Glenn Beck Study Guide: TSA, Trumka, and Muslim Brotherhood
BRITISH MISSILE STORY BACKGROUND
§ Information about every Trident missile the US supplies to Britain will be given to Russia as part of an arms control deal signed by President Barack Obama next week.
§ Defence analysts claim the agreement risks undermining Britain’s policy of refusing to confirm the exact size of its nuclear arsenal.
§ The fact that the Americans used British nuclear secrets as a bargaining chip also sheds new light on the so-called “special relationship”, which is shown often to be a one-sided affair by US diplomatic communications obtained by the WikiLeaks website.
§ Details of the behind-the-scenes talks are contained in more than 1,400 US embassy cables published to date by the Telegraph, including almost 800 sent from the London Embassy, which are published online today. The documents also show that:
§ America spied on Foreign Office ministers by gathering gossip on their private lives and professional relationships.
§ Intelligence-sharing arrangements with the US became strained after the controversy over Binyam Mohamed, the former Guantánamo Bay detainee who sued the Government over his alleged torture.
§ David Miliband disowned the Duchess of York by saying she could not “be controlled” after she made an undercover TV documentary.
§ Tens of millions of pounds of overseas aid was stolen and spent on plasma televisions and luxury goods by corrupt regimes.
§ A series of
classified messages sent to Washington by US negotiators show how
information on Britain’s nuclear capability was crucial to securing
Russia’s support for the “New START” deal.
§ Although the treaty was not supposed to have any impact on Britain, the leaked cables show that Russia used the talks to demand more information about the UK’s Trident missiles, which are manufactured and maintained in the US.
§ Washington lobbied London in 2009 for permission to supply Moscow with detailed data about the performance of UK missiles. The UK refused, but the US agreed to hand over the serial numbers of Trident missiles it transfers to Britain.
§ Professor Malcolm Chalmers said: “This appears to be significant because while the UK has announced how many missiles it possesses, there has been no way for the Russians to verify this. Over time, the unique identifiers will provide them with another data point to gauge the size of the British arsenal.”
§ Duncan Lennox, editor of Jane’s Strategic Weapons Systems, said: “They want to find out whether Britain has more missiles than we say we have, and having the unique identifiers might help them.”
§ While the US and Russia have long permitted inspections of each other’s nuclear weapons, Britain has sought to maintain some secrecy to compensate for the relatively small size of its arsenal.
§ William Hague, the Foreign Secretary, last year disclosed that “up to 160” warheads are operational at any one time, but did not confirm the number of missiles.
STATE DEPARTMENT DENIES STORY
§ A State Department spokesman called a British newspaper’s report that the U.S. offered to disclose British nuclear secrets in order to secure support for the New START treaty “bunk.”
§ The Telegraph reported Saturday that WikiLeaks cables showed the administration agreed to give Russia information about every Trident missile the U.S. supplies to the United Kingdom.
§ The story claims that Russia used the talks over the treaty, which faced opposition from suspicious Republicans in the Senate before its 11th-hour lame-duck approval, to win agreement for more information about the missile supplies.
§ ”Washington lobbied London in 2009 for permission to supply Moscow with detailed data about the performance of UK missiles,” the Telegraph reports. “The UK refused, but the US agreed to hand over the serial numbers of Trident missiles it transfers to Britain.”
§ State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley issued a “one word response” to the report on Twitter Saturday:
claims the U.S. betrayed #UK nuclear secrets as part of the negotiation
of the #NewSTART treaty. One word response: Bunk!
§ Crowley then tweeted: Contrary to @TelegraphNews claim, we carried forward requirement to notify #Russia about U.S.-UK nuclear cooperation from the 1991 treaty.
§ The New START treaty went into effect Saturday, with U.S. and Russian officials hailing the pact and impending inspections of each other’s nuclear arsenals at the Munich Security Conference.
UK ALSO DENIES STORY
§ Both the U.S. and British governments disputed on Saturday a London Telegraph report asserting that the “U.S. secretly agreed to give the Russians sensitive information on Britain’s nuclear deterrent to persuade them to sign a key treaty.”
