Perhaps over time, the evidence will emerge, viagra online kaufen. In the meantime, we are stuck with the difficult task of focusing ‘on the social and religious networks’ from which extremists emerge if we want ‘to interrupt or fragment face-to-face recruitment.’"

------------------------
Below is an extended excerpt (quasi-crypto-mashup may be a better term) of Tucker’s January 2010 Homeland Security Affairs article, “Jihad Dramatically Transformed. Order viagra c.o.d., Sageman on Jihad and the Internet.”

For this post, I have not included the footnotes or page references from the original document. Nor have I followed the normal convention about the use of ellipses, cheap viagra online without prescription. But I have emphasized parts of the article that I think are especially relevant to the internet-terrorism theme.

The complete, properly referenced, viagra without a prescription, emphasized and formatted article can be found at this link.
------------------------

“Jihad Dramatically Transformed. Sageman on Jihad and the Internet.”

In his book Leaderless Jihad, φτηνές φαρμακείο viagra, Marc Sageman claims...that Jihad in the modern world is changing from a centrally organized and structured activity into a more dispersed, decentralized movement in which small groups self-organize to carry out attacks.... Cheap viagra online without prescription, [Not] enough attention had been paid to the claims that Sageman made about the role of the internet in the development of what he calls the leaderless Jihad movement....

Sageman claims it is the internet that “has dramatically transformed the structure and dynamic of the evolving threat of global Islamic terrorism by changing the nature of terrorists’ interactions… Starting around 2004, communication and inspiration shifted from face-to-face interactions…to interaction on the internet.”

Assessing Sageman’s claim is important because if he is right, it would suggest that we switch attention and resources to combating digital recruitment, North Dakota ND . If he is wrong, then this would be a waste of resources.

Sageman says the interactivity of the internet (particularly forums and chat rooms) is changing human relationships in a revolutionary way and hence, Osta alennus viagra, he implicitly assumes, must be changing the way those who become extremists interact online. In support of this claim, Sageman cites one article and six terrorism cases he says show the revolutionary impact of the internet and substantiate his claim that the internet “has dramatically transformed the structure and dynamic of the evolving threat of global Islamic terrorism.”

[Tucker then argues one article and six cases is a too small a sample to make large scale generalizations. Small numbers is a persistent research problem.]

Sound generalization is always a problem in terrorism studies because terrorism is such a rare event that we seldom have a large number of well-understood cases to base our claims on, cheap viagra online without prescription. Any scientific or even simply reasonable and candid analysis of terrorism should acknowledge this problem, Michigan MI Mich. , however, and be modest in the claims it makes.

Sageman considers ... Washington WA Wash. , the effect of the internet on human relations in general. He states that “people’s relationships are being completely transformed through computer-mediated communications.” Sageman offers no support for this claim.... Cheap viagra online without prescription, He proceeds, however, to draw conclusions about terrorism from these undocumented claims, arguing that the trust and intensity of emotion that is necessary for the sacrifices that terrorism requires can be generated online. At this point he states that “online feelings are stronger in almost every measurement than offline feelings. This is a robust finding that has been duplicated many times”

In support of this broad claim, Sageman cites one article: a review of research on the effects of the internet on social life.

[However], Virginia VA Va. , the article does not state that “online feelings are stronger in every measurement than offline feelings” or that this is a robust finding. It states rather that in two experiments “those who met first on the Internet liked each other more than those who met first face-to-face.” (It also reports that, depending on assumptions about the social context, Purchase viagra, interactions on the internet can be negative, displaying lack of trust, for example. ) Overall, the article offers no support for the claim that the internet is transforming social life, Wyoming WY Wyo. . .., cheap viagra online without prescription.

Instead of supporting Sageman’s claims, the article suggests that Sageman is wrong in stressing the transformational character of the internet. It reports that people tend to take online relationships offline into the non-internet world, Delaware DE Del. , for example. This suggests that whatever the internet’s advantages, individuals still prefer face-to-face social life to online social life. Indeed, the article reports that “international bankers and college students alike considered off-line communication more beneficial to establishing close social (as opposed to work) relationships.”

Other research on the social effects of the internet published since the one article that Sageman refers to does not support Sageman’s claim that the internet is transforming people’s relationships, viagra generic. Cheap viagra online without prescription, First, the internet does not appear to be displacing people’s social activity. People who use the internet are not less likely to have other forms of social contact. Internet use “appears to expand activity engagement rather than replace previous personal channel contacts [including face-to-face contact] or media use.”

This research suggests that if Islamic extremists are replacing face-to-face contact with internet mediated contact, as Sageman claims, Rabatt kaufen viagra, then they are doing something that others who use the internet are not doing.

....If research on internet use does not support Sageman, neither does the other evidence he uses, the six cases he refers to in his book.

After presenting [evidence about the six cases] in narrative form, Sageman states “this clearly shows the change from offline to online interaction in the evolution of the threat."

In fact, order viagra, it does not.

In two of the six cases that Sageman mentions, he tells us only that the terrorists got support from the internet (an inspirational document in the case of the Madrid bombing and bomb-making instructions in the case of the Cairo bombing).

There is nothing new here, cheap viagra online without prescription. Order viagra from canada, Terrorists did not begin using the internet for support in 2004. The 9/11 bombers used it, as did others before them. More important, “support” is not “interaction, order viagra online,” and it is interaction among terrorists that Sageman says the internet has “dramatically transformed.”

Interaction did occur on the internet in the other four cases, but it also occurred face-to-face. How do we know which kind of interaction was more important. Cheap viagra online without prescription, If terrorists are meeting as they have always done and then communicating online, which would be consistent with research on internet use, this does not suggest a dramatic change in terrorists’ interactions. It is important to note, then, that only in one case (the German bombing) does Sageman tell us the terrorists met first online. Ordering viagra online, The reason Sageman does not mention terrorists meeting first online in the other cases is that it did not happen. In all the other cases, it appears the terrorists met first face-to-face.  In fact, the evidence suggests terrorists tend to be friends, acquaintances or relatives, ordering viagra overnight delivery, who then become radicalized and carry out an attack.

What about cases that have occurred since Sageman’s book appeared in 2008. There have been a number of cases over the past several years.  Full details on these cases are not available but we can look at what we know about a few of the more prominent ones. [And Tucker's article reviews those cases]

While sketchy and limited, Ordering viagra pills, none of the information we have on these recent plots suggests anything like what Sageman claims. Internet images sometimes appear to assist if not initiate the movement to extremism, cheap viagra online without prescription. Chat rooms play a role but rarely are the place terrorists first meet; face-to-face contact predominates. Mosques and other physical gathering places figure more prominently than the internet. In this limited sample, the internet appears to be a useful but by no means a transforming or even dominant means of mobilizing recruits for extremism, cheapest viagra online.

In showing the complex interaction of social relations, the internet and recruiting, all of these cases show a marked resemblance to the summary description one analyst of the Madrid bombing has offered of those who carried out that attack:

It was in Mosques, παραγγείλετε online viagra, worship sites, countryside gatherings and private residences where most of the members of the Madrid bombing network adopted extremist views. Cheap viagra online without prescription, A few adopted a violent conception of Islam while in prison. The internet was clearly relevant as a radicalization tool, especially among those who were radicalized after 2003, but it was more importantly a complement to face-to-face interactions.

Further evidence suggesting that Sageman’s claims are wrong comes from research done on the recruitment of foreign fighters from the Middle East and North Africa.

Analysis of data captured in Iraq shows that 97 percent of a group of 177 foreign fighters met their recruitment coordinator “through a social (84 percent), family (6 percent) or religious (6 percent) connection.” Only 3.4 percent of the 177 foreign fighters mentioned the internet.