§ State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley called the report “nonsense,” saying the information sharing about U.S. transfers of nuclear weapons to the U.K. dates back to the original START treaty, an assertion backed up by the White House and British government officials.
§ The report, based on a Wikileaked cable from February 2010 during negotiations over the U.S.-Russian New START nuclear disarmament treaty, discussed an agreed statement on the transfer of Tridents II SLBMs to the United Kingdom.
§ The parties agreed that “in order to increase transparency in relation to the use of “Trident-II” SLBMs, transferred by the United States of America to equip the Navy of Great Britain, the United States of America shall provide notification to the Russian Federation about the time of such transfer, as well as the unique identifier and the location of each of the transferred missiles.
§ The Parties agree that, upon conclusion of the life cycle of ‘Trident-II’ SLBMs transferred by the United States of America to equip the Navy of Great Britain, the United States of America will send notification to the Russian Federation about the time and method of elimination, as well as the unique identifier for each of the transferred missiles.”
§ Crowley emailed ABC News that “Under the 1991 START Treaty, the U.S. agreed to notify Russia of specific nuclear cooperation with the United Kingdom, such as the transfer of SLBM’s to the U.K., or their maintenance or modernization. This is under an existing pattern of cooperation throughout that treaty and is expected to continue under New START. We simply carried forward and updated this notification procedure to the new treaty. There was no secret agreement and no compromise of the U.K.’s independent nuclear deterrent.”
§ A knowledgeable
source with the British government, speaking anonymously because his
government has a policy of not commenting on Wikileaks, says his
understanding of the policy conforms with that asserted by the State
IF WE STILL WANT TO GO W/ STORY…ACCORDING TO HOT AIR, THE UNIQUE IDENTIFIERS WERE NOT GIVEN TO RUSSIA BEFORE APPARENTLY:
§ How desperate was Barack Obama to sign a new START agreement with Russia? Until now, we just thought his desperation went far enough to hamper our missile-defense system in eastern Europe. According to Wikileaks, the Poles and the Czechs aren’t the only allies to feel the sting of an American betrayal:
§ Information about every Trident missile the US supplies to
Britain will be given to Russia as part of an arms control deal signed
by President Barack Obama next week. Defence analysts claim the
agreement risks undermining Britain’s policy of refusing to confirm the
exact size of its nuclear arsenal. The fact that the Americans used
British nuclear secrets as a bargaining chip also sheds new light on the
so-called “special relationship”, which is shown often to be a
one-sided affair by US diplomatic communications obtained by the
§ The rest of the revelations from this round of published diplomatic cables are nowhere near as explosive. The worst among them was a revelation that the US spied on the British Foreign Office by “gathering gossip,” apparently for later use in pressuring diplomats to cooperate with our efforts. The Duchess of York, Sarah “Fergie” Ferguson, embarrasses the British government, and millions of pounds in foreign aid got spent on personal amenities by despots and dictators. And in other news, water is wet.
§ The revelation about the deal with the Russians is huge, however. According to the Telegraph’s report on the cables, the Obama administration asked permission of the British government to share the details of their nuclear program, and were refused. The Obama administration agreed to do it anyway without letting the UK know. We apparently will hand over all of the serial numbers of the Trident nuclear missiles we sell to the Brits so that Russia can keep track of them. This means that the UK’s relatively small but ambiguous nuclear deterrent can be more easily calculated, and perhaps neutralized if the necessity arises.
§ This is a disgrace, of course. Remember when Obama the candidate insisted that he would restore our standing with friends and allies after the supposedly inept diplomacy of the Bush administration? We do not increase our standing among friends or foes when we stab the former in the back for the sake of the latter. Instead, we look craven, disloyal, and inept.
§ Regardless of what Obama thinks of American nuclear deterrents and policy, he has no right to undermine the policies of our closest ally and stalwart friend, especially as they fight with us in Afghanistan. Congress should immediately investigate this, and if possible the Senate should revoke its ratification of START.
§ Update: Via Teresa Kopec on Twitter, State Dept
spokesman P. J. Crowley tweets, “Contrary to @TelegraphNews claim, we
carried forward requirement to notify#Russia about U.S.-UK nuclear
cooperation from the 1991 treaty.”
§ But if that were true, why did the UK refuse permission to do it again?
§ Update II: Doug Mataconis updates OTB with this slightly more extensive pushback from Crowley at Time:
§ This is bunk. Under the 1991 START Treaty, the U.S. agreed to
notify Russia of specific nuclear cooperation with the United Kingdom,
such as the transfer of SLBM’s [submarine launch ballistic missiles] to
the UK, or their maintenance or modernization. This is under an existing
pattern of cooperation throughout that treaty and is expected to
continue under New START. We simply carried forward and updated this
notification procedure to the new treaty. There was no secret agreement
and no compromise of the UK’s independent nuclear deterrent.
§ If that’s all this is, then Doug says it’s really no big deal. But did the previous agreement include the serial numbers of Trident MIRVs, indicating the specific number of such missiles in the British inventory? And again, if this is just a continuation of the 1991 START process, then why did the UK object to it?
§ Update III: The UK is quietly backing the Obama administration, Jake Tapper reports:
§ A knowledgeable source with the British government,
speaking anonymously because his government has a policy of not
commenting on Wikileaks, says his understanding of the policy conforms
with that asserted by the State Department.
§ Update IV: Just FYI, here’s the part of the memo leaked by Wikileaks, emphasis mine:
§ 10. (S) Orlov asked about the U.S. practice of transferring
Trident II missiles to the United Kingdom (UK) in reference to the
Russian-proposed agreed statement on the subject. Trout pointed out that
most of the provisions contained in the proposed agreed statement were
already covered by other sections of the treaty. He
noted that notifications existed for the transfer and return of
missiles to and from a third party. Additionally, he pointed out, the
Russian Federation will receive unique identifiers for each of the
missiles transferred to the UK, which was more information than was
disclosed under START.
§ Trout acknowledged that the proposal to send a notification of a UK flight test was not covered under START nor had it been included as part of this treaty but argued that this was the flight test of a missile owned by a third country. He said the United States had no legal responsibility for such a notification. Trout said he assumed the UK would send a notice to mariners and airmen prior to any flight test.
§ So yes, they got notified under the earlier START protocols of transfers of nuclear weapons — but they didn’t get the unique identifiers, which would quantify and specify the number of weapons transferred. That’s what the British refused to accept, and apparently what we agreed to do anyway.
§ AFL-CIO’s Trumka Backs New Anti Mubarak Egyptian Labor Federation
§ AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka is backing the Egyptian revolution.
§ From the Communist Party USA’s Peoples World:
§ Egyptian workers…have broken away to form their own independent unions and federation and join the popular protests against President Hosni Mubarak’s dictatorial rule.
§ In a Jan. 30 declaration the new Egyptian Federation of
Independent Unions said its demands include the right to organize and
the right to work at a decent minimum wage, rather than be unemployed.
Like the other protesters, the new federation also demands Mubarak
quit. The federation then called a general strike to back its demands.
§ The new federation, unveiled at a press conference in the jammed central Tahrir Square in Cairo, includes the Real Estate Tax Authority (RETA) workers, the Retired Workers Union, the Health Professionals Union, the Teachers Independent Union and several other independent unions.
§ The workers’ movement drew support from both AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and the International Trades Union Congress. Trumka said the new confederation’s role in the protests “inspires us and will not be forgotten…”
§ Trumka wrote to
RETA President Kamal Abu Eita and to Kamal Abbas, director of the
Independent Egyptian labor group, the Center for Trade Union Worker
Services, that their “organizations symbolize the strength and courage
of Egyptian workers and their families who have been standing up to
repression for many years.”
§ “We salute you in this brave endeavor” of forming the new labor federation “and join the international labor movement in standing with you,” Trumka added. “The peoples’ movement for democracy in Egypt and the role unions are playing for freedom and worker rights inspires us and will not be forgotten,” he concluded.
§ Who will Trumka blame when American workers pay double to fill their gas tanks?