Furthermore, when countries of origin for the foreign fighters were compared to the number of internet users in those countries, “more internet users correlated with lower numbers of fighters.”

Finally, analysis shows that there is no correlation between countries that access extremist web sites and countries that produce foreign fighters. If the internet were an important tool of mobilization and recruitment, we would expect to see a correlation between accessing extremist web sites and numbers of foreign fighters.

What holds true for the Middle East and North Africa might not hold true for other places with greater general rates of access to the internet and less of a supporting social and cultural network for extremists to rely on. In these places, one night argue, the internet might be the only place where would-be radicals could find the contacts and encouragement they need to join the extremist movement. Yet what is true of the Middle East and North Africa appears to be true of North America, judging by the cases Sageman cites and the additional cases discussed above, cheap viagra online without prescription. “The internet plays a minor radicalization role…. Conversations, sermons, print and radio communication, family and social networks present foreign fighters with local justification for joining the jihad.” This finding accords with research that finds internet use tends to “activate the active;” that is, promote engagement and activity among those already inclined that way and focus attention on the local community.

One must conclude, therefore, both that Sageman offers no evidence to support his claim the internet is transforming how terrorists interact and there is little evidence elsewhere to support this claim. Perhaps over time, the evidence will emerge. In the meantime, we are stuck with the difficult task of focusing “on the social and religious networks” from which extremists emerge if we want “to interrupt or fragment face-to-face recruitment.”

------------------------

Is the internet really creating terrorists?  In the beginning did God really create the heaven and the earth.

Tucker's contrarian article reminds us -- it reminds me -- it is important to know what we believe.  It is equally important to examine why we believe it.

Similar posts: Cheap generic viagra. Buy viagra no rx. Order viagra no prescription. Buy soma no prescription. Ordering viagra no prescription. Buy propecia no prescription.
Trackbacks from: Cheap viagra online without prescription. Cheap viagra online without prescription. Cheap viagra online without prescription. Cheap viagra online without prescription. Cheap viagra online without prescription. Cheap viagra online without prescription.

The title of this post is a bit big.  But nowhere near as huge as the idea behind it.

Ordering viagra online cheap, The basic concept is to build new underground electric power transmission lines, natural gas pipelines, and telecommunication, cable TV, and Internet communication lines on rights-of-way already established by America's 40,000 mile Interstate Highway System. The Interstate Highway System reaches nearly every part of the nation, and states own the rights-of-way along these roads. It makes sense to leverage this asset.

The idea -- called the National System of Resilient Infrastructure (or NSRI) -- was developed by Ted G. Lewis, at the Naval Postgraduate School.  Here are the details of this $1, Buy viagra no rx, 000,000,000,000 idea:

----------------------------------------

Proposed

Electric power, energy for transportation, and telecommunications capacity are three major economic drivers for the future economy of the USA.  But these sectors are in trouble, for a variety of reasons, φτηνές φαρμακείο viagra, including NIMBY (not in my back yard), lack of investment, and lack of vision.

To overcome these barriers, stimulate the economy, Ordering viagra online legally, and develop a resilient infrastructure for the 21^st century, the author proposes a "moon shot" scale effort to build a national system of resilient natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications infrastructure along the 40,000 miles of Interstate Highway.

This 20-year, $1 trillion project would be implemented by a public-private partnership structured much like a GSE (government-sponsored enterprise), and mainly funded by the private sector, ordering viagra online cheap. Besides creating millions of jobs, enhancing our ability to transition to clean cars, Connecticut CT Conn. , trucks, and buses, the national system would be immediately self-sustained by usage fees, and therefore profitable. It would not cost the government any money, Ordering viagra online without prescription, and would have an immense impact on the economy.

Infrastructure Equals Prosperity

The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, commonly called the Interstate Highway System (or simply the Interstate) is the largest highway system and largest public works project in the world. Ordering viagra online cheap, More importantly, it propelled the United States into a new era of prosperity. Today, virtually all goods and services are distributed via the Interstate, which is still expanding, ordering viagra online cheap.

In the 1990s the 25-year old Internet was commercialized, stimulating economic growth so much that it produced a bubble in 2000. Yet, the federal government's $200 million investment has already returned 100-fold on investment, after less than 20 years of growth. Comprar viagra baratos, The future of the global economy increasingly depends on the Internet.

It is clear that relatively modest investments in infrastructure reap exponentially large returns due to economic growth, job creation, and innovation, ordering viagra online cheap. Since ancient Rome, no nation on earth has achieved or maintained greatness, security, and prosperity, without plentiful energy, robust communications, Mississippi MS Miss. , and transportation capacity.

The economy of the 21^st century will run on electrical power and Internet packets. Without these, the USA will slip into fourth or fifth place among nations.

The Challenge

The United States faces an "infrastructure challenge" and an equally big opportunity, Acheter en ligne viagra, today. Ordering viagra online cheap, The challenge is to rejuvenate our failing basic infrastructures: water, power, telecommunications, and energy.

Progress in green energy generation is stalled because of inadequate transmission capacity. Telecommunications capacity must be greatly increased to accommodate global 3D virtual reality, multi-party conferencing, and high-performance research and development in medical, environmental, and technical industries, order viagra pills. Think of the possibilities of telemedicine piped directly into your home, or corporate meetings conducted with 100,000 participants from around the globe.

Advances in material science, bioengineering, Viagra online stores, medicine, green energy, revolutionary telecommunications, and green transportation will present great opportunity over the next 20 years to those nations prepared to capitalize on them.

These are the economic drivers of the future, but they require advanced infrastructure, ordering viagra online cheap.

We know how to turn sunlight into electrons, but lack the distribution channel to transport electrons produced in New Mexico to markets in New York. We know how to telecommute via our computers, California CA Calif. , but lack the bandwidth for two-way, 3D telecommunication between grandmother and granddaughter across the continent. We know how to automate transportation systems to reduce auto accidents and congestion, but our highways are "dumb."  In the next 20 years, cars will run on electricity and natural gas, Buy viagra, but we lack the infrastructure to refuel them while achieving energy independence.

Venture capital is pent up, waiting for government to stimulate a "green economy," but we do not currently have the market distribution infrastructure to make it possible.

We need a National System of Resilient Infrastructure (NSRI) to take advantage of opportunities that will create jobs and keep America economically strong Ordering viagra online cheap, .

The Solution

The National System of Resilient Infrastructure plan (NSRI) is designed to address two roadblocks in the way of the next stage of economic growth: NIMBY, and the enormous cost of rebuilding the power and telecommunications infrastructure of the 21^st century.

NIMBY (Not-In-My-Backyard) is currently blocking many projects because people do not want power lines in their backyards, Kaufen viagra. In addition, infrastructure is enormously expensive and unattractive as an investment because it does not give companies a competitive advantage. For example, the current 1 trillion dollar electrical power grid is fragile due to a lack of transmission capacity. It is also based on 1940's technology, ordering viagra online cheap. But who can afford to invest 1 trillion dollars to rebuild it. Buy viagra from canada, NSRI proposes to avoid NIMBY by placing critical infrastructure underground. NIMBY can be avoided by building underground electric power transmission lines, natural gas pipelines, and telecommunication/CATV/Internet communication lines on rights-of-way already established by the Interstate Highway System. States already own these rights-of-way, and the Interstate Highway System reaches nearly every part of the nation. Ordering viagra online cheap, It therefore makes sense to leverage this asset even more so.

Energy, köpa rabatterade viagra, Power, and Communications infrastructure also requires storage nodes (for surge resilience), "service stations" (for distribution), and several network operation centers. The NSRI will be resilient because of its storage, Acheter viagra, security, and distributed architecture [decentralized assets].

Robust and redundant, able to transmit commodities such as Internet packets, electrons from solar farms, natural gas for future cars, trucks, Hawaii HI , and buses, and bountiful electrical power for future cyber businesses, the NSRI will be a quantum step forward for the nation and the economy.

NSRI is America's 21^st century "moon shot."

How to Pay for It

The NSRI network would be constructed much like the Interstate Highway network, over a 20-30-year period at an estimated cost of $50 billion per year.

The author estimates it would cost $25 million/mile to build the necessary tunnels, pipes, wires, etc, ordering viagra online cheap. Ordering viagra pills, The Interstate is 40,000 miles long, hence a total estimated cost of $1 trillion over 20 years.

This may seem high, but it represents 3.6% of the combined revenues of the natural gas, electrical power, telecommunications, Georgia GA Ga. , gasoline, and broadcast industries, see Table I.

The Interstate Highway System is "pay-as-you-go", with 90% of the funding coming from the Federal government, Køb discount viagra, and the remaining 10% from the States. In its first year of construction, 1958, total costs were $37.6 billion. Ordering viagra online cheap, By 1991, the cost was $128 billion. But these billions contributed nothing to the national debt because they were paid for by a 40 cent per gallon tax on gasoline. Title II of the Highway Revenue Act of 1956 created the Highway Trust Fund to collect and dispense funding for the Interstate System.

Similarly, order viagra overnight delivery, the NSRI would be financed through a Trust Fund established by Congress to create and operate NSRI. The NSRI financing plan needs to be worked out in detail, but two attractive options are: Option I: GSE (Government Sponsored Enterprise), and Option II: excise taxation, similar to the model used by the Highway Revenue Act of 1956.

Ultimately, the NSRI must be self-sustaining, through revenues generated by its use, ordering viagra online cheap. Osta viagra online, A toll fee would be charged for use of the pipelines, communication lines, storage facilities, and service stations. These fees can be based on current regulated fees charged by telephone, utility, and pipeline companies - a familiar fee structure for these industries, comprare viagra sconto.

Option I: GSE: Ginny Mae, Sallie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are GSEs, i. e., αγοράζουν online viagra, government-backed enterprises listed on stock exchanges, and therefore, investor supported. Ordering viagra online cheap, The idea here is to raise the major portion of funding from investment banks, retirement funds, and personal investors through an IPO [initial public offering]. Like a GSE, the NSRI Trust Fund would be backed by the Federal government, and at some point reach a self-sustainable level through usage fees. This model, however, would probably require temporary taxation to raise the full $50 billion needed to initiate NSRI.

Option II: Excise Taxes: The Interstate Highway System was funded by a $0.40/gallon tax on gasoline (part Federal and part State). This tax can be rolled back as expenses are replaced with usage fees. Consider this: a 3.6% excise tax on revenues shown in Table I would raise $50 billion per year, ordering viagra online cheap. Alternatively, an additional $0.40/gallon excise tax would raise $56 billion per year.

Both options are no-cost options for the Federal Government. Both options follow the Interstate Highway model whereby States own the infrastructure. Unlike the Interstate Highway model, however, the NSRI can easily achieve sustainability through an industry-accepted fee structure.

----------------------------------------

Dr. Lewis can be reached at tlewis[at]nps.edu.

Similar posts: Cheap viagra online. Purchase viagra online. Order cheap viagra online. Order viagra free samples. Viagra free samples over the counter. Cheap viagra over the counter.
Trackbacks from: Ordering viagra online cheap. Ordering viagra online cheap. Ordering viagra online cheap. Ordering viagra online cheap. Ordering viagra online cheap. Ordering viagra online cheap.

Ethics question: Let’s say you are a military officer whose Oath of Office requires you to disobey an order that violates the Constitution of the United States.

You believe - for reasons that appear almost Talmudic to someone unversed in the details - that the order to be inoculated with an “unapproved anthrax vaccine” is illegal.

Price of viagra, You go through the authorized procedures to make your case, including going to federal court.  You lose your case, but not -- you believe -- on the merits.

Almost one thousand service men and women refuse to receive the inoculation and are punished. You think the punishment was wrong because the order they are accused of disobeying was illegal.

You go on with your life and career.  But you learn that many more doses of the unapproved vaccine are now included in the Strategic National Stockpile.  What do you do?  Do you let it go and just keep your fingers crossed hoping the vaccine is never needed?  Do you trod further down the Quixotic path to battle even more windmills?  Do you stop trying to have the records expunged of those service members you believe were illegally punished?

A few days ago, Edward Jay Epstein  published an article in the Wall Street Journal claiming the Anthrax Attack of 2001 is still an open case.  Reading the article reminded me of the officer’s dilemma.  And a confusing story -- at least to me -- gets even more confusing.

In a May 2009 article the officer wrote about the vaccine, cheap viagra online legally, he noted the

Justice Department alleged the anthrax vaccine program’s "failing" status served as the stated motive in the 2001 anthrax letter attacks. Viagra en ligne afin, By sending anthrax through the U.S. mail system, the perpetrator was attempting to create a situation where the government might recognize a renewed need for the vaccine.

What does all this mean?  As best as I can summarize:

• The particular anthrax vaccine was never proven effective, købe viagra online.


• Allegedly, Maryland MD Md. , one of the U.S. scientists involved with developing the vaccine sent anthrax through the mails to create demand for more research, price of viagra.


• It was that vaccine service members were required to take.


• It is that vaccine that has been included in the Strategic National Stockpile, Rhode Island RI R.I. , to be used on civilians if there is a need.

What is the ethically correct action for the officer who believes this to be the case?

------------------------------------------------------------------

The guest author for today’s post is Lieutenant Colonel Tom Rempfer.  LtCol Rempfer is a distinguished graduate of the U.S. Viagra generic, Air Force Academy, and an Air Force Command pilot, experienced in F-16s, South Carolina SC S.C. , F-117s, αγοράζουν online viagra, A-10s, and MQ-1s. His prior service included membership on the U.S, New Hampshire NH N.H. . Price of viagra, Air Force Cyberspace Task Force, as well as flight safety and operational risk management duties. He recently graduated with a homeland security master’s degree from the Naval Postgraduate School.  His thesis -- available at this link -- is titled: ANTHRAX VACCINE AS A COMPONENT OF THE STRATEGIC NATIONAL STOCKPILE:  A DILEMMA FOR HOMELAND SECURITY.

If you are one of the people interested in the 2001 anthrax attacks, Order viagra, or anything related to it, LtCol Rempfer's thesis is worth a read.

------------------------------------------------------------------
"Check six."  Fighter pilots use this term to warn fellow aviators to look to their six o'clock position and avoid impending threats.  This is the objective of Lieutenant Colonel Tom Rempfer's Naval Postgraduate School Center for Homeland Defense and Security thesis.

The thesis details the history of the anthrax vaccine incorporated into the Strategic National Stockpile after the anthrax letter attacks of 2001.  Prior to that time, παραγγείλετε online viagra, the vaccine suffered from unapproved manufacturing changes, Osta alennus viagra, GAO documented potency increases, controversies over Gulf War Illness, quality control problems, buy viagra no rx, threatened FDA notices of license revocation, Kjøpe billig viagra, Department of Defense (DoD) plans to replace the vaccine and recommendations by the George W. Bush administration to minimize its use in August 2001.

According to the FBI, cheap viagra no prescription, the anthrax letter attacks in the fall of 2001 by a US Army scientist successfully rekindled demand and overcame the vaccine's "failing" status.  Since those attacks, Florida FL Fla. , DoD leaders leveraged the crimes to revive the anthrax vaccine program and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) endorsed the purchase of over $1 billion for the Strategic National Stockpile, all while federal courts declared the program illegal due to the vaccine's lack of proper licensing.