FROM AFL-CIO BLOG
§ Representatives of the Egyptian union movement announced they are forming a new labor federation, the Federation of Egyptian Trade Unions, which will represent workers in more than a dozen industries and enterprises. The federation also plans to set a date for a nationwide general strike for democracy and fundamental rights. Many people believe the labor demonstrations in the past two years played a significant role in giving Egyptian citizens courage to stand up to the government.
§ In a letter today to Egyptian union leaders Kamal Abbas and Kamal Abu Eita, recipients of last year’s George Meany-Lane Kirkland Human Rights Award, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka praised the workers’ “extraordinary courage and defiance of a ban on free and independent unions.”
§ Yesterday we learned that your organizations joined
with retirees, the technical health professionals and representatives of
workers in the important industrial areas to announce the organization
of a new labor federation to represent workers in a new era of democracy
in Egypt. We salute you in this brave endeavor and join the
international labor movement in standing with you. The people’s
movement for democracy in Egypt and the role unions are playing for
freedom and worker rights inspires us and will not be forgotten.
TSA TIP SHEET – BACKGROUNDER
§ This framework is unique to TSA in that it allows for bargaining at the national-level only – while prohibiting local-level bargaining at individual airports – only on the non-security employment issues identified in the Determination, such as shift bids, transfers and awards. Administrator Pistole’s Determination prohibits bargaining on any topics that might affect security, such as:
§ Security policies, procedures or the deployment of security personnel or equipment
§ Pay, pensions and any form of compensation
§ Proficiency testing
§ Job qualifications
§ Discipline standards
§ If a union is chosen, each security officer will retain the right to choose whether or not to join the union. The Determination strictly prohibits officers from striking or engaging in work slowdowns of any kind
WHAT IS THE TIMEFRAME
§ The FLRA-run election – which will be held electronically and by secret ballot – will likely take place in Spring 2011.
HOW MUCH WILL UNIONIZING COST THE TSA?
§ There will be no cost to TSA unless and until a union is certified by the FLRA as the winner of the election. If exclusive union representation is voted for by a majority of TSOs, our preliminary estimates are that implementation would cost between $5-8 million annually, which amounts to approximately one-quarter of one percent of TSA’s budget for security officer salaries.
§ Because bargaining would occur at the national level only, the need for local labor relations infrastructure – a significant driver of cost – is eliminated.
HOW DOES THIS AFFECT THE PUBLIC
§ TSA’s priority is the safety of the traveling public and we will not negotiate on security or risk adversely impacting the resources and agility necessary to protect national security.
§ TSOs will not have the right to strike or engage in work
slowdowns of any kind and bargaining would be strictly limited to
clearly-defined employment issues. This will not impact the traveling
ARTICLE ON TSA
§ Since the creation of the Transportation Security Administration shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, its airport screeners have sought to be part of a collective bargaining unit.
§ The Bush Administration and congressional Republicans opposed that, however. Thus, 40,000 TSA workers continued to work without the kind of union representation some wanted. On Friday, all that changed.
§ Following an TSA review of the issue, John Pistole, the
agency’s administrator, said screeners will now be allowed to vote on
whether they want a union to collectively bargain with the agency on
§ In November, the Federal Labor Relations Authority ruled that TSA screeners should be allowed to vote on whether they wanted to be represented by a single union. That decision didn’t give them collective bargaining rights, however. Pistole’s decision changes that.
§ The ostensible reason the previous administration and
congressional critics gave for opposing collective bargaining rights for
TSA workers was a concern that could impair TSA management’s
flexibility to deploy workers as needed, especially during periods of
heightened terrorism threats.
§ Organized labor suspected its ties to the Democratic Party didn’t exactly help Republicans warm to the idea of thousands of TSA workers being represented by a union in negotiations either.
§ During the 2008 campaign, then candidate Barack Obama promised to give TSA workers bargaining rights.
§ The Obama Administration won’t allow any union agreements to reduce air traveler security, Pistole said. From a TSA statement:
§ “The safety of the traveling public is our top priority and we will not negotiate on security,” said TSA Administrator Pistole. “But morale and employee engagement cannot be separated from achieving superior security. If security officers vote to move forward with collective bargaining, this framework will ensure that TSA retains the capability and flexibility necessary to respond to evolving threats, and continue improving employee engagement, performance and professional development.”