The author's involvement with the DoD anthrax vaccine controversy spanned the ten years preceding his Master's degree.  He challenged the program in accordance with his Oath of Office, which demanded military orders adhere to the law, price of viagra.

LtCol Rempfer testified to Congress and his legal efforts to seek accountability continue with a recently filed Writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court and an ongoing case with the Board for Correction of Military Records.  Well documented alliances in his pursuit of justice include Connecticut legislators such as Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, comprar viagra de descuento, Senator Christopher Dodd, Minnesota MN Minn. ,   former Representative Christopher Shays, and a tenacious Veteran advocate, Mr, Wisconsin WI Wis. . H. Buy viagra from canada, Ross Perot.

The author's ultimate goal to expunge the records for the almost one thousand Servicemembers wrongfully punished for refusing to comply with the illegal mandate serves as a backdrop, as well as his goal for proper care for those harmed by the vaccine, Osta viagra online. Price of viagra, The thesis describes unhealthy precedents where illegal policy, resuscitated through bioterrorism, could lead to dramatic expenditures and expanded use of the vaccine for the civilian population.  The author recommends the government resurvey the use of the vaccine for the American people and suggests the new administration should "check six" by ensuring Homeland Security Presidential Directive reviews support vaccine stockpiling in light of the proven efficacy of antibiotics, as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

The thesis encourages a Presidential Study and Policy Directive process to review systemic problems associated with the anthrax vaccine from a historical lens.  In doing so, Cheap viagra tablets, DHS Secretary Napolitano protects the Obama Administration from being duped into adopting historically plagued, unnecessary and wasteful policy.

------------------------------------------------------------------

One clarification: the current "lost" case is under appeal, Osta viagra, so it's not over 'till it's over. Ordering viagra pills, Plus, there's another case at the corrections board which is an effective win.  The court agreed with my position, ordered the DoD to address records corrections, viagra online stores, but the DoD has simply done nothing to correct the wrongs. That case is now headed back to court too, to compell the DoD to do the right thing.

These two latest cases were preceded by a complete win in a separate case.  The government was found to have violated the law because the vaccine was never licensed by the FDA until 2005, six years after they ordered service members to take the vaccine and punished those who refused.

Similar posts: Buy viagra online. Cheap viagra from mexico. Ordering viagra online without prescription. Order cialis online cheap. Buy viagra free samples online cheap. Order cialis no prescription.
Trackbacks from: Price of viagra. Price of viagra. Price of viagra. Price of viagra. Price of viagra. Price of viagra.

Viagra pills, Someone once said of the choice among quality, price, and timely delivery, “Pick any two.”  In recent years, Americans have operated under the illusion that such tradeoffs do not apply to us, at least with respect to information.  The pace of technological progress has fueled this illusion.

As individuals’ access to information has improved through the seemingly relentless convergence of information technologies, people have actually started wondering when, not if, South Carolina SC S.C. , a singularity will emerge.   Until this happens, we have to cope with the tradeoffs and their effects on democracy and trust. Billiga viagra apotek, As this blog’s other distinguished contributors and discussants has demonstrated on many occasions, homeland security professionals wrestle continuously with information management and technology policy issues that call upon us to balance information integrity, validity, and security.  Inevitably, viagra pills, these values find themselves expressed as tensions, and tradeoffs become inevitable as we seek to meet the expectations of politicians and citizens’ insatiable ‘needs to know.’

In addition to the need to know, Buy cheap viagra, we must now confront the ability to know.  Information and knowledge are not the same thing. Turning information into knowledge is a complex, time-consuming, and often costly process.  People in general have a poor capacity for interpreting large amounts of complex information and thus acquiring appreciable knowledge of risks, especially those far removed from their everyday experience, viagra discount.

This became abundantly clear to me recently, as the community where I work responded to a positive test for e. Price of viagra, coli contamination in our drinking water supply.  Initial tests, like the one conducted here the day before Thanksgiving, had produced positive results on more than a dozen prior occasions without resulting in confirmation during subsequent testing.  This time was different though.

By the time the positive results were confirmed and the potential extent of contamination became clear, officials had to work out who needed to know what and then worried about the best way to communicate the information without provoking undue fear.  After all, they reckoned, the boil water notice issued in response to the finding in compliance with federal drinking water regulations was not itself a risk-free proposition: In other communities, more people suffered burns preparing water for consumption than suffered illness from the such contamination itself, viagra pills.

As word of the required actions and the city’s response to it was released to the news media and the public, halvalla viagra apteekki, feedback came in hot and fast.  Why had this notice not been issued sooner?  Why had officials relied so heavily on traditional media to get the word out?  Why had city officials not contacted water customers directly.

Those in the community asking these questions assumed they were the first to do so.  Moreover, Washington WA Wash. , they assumed that the answers were influenced primarily by money, technology, and administrative inertia, if not apathy or incompetence.  While cost, cheapest viagra prices, technical capability, and bureaucratic issues all play a role in delaying or preventing action, Order viagra from canada, they are not the primary cause of officials’ concerns.  Those responsible for deciding when and how to act, including when and how to notify the public, tend to be consumed with concern for getting it right.  Herein lies the problem: A “right” response lies in the eyes of the beholder, and the public has taken a particularly jaundiced view of official actions to manage risks, Hawaii HI , especially those that involve an intersection between complex technologies and human health.

As I was digesting the very real implications of the dilemma occurring in my own community, New Mexico NM N.Mex. , I became aware of a report released at the beginning of October by the Knight Commission on the Information Needs of Communities in a Democracy.  The report prepared by a commission of policy and technology experts co-chaired by former United States Solicitor General Theodore Olson and Google vice president Marisa Mayer was presented to federal Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski upon its release.

In short, the report warns of a growing information divide that threatens to undermine the foundations of American democracy. Addressing the divide, the report argues, viagra, will require coordinated effort on many fronts, and cannot be accomplished by either the government or the market acting alone. Viagra pills, Although improved access to technology, expanded transparency of government information, and increased commitment to engagement are all required, so too is increased literacy and numeracy – the capacity of people to appreciate information and turn it into useful knowledge. Lowest price viagra, So far, efforts to produce engagement even in some of the most creative, educated, and engaged communities through technology innovation have produced spotty results.  Open data and application development contests intended to engage private sector partners to leverage insights from public data have produced applications that do little to advance the public good.  In many cases, cheap generic viagra, these applications simply make it easier for well-equipped citizens with smartphones to tell government officials they are doing a poor job responding to citizen concerns, while increasing the volume of complaints they have to deal with before they can get on with the work needed to remedy the underlying causes of what might otherwise be legitimate problems. New Hampshire NH N.H. , In other cases, applications that improve the efficiency of individual competition for consumption of public goods like parking spaces pass for innovation.  In still others, externalities clearly outweigh efficiencies by making undigested or unconfirmed information available in forms that further erode confidence in government.

In the early days of the republic, buy viagra online, a learned man or woman of modest means could acquire a decent command of all available knowledge by applying him or herself with rigor and discipline.  Indeed, the signers of our own Declaration of Independence distinguished themselves as knowledgeable in a diverse array of subjects ranging from philosophy to law to agriculture to military strategy to engineering to commerce to religion. Georgia GA Ga. , Today, not one of us has any hope of achieving comparable mastery of extant knowledge.  The volume of information already in existence and the pace of new discoveries have simply become too vast, too specialized, too detailed, order viagra online without prescription, and too isolated from everyday experience for anyone to master regardless of mettle or means.  This does not seem to have lowered public expectations though.

In a world where people share information in real-time with one another over distances of thousands of miles and have instant access to hundreds of television channels, Order viagra, dozens of radio stations, and zettabytes (one zettabyte equals one billion terabytes) of data how do we overcome the illusion that information access equals knowledge?  With all of this information floating around us all the time, how do we decide what to tell people, when to tell them, Massachusetts MA Mass. , and what method to use.

In the online discussion that emerged following the recent water contamination scare here, Viagra for sale, one participant in noted, “People do not trust institutions, they trust people.”  For him, at least, Minnesota MN Minn. , it was important not so much that someone had the answers to his questions, as it was that someone took responsibility for responding to his concerns.  In the absence of an official somebody, Viagra en ligne afin, it seems anybody will do.  He, and many others, argued that the absence of official pronouncements only encouraged others to fill the void.

Not long ago, Nevada NV Nev. , we relied upon media to do this for us.  That has changed, and media no longer have the capacity they once did to hold government accountable or to lower public expectations.  To the extent that media play an influential role in public debates these days, they are more likely to reinforce our biases than clarify positions or encourage dialogue.

It remains unclear whether social media or other technologies will bridge the gap between knowledge haves and have-nots.  If time is running out on our information illusions and our nation’s capacity to maintain trust in government and its democratic legitimacy are threatened by this growing divide, what will we make of the choice between integrity, validity, and security in the future and how will cost, quality, and timeliness influence our decisions.

Similar posts: Order clomid no prescription. Soma over the counter. Viagra prices. Ordering viagra online legally. Buy viagra from canada. Order viagra from canada.
Trackbacks from: Viagra pills. Viagra pills. Viagra pills. Viagra pills. Viagra pills. Viagra pills.

Today's guest blogger is Glen Woodbury. The issue -- pictured in the spectrum below --  is how homeland security decision makers can think about their options to handle web 2.0 (or 3.0, 4.0, etc.) technologies and tools. ( The material in this  post was developed out of discussion at the OGMA Workshop held at the NPS Center for Homeland Defense and Security 30 June – 1 July, 2009 in Monterey, CA.)

Suppress – An organization issues policies or directorates that forbid the use of a particular technology. For example, an agency issues a prohibition on their employees’ ability to access Facebook. Or an intelligence fusion center forbids its analysts from accessing social networks due to civil liberty and privacy concerns.

Defer – (ignore, abstain, dismiss) An organization decides to not use or not engage in technologies or tools even though their use is evident in their operating environment. For example, a public safety agency decides not to observe or utilize Twitter, Facebook, blogs, or other information sources even though they know that these forums are providing information to the public they are serving. Or the agency determines that engagement in a particular social networking information source would strip resources away from other requirements.

Adapt (Reactive) – An organization observes the use of technologies and tools in their environment and decides to adjust its policies and procedures in order to participate in the same technological environment. For example, a fire agency discovers that the public is relying or acting on information from Twitter sources, so it decides to enter Twitter forums and generate its own content.

Adopt (Proactive) – An organization decides, in advance of an event, to use technologies and tools that already exist and are being utilized in the public domain. For example, a police department decides, and plans for, the use of Facebook to provide information to the general public during a planned mass gathering event.

Influence – An organization deliberately influences how a particular technology or tool is being used, maintained or operated. For example, a public health agency asks a technology provider to delay scheduled maintenance on its system so that important information can be delivered to the public at a certain time. Or the same agency asks the technology company to change a characteristic of its technology to better serve the requirements of the agency.

Design – An organization determines requirements that might be served by new technologies and tools and seeks a design and production of a system to serve those needs. For example, an emergency management agency desires a new way to hold collaborative planning discussions in a virtual environment and engages with a technology provider to build the product.

(Editorial note:  Yesterday Peter J. Brown posted the following as a comment to a post on the 2010 DHS Appropriations Conference report.  Without Peter's permission, I am copying below the comment, in its entirety.  I have added a couple of  embedded online links.) This is an appeal to all 10 FEMA regional coordinators to stand up and be counted. While I agree that much time and energy has been devoted to standing up 4500 personnel under the current 3 CBRNE Consequence Management Response Forces (CCMRF), there is a valid need for a more agile and responsive force consisting of 10 smaller teams assigned to all 10 FEMA regions. In instances where a specific FEMA regional coordinator calls for additional support, any movement /mobilization of appropriate CBRNE response resources and manpower could accompany a broader EMAC activation in close coordination with HHS /CDC and other components. However, beyond any CBRNE /CCMRF concerns, it might be a good idea for each of the Regional Emergency Communications Coordination Working Groups(RECCWGs) in each of the 10 FEMA regions to reflect upon the recommendations spelled out Page 61 of the GAO report last summer (see GAO-09-604 Emergency Communications). Specifically, what is the status of the broad implementation of the National Emergency Communications Plan (NECP), and, if bottlenecks or significant glitches are apparent, what is the impact? A year after the release of the NECP, how relevant and how workable are the milestones, for example? Whereas this GAO report suggests that each region might want an update from DHS on the status of the Emergency Communications Preparedness Center (ECPC), and how the progress to date and intended outcome of the ECPC project helps or hinders efforts to implement NECP, perhaps the ECPC concept needs further scrutiny in light of overall progress to date on the NECP. As DHS and FCC attempt to craft a “common vision” and “better collaborate on each agency’s emergency communications efforts” what exactly are the priorities and how do these match priorities at the local and state level in terms of overall planning and coordination efforts — again something that is relevant to the RECCWGs. Finally, where the GAO recommends –

To help ensure that federal agencies and their communications assets are well-positioned to support state and local first responders in catastrophic disasters, we recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security provide guidance and technical assistance to federal agencies in developing formal emergency communications plans. These plans could include identifying how federal agencies’ communications resources and assets will support state and local first responders in a disaster. To help DHS and FCC enhance the value of stakeholder groups’ recommendations, we recommend that the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Chair of the Federal Communications Commission systematically track, assess, and respond to stakeholder groups’ recommendations, including identifying actions taken by the agencies in response to recommendations, whether recommendations are duplicative with past recommendations, and opportunities to work with other agencies, as appropriate, to advance recommendations.

Perhaps, given all the time spent on this and related topics to date, the time has come for the RECCWGs in the 10 regions to be empowered to act as one and emerge as a logical overseer of this process. In other words, rather than sitting on the receiving end of the outcome, the RECCWGs could speed the process by setting out what exactly is needed at this point, and set a realistic timetable as well. As end user representatives rather than providers, the RECCWGs are in a good position to take realistic look at where this is all leading, what has been accomplished to date, and how the vendor-driven and real world environment could benefit from the activities in question. I do not want to sound as if I do not see the value of an NPD task force like the one described here, but at the same time simply from a confidence-building standpoint, I cringe when I hear that another task force of such an immense scope may be forming up to do nothing more than critique the entire national preparedness and response apparatus that has been taking shape during this decade. We should, at this point, be devoting time and energy to a more productive exercise.

President Obama nominated Tara O'Toole as Under Secretary for the Science & Technology Directorate (S&T) at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) earlier this summer.   While approved by the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee and sent to the full Senate, her nomination was one that did not make it through in the final days before the Congressional August recess. If and when Dr. O'Toole is confirmed, she will have a significant job ahead of her at S&T.  Tasked with being the research and development arm of DHS, S&T has a budget of nearly $933 million (FY 2009) and is in charge of research in such areas as Chemical/Biological, Infrastructure, Command, Control and Interoperability (CCI), Explosives and Maritime.  The Directorate also oversees the Department's Centers of Excellence/University programs and runs partnerships with a number of the Energy Department's labs. S&T also oversees the Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency (HSARPA),  an entity which has struggled to find its mission.  Originally, it was intended to be Homeland's equivalent of the Defense Department's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), a scientific arm that focuses on high-payoff, innovative, and potentially risky R&D.  HSARPA, in its early days, focused significantly on conventional R&D that was not cutting edge but potentially provided some better returns.  In the past year or so, there was a push to mold HSARPA into the DARPA model but it hasn't quite gotten there yet. One idea that Dr. O'Toole and others at DHS may want to consider as they take the helm is to create a "Grand Challenge" for HSARPA, similar to the well-known and successful DARPA Grand Challenge.   The DARPA Grand Challenge, for those not familiar, is a competition sponsored by DARPA to facilitate robotic development for national security purposes.  Teams from the robotics, automotive, and defense industries, as well as from academia and elsewhere, design autonomous ground vehicles to complete a course set up by DARPA, with the winners of the competition receiving cash prizes.  There have been three DARPA Challenges to date, with the Urban Challenge, held in 2007, offering prizes of $2 million, $1 million, and $500,000, respectively, to the top three teams. The theory between the DARPA Grand Challenge is that it "mobilizes the technical community to accelerate research and development in critical national security technology areas."   If that is the case, why not develop a Homeland Security Grand Challenge? There are countless specific technological challenges in the homeland security space that need to be addressed.  The Department has continued to struggle with pairing technology with solutions in a number of areas, including in the areas of border security, transportation security, and infrastructure protection.   As a result, Congress continues to mandate deadlines for implementing certain programs - deadlines that the agency has not always been able to meet. A few ideas on some potential HSARPA Challenge subjects:

• Technology to address the 100% maritime cargo scanning mandated by the "Implementing the 9/11 Commission's Recommendations Act of 2007."
• Improved technology for identifying weapons, liquids, explosives, and the like at TSA security screening points to facilitate quicker and more effective travel.
• Technology to improve border crossing times at the Southern and Northern Border Ports of Entry (POE), especially at peak travel times and during special events.
• Technology to improve perimeter and access security at critical infrastructures and federal government buildings.

Admittedly, there are a couple of private sector-run security challenges already in existence.  Those may be good for generally promoting emerging technologies for general homeland and national security purposes. They are not the same as a government-initiated challenge to a specific problem. If anything, those programs would compliment what the government could be doing to furthering security technologies. In addition, there are companies who claim they have technologies that can address the issues described above.  Allowing those companies, along with others, to openly and transparently demonstrate capabilities in a "crisis" designed environment would go far in getting these technologies out of the lab and pilot programs and into the field.   This effort may also help Congress better understand what can and can't be done with technology and what R&D still lies ahead.

 By Peter J. Brown Besides its recent decision to terminate the National Applications Office (NAO), DHS/FEMA -- along with NGA -- has several other satellite-related issues that warrant immediate attention. The first responders we were in touch with recently use satellite communications (satcom) equipment routinely in their assigned missions, and they want DHS to hear their concerns. It is clear that from the standpoint of satcom operations and training, improvements are in order. By the way, we were also in touch with an MIT-trained professional space systems engineer who served as an instructor for a satcom training course attended by a team of first responders as well. First, DHS has no single point of contact which handles satcom questions for first responders. Or if one exists, it is not well known. "Yes, I agree that a single point of contact at the Federal level for satcom questions would be of great benefit," says one tech specialist who supports a rapid response team on the East Coast. Second, while satcom appears to be a simple and straightforward solution, these first responders report that there are many issues that make satcom not as user-friendly as it could otherwise be.   - High recurring costs restrain or even prevent many first responders from utilizing the equipment. - Satcom usage fees are increasing -- with some service providers -- while available bandwidth is being reduced in some instances. - Teams need to be more highly trained, and more technically proficient in the use of satcom including troubleshooting when higher level satcom activities beyond simple remote Web access are underway. ("I would say that the grasp is getting firmer, but is not as firm as it should be," says one first responder.) Radio over IP, Voice over IP and video streaming warrant further training. - Only a finite pool of people tend to have a complete understanding of the entire scope of the communications network end-to-end. - Many if not all federal agency and DoD satcom systems use firewalls that prohibit first responders from utilizing their systems. - When NGA makes an effort to provide GIS data to first responders, more often than not, it only supplies low resolution, dated imagery. The ability to access real or near real time imagery is still a major challenge. The good news is that a terrestrial alternative -- Cellular 3G technology -- has seen a notable improvement in availability and use over the past year or so.  This includes redundancy - dual carrier service options (AT&T / Sprint) or failover to one if the other is not available in an area.  Our instructor recommends that response teams should meet with a representative for the service provider(s) to explain specifics of the network, troubleshooting options, etc. Besides providing specific technical resources for troubleshooting in the field, this could greatly assist the team to improve its set up. By the way, DHS needs to be aware that occasional denials of service due to the high volume of traffic in the aftermath of an emergency are being reported. Perhaps DHS -- and the FCC too -- needs to sit down with first responders, disaster assistance teams and service providers to establish a WPS or GETS-type high-priority service channel / policy for satcom users. One first responder reported that he could not get a special category designation, or a "Fair Use Policy" waiver on short notice to override limits on bandwidth usage. This is very restrictive and upsetting for emergency users in particular since a few minutes of video or a bundle of aerial image downloads can quickly exceed the contractual cap in question. Because unexpected service interruptions in the middle of operations can occur for reasons such as unannounced software upgrades too, our instructor thinks it may be useful to develop a guidebook that would walk a team through negotiating their service contracts to avoid similar pitfalls. Otherwise, one first responder points out that DHS, FEMA and NGA also need to do a better job of addressing the satcom "culture gap" or what is simply the fact that in the field, federal agency employees and local first responders have completely different needs. "We just need basic information in a one or two shift operation, and we need to have the complete response quickly in the first request cycle, and not after 3 requests have been made and 36 hours have passed," says one first responder.   While first responders are well versed in IP and even IPv6, cybersecurity is not a top priority. In fact, our instructor reports that in one 6-hour session, "I don’t recall cybersecurity ever being brought up; rather, the team seemed mostly concerned about physical trailer security. In other words, they didn’t want people to enter their trailer and steal their equipment." DHS might find this observation troubling. Finally, with this year's "Amateur Radio Week" drawing to a close this past weekend, this satellite guy want to salute all the members of the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) who contribute so much of their time as volunteer communications personnel in emergency situations large and small. These people ensure that vital ham radio services are available on short notice whenever needed. They are truly the finest kind of first responders.

Peter J. Brown is a frequent contributor to HLSWatch. For years, he has written about emergency communications, interoperability and the increasing use of satellite technology in the homeland security and disaster response sectors for several publications.

How do we know when we, as a nation, are getting better at this homeland security business?  How do we know when the effort all levels of government, the private sector, and the people who live in this country have been making is actually improving things --  that we are better prepared, more resilient, and more secure than we were on September 10, 2001? I think the country – writ large -- responded very well to Chapter 1 of the to-be-continued H1N1 saga.  I think that response is one indicator the nation is better prepared than it used to be. But I use anecdotes – stories -- filtered through my biases to support that belief.    My subjective perception seeks examples that help me sustain my hope that we are doing better.  I tend to dismiss counter examples as, "Well, nothing's perfect." I don’t know what objective data I would accept that would lead me to believe we are less prepared, less resilient, less secure.  I have no performance measures.  I don't think I want any. In April, GAO reported on FEMA's efforts to coordinate national catastrophic preparedness efforts.  In one of the more understated sentences in recent homeland security memory, GAO noted, "The size and complexity of the nation’s preparedness activities and the number of organizations involved make developing a national preparedness system a difficult task."  That difficulty did not prevent GAO from measuring FEMA's performance anyway. For reasons David Snowden described elsewhere , I don’t think the traditional understanding of performance measures will help answer the big questions about national preparedness or resilience.  Performance measures may work very well for engineered systems.  My experience is they provide a distorted picture of performance in complex systems.  And whatever else homeland security may be, it clearly is -- as Carafano and Weitz (along with GAO) argued last month – a multi-dimensional complex system.

Some things one has to see before one believes.  For other things, belief may have to come before sight.

You may have seen the Washington Post article last week  about a group of science fiction writers, called Sigma, who offer to use their imagination to help homeland security. According to the article, the DHS deputy director of research thinks fiction writers can “help managers think more broadly about projects, especially about potential reactions and unintended consequences….” The chief information officer for the DHS Office of Operations Coordination & Planning believes the writers might help break old thinking habits.  "We're stuck in a paradigm of databases," he said …. "How do we jump out of our infrastructure and start conceptualizing those threats? …." Bravo for taking such risks with imagination.

Long ago a friend told me, “If you want to get better at solving problems, read detective stories.  If you want to know how to create the future, read science fiction.”

What kind of homeland security future might be created by science fiction writers? Cory Doctorow’s 2008 book “Little Brother” about good hackers battling the evil DHS immediately comes to mind. (The protagonist, w1n5t0n, pays visual homage to George Orwell’s Winston.) One blogger, commenting on the Post story, suggests science fiction could lead to an enhanced government program that transported “undesirables” to another planet for … well, enhanced questioning.  Other blogolic apprehensiveness about science fiction/homeland security mashups can be found here, here, and here. But science fiction can also imagine a better future. Appreciative inquiry is about imagination.  It is about looking toward what might actually go right in the world.  It rejects a knee-jerk negativity and – in a non-Pollyannaish way – looks instead for the best of what could be. What would Homeland Security meets Science Fiction meets Appreciative Inquiry look like? In the wonderful way the Intertube Gods can sometimes work, I found an answer to my question on the Sigma website.  “Fresh Flowers and Small Robots,” written by Michael Swanwick, and reprinted below (permission requested), is a gem crystallized from security, fiction and inquiry.  Please enjoy.

Fresh Flowers and Small Robots

The Open-Security Airport of 2010

Like most Americans regularly subjected to the discomforts and indignities of airport security, I have concluded that it is almost all “security theater.” That is, a series of empty gestures meant to reassure travelers that it is safe to board an airplane. Conceivably it may also help deter would-be terrorists. Certainly it has captured none – or we would surely have been told. Why not exchange this Theater of Misery, then, for a Theater of Optimism? Something equally reassuring, potentially more effective, and not at all oppressive. It could be done with minimal preparation, modest cost, and no new technology. I propose a voluntary pilot program of one small airport, where security is so easy to pass through that it is once again possible for families to meet a traveling relative as he or she gets off the jetliner. Imagine this happy airport of the very near future: Gone are the TSA employees who currently check boarding passes to make certain that only passengers enter the waiting areas. They’ve been replaced by or retrained as concierges – politely and efficiently taking coats and carry-on and placing them on the conveyor belts for the X-ray machines. They also answer questions about schedules and airport facilities, which is not technically the job of security, but makes life more pleasant for everybody. There are no lines for the metal detectors, because their numbers have been doubled or tripled. Passengers now stroll through casually, with their dignities and tempers intact. Most amazingly, nobody takes their shoes off. The possibility of shoe bombs is still very real. But so is the possibility of an obsidian knife or a ceramic gun strapped to a passenger’s body – and only a select few are checked for those. However, no one thinks for an instant that they are less safe than before. This is because small robots trundle up and down the lines, projecting a laser grid over their shoes, and occasionally stopping to inhale a sudden whoosh of air. These robots are not at all threatening – their housing has been designed by Industrial Light and Magic, the same people who created R2D2 for George Lukas’s Star Wars movies – but they are reassuringly high-tech. They are clearly sampling the air for trace chemicals associated with explosives. While this is a worthy and admirable emphasis for protectors to take, it is also profoundly and narrowly overspecialized.  It reflects a counterfactual assumption that, given sufficient funding, these communities can not only anticipate all future shocks, but prepare adequately to deal with them on a strictly in-house basis, through the application of fiercely effective professional action. It is not necessary that the robots actually function as bomb sniffers. (Though I’m sure the defense industry would be happy to design such devices.) All that is needed is that they reassure our friends and unnerve our foes. The DHS is widely believed to possess sinister technology and worse intentions. It is time to recognize this as being not a weakness but an advantage. In this scenario the DHS has embraced its evil image and put it to work. Cheap silvered plastic bubbles, of the sort used to hide surveillance cameras in casinos, are bolted to the walls. Electric cables run to them, painted the same color as the wall, obviously to camouflage them. Sconces directly below the bubbles hold ceramic vases containing fresh-cut flowers. The flowers draw the eye right to the bubbles, while looking like an attempt to disguise their presence. Passengers feel safer. Evildoers assume the worst. Similar examples of benign deceit come and go, as the DHS fine-tunes public awareness of its presence. Trip-beams cause green lights to flash reassuringly as a traveler passes. Stepping on a pressure plate triggers a musical “all-clear” note. Decorative kinetic sculpture moves gracefully in time with foot traffic. Passengers chosen for random security checks no longer resent this necessity. They are taken to a pleasant and comfortable room where, after their interview, they are given complimentary chits for food and drink on their airliners. At random intervals, two or three times a day, a bell rings and a cheerful voice announces over the intercom that another lucky passenger being checked has just received a hundred-dollar credit for the duty-free shops. Light applause fills the airport. In such an environment, a nervous or fearful individual stands out more clearly than is the case today. All this is done with existing technology. (The wall-bubbles are sometimes used to field-test a variety of passive detectors, but that is just a side benefit.) The added cost is moderate, and the bulk of it – particularly the added space required to make the security process comfortably uncrowded – is absorbed by the airport itself. It is considered a small price to pay for a great deal of positive publicity. Best of all, since the security process has been simplified and sped up, it is no longer necessary to keep non-passengers out of the waiting areas. Once again, the weary traveler can come up the ramp from the plane to find his or her family waiting with smiles and open arms. In their hurry to get home, not one in ten passengers notes the plaque reading, “This Facility Meets DHS Open Security Standards.” Nor do they notice the program’s certification that the airport is Security Hardened and Family Safe. They only know that they feel safer and more at ease than any commercial air traveler has since the Twentieth Century. The DHS has won one small, quiet victory in the War on Terror.

"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." - A. Einstein

(The following is a guest feature. More information on the NAO and Peter J. Brown is available in a post immediately below) Prodded by members of the House Homeland Security Committee in particular, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano initiated a review of the National Applications Office (NAO) on April 1. Among other things, NAO is designated as the chief source of satellite imagery in support of homeland security, and, state, local, and tribal law enforcement operations. NAO is overseen by the Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis / Chief Intelligence Officer at DHS. President Obama has nominated Philip Mudd to succeed Mr. Allen in this position. “The NAO charter, signed by the Secretaries of Homeland Security, Defense, Interior, as well as the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General, certifies that the NAO complies with all existing laws, including all applicable privacy and civil liberties standards. The NAO is prepared to begin operations to support civil and Homeland security domains. This program is another step in the right direction to leverage geospatial intelligence as we work to secure the Homeland," stated Mr. Allen last fall. Last November, a report issued by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) -- “National Applications Office: Certification of Compliance With Legal, Privacy, and Civil Liberties Standards Needs to Be More Fully Justified” -- challenged that assertion and raised questions about unresolved legal and policy issues. Many members of Congress on both sides of the aisle, government watchdog and civil rights organizations remain unconvinced that a suitable set of checks and balances are in place so that the NAO can go about effectively processing requests for satellite imagery, and then either approving and rejecting them in turn in support of law enforcement operations -- engaging in satellite surveillance while upholding an individual's civil rights, right to privacy, and other legal rights under existing law. DHS responded late last week to a number of questions, we posed in order to help determine where things stand now. Here are the unedited responses to our questions. -- What is the status of NAO Operations today? The National Applications Office (NAO) has not yet initiated operations. Secretary Napolitano is reviewing all aspects of the NAO program. The NAO will not begin operations until the Secretary and the other four signatories (Secretaries of Defense and Interior, AG, DNI) to the NAO Charter have approved the NAO to do so. -- Questions have been raised about "DHS Earth" and how this project overlaps with NAO. Has DHS examined this and what is the recommendation from DHS concerning this situation? DHS Earth provides a "Google Earth" based platform for the provision of some general layers of information that are relevant to DHS agency use. DHS Earth is solely a dissemination method and analytic tool for some uses and users. To the extent DHS Earth has controls in place to protect individual privacy, civil rights and civil liberties, it could provide a good dissemination means for some unclassified NAO products in the future, consistent with all other proper use requirements under law and policy. By contrast, NAO was established to meet the needs of non-traditional intelligence users by facilitating access to national intelligence capabilities by such users. NAO will also provide analytical capabilities for the many non-traditional users who do not have such specialized capabilities themselves. As a component of the federal government, NAO is necessarily bound by applicable laws, regulations, policies and procedures as it performs its mission. These multiple layers of safeguards are designed to ensure that all NAO operations respect and preserve the privacy, civil rights and civil liberties of the American public. -- Regarding the NGA Support Team (NST) embedded within DHS which facilitates NGA's collaboration with DHS, what role does - or will - the NAO play with the NST in developing an effective and elastic common operational picture (COP) for local law enforcement as part of the Homeland Security Information Network? Through the NST, NGA will partner closely with NAO to support the information requirements of NAO customers. In addition, NGA has a long-standing history of providing geospatial intelligence to both federal government and non-federal government customers. It has well-established, time-tested procedures in place for ensuring that it meets its customer needs in the best way possible, within all legal and policy boundaries. Through the NST, NGA is sharing its corporate knowledge and experience with NAO to ensure that NAO also acts efficiently, legally, and properly in all its operations. Under current law, NAO is precluded from working on law enforcement issues until the Secretary has certified that NAO meets all applicable privacy and civil liberties standards, and that certification has been reviewed by GAO, with results communicated to the Congress. NAO future plans are premised on handling customer requests and providing requested information through the mechanisms that customers use, and not creating new delivery methods. NGA, through the NST, will be a key partner in meeting that objective. -- And how does this COP-related activity relate or tie into broader efforts at DHS to ensure that layered geospatial visualization supports critical infrastructure protection at the local level via an open architecture-based and enterprise-based approach accessed across all components of DHS? The National Operations Center (NOC) is in charge of the DHS COP. If the NOC requests geospatial support from the NAO, those requests will be handled consistent with all legal, privacy, and civil rights/civil liberties concerns and guidelines. -- Is the current satellite imagery analysis capability of the FEMA Mapping and Analysis Center deemed adequate? If not, what is being done to address this situation? How is the uncertainty surrounding NAO impacting FEMA in this regard? NAO's current status has not had a direct impact on FEMA's capabilities because FEMA is directly serviced by NGA and others for current imagery needs. -- Can you comment on the status of the proposed shift of the Civil Applications Committee from Interior to DHS? The Civil Applications Committee (CAC) itself will not shift from Interior to DHS. The functions of the CAC will transition to the NAO, per the requirements of the NAO Charter. The NAO charter spells out that when these functions shift, the CAC and its Charter will sunset and the former CAC functions would be fully integrated into the NAO. -- Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued an RFI for Multi-role Enforcement Aircraft (MEA) last year. Is there a mechanism in place whereby the imagery and other sensor data gathered by DHS aircraft or Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) is shared with local law enforcement? The MEA and UAS programs fall under CBP - please contact the CBP Public Affairs office at 202-344-1780. (Update: In early May, CBP issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for up to 40 MEA's for use by CBP's Air and Marine Office. The goal is to procure commercially-available turboprop aircraft primarily for maritime and ground surveillance missions as well as for tracking other aircraft. The RFP requests MEA support for other missions as well.) -- Is the growing conflict along the US - Mexico border changing the debate over NAO or triggering any discussion of possible changes to NAO or the (potential for) imagery-sharing raised in Question #8? The Secretary has made no decision regarding NAO missions at this time.

Immediately following is a guest post by Peter J. Brown, a close observer of emergency communications and satellite operations at DHS and FEMA.   The post consists of questions Mr. Brown posed to the Department of Homeland Security about five weeks ago and the answers he received last  Friday.  According to the official DHS backgrounder the National Applications Office, "is the executive agent to facilitate the use of intelligence community technological assets for civil, homeland security and law enforcement purposes within the United States."  For more detailed background see the NAO Charter. NAO has attracted scrutiny, skepticism, and more for the alleged use of satellites to spy on the American people.  Last July, Charlie Allen, former Director of the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, made a case for continuation of the NAO. Peter J. Brown's most recent published commentary on emergency communications and related matters appears in the October 2008 issue of  "Disaster Medicine & Public Health Preparedness", a journal of the American Medical Association (subscription required).  He has also previously addressed the NAO and the National Emergency Communications Plan here at HLSwatch.

In testimony yesterday, Dr. David  Boyd, Director of Command, Control and Interoperability Division of the DHS S&T Directorate, explained that an effective national network for interoperable communications need not connect every first responder in San Diego to every first responder in Miami. The tactical and operational needs of different communities are too diverse to be encompassed by any single system.  "A system of systems is the only viable solution for the next two decades," he told the House Appropriations Homeland Security subcommittee. Developing and implementing standards that will ensure effective linkage within this system of systems would produce three benefits according to Boyd: 1. Allow the system of systems to be built on the back of exisiting investments and networks, potentially saving substantial time and money. 2. Allow the system of systems to reflect very real, sometimes daunting, differences in local geography, structural density, and other crucial variabilities. 3.  Eliminate the risk of a single point of failure that a monolithic national system would probably entail. Dr. Boyd's prepared testimony is available. The prepared testimony of others who were testifying is also available at the Committee website.  Boyd's comments were the only part of the webcast I was able to catch.

The White House issued President Bush’s final Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD-24) on June 5, 2008. Entitled “Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security,” HSPD-24 provides a framework to align Federal executive departments and agencies in the “collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals.” The PD tasks multiple agencies – led by the AG – with developing an implementation plan by June 2009. DHS has a significant stake in coordinating federal use of biometrics. DHS is the steward of the Biometric Storage System. DHS runs the Screening Coordination Office. DHS operates the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which conducts 135,000 national security background checks, including the collection of 11,000 sets of fingerprints, every day. On Jan 27-28, 2009, NDIA convenes its Biometric Conference 2009, which is intended to bring together stakeholders (including federal implementers) to address challenges of successfully implementing HSPD-24, along the lines of the following: • Policy development • Existing and planned U.S. Government programs • Examples of commercial application of biometrics to address mission critical business goals • Enabling technologies • Initiatives within the international community • Challenges to achieving true interoperability and information sharing. NDIA states that the conference’s goal is to develop a “mutual understanding and cardinal direction for possible solutions wherein jurisdiction gaps are closed, technologies are interoperable and policies are cohesive.” For more one the conference, check out the agenda here.