§ John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, one of two unions vying to represent workers in an election scheduled to start in March, said in a statement:
§ Today marks the recognition of a fundamental human right for
40,000 patriotic federal employees who have been disenfranchised since
the inception of the agency. We have come a long way since AFGE first
began representing TSOs in 2001 when the union took up the fight for a
federalized security officer workforce. The granting of these rights is a
step in the right direction and gets us in the door. After AFGE wins the election to be the sole union at TSA, we will move immediately to the table and be ready to negotiate.
§ The National Treasury Employees Union which also hopes to represent TSA workers also issued a statement:
§ ”This decision and the upcoming representation election at TSA
will give these officers a voice in their workplace and a chance at a
better future,” said NTEU President Colleen M. Kelley. “The
sooner NTEU is certified as the exclusive representative of the TSA
workforce, the sooner we can begin improving the lives of employees at
this key agency.”
§ Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) introduced an amendment earlier this week to the Federal Aviation Administration bill to bar TSA screeners from gaining collective bargaining rights.
§ An excerpt from his statement: “The Obama Administration’s actions today to move forward on unionizing our TSA workforce with collective bargaining rights could hamper our national security,” said Wicker. “Earlier this week, I offered an amendment, which is currently being debated in the Senate, that would prohibit collective bargaining for TSA security screeners. Despite the fact that the Senate is considering this very issue, the Administration decided to move forward with this ill-advised policy.”
THE REVOLUTIONARY SOCIALISTS OF EGYPT- -
Statement of the Revolutionary Socialists Egypt:
Glory to the martyrs! Victory to the revolution!.
Mubarak’s departure is the first step, not the last step of the revolution
The country’s wealth belongs to the people and must return to it
Factories wrecked and sold dirt cheap must go back to the people
We will not accept to be guard dogs of America and Israel
The revolution is a popular revolution
A people’s army is the army that protects the revolution
Form revolutionary councils urgently
Call to Egyptian workers to join the ranks of the revolution
Glory to the martyrs!
Down with the system!
All power to the people!
Victory to the revolution!
TURKEY’S PRIME MINISTER Mr. Erdogan’s party has already
established ties to the Muslim Brotherhood — a result of Mr. Erdogan’s
long and successful campaign to present himself as a dominant and
increasingly anti-Israeli voice in the Middle East.According to research
by Dore Gold at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, three members
of the Muslim Brotherhood — two of whom serve in the Egyptian Parliament
— were on the Turkish-sponsored ship that was attacked by Israeli
forces on its way to deliver aid to the Gaza Strip in May.
The Hizb ut-Tahrir Movement
- Hizb ut-Tahrir (or “Party of Liberation”) is frequently equated with jihadism despite being different from the violent radical groups in terms of its organizational structure, methods and public profile. Founded in the Middle East in the early 1950s as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, the group seeks to re-establish the caliphate, or “golden age” of Islamic rule, through political means.
- One reason Hizb ut-Tahrir has been successful in Europe is because it has made an effort to tap into the mixed or “hybrid” sense of identity found among second- and third-generation European Muslims, some of whom feel a sense of alienation from both the Western societies in which they were raised and the Muslim-majority countries from which their parents or grandparents emigrated. Hizb ut-Tahrir’s rhetoric attempts to tap into this sense of alienation by encouraging its followers to view their political identity in global terms, as Muslims struggling on behalf of co-religionists worldwide rather than as citizens of particular nation-states.
**GREAT POINT HIGHLIGHTED ON WHY THIS GROUPS IS “GLOBAL COMMUNITY ORGANIZERS”
For this reason, its activities have often been regarded as an obstacle to the assimilation of European Muslims.
- Unlike many jihadi groups, Hizb ut-Tahrir officially eschews violence, saying it prefers to achieve its goal of a new caliphate through persuasion, protests and political organizing, including recruiting senior political and military officials to its cause. The group frequently organizes rallies and protests, particularly in the U.K., which are usually accompanied by ambitious public statements, such as “Britain will be an Islamic state by the year 2020!”
Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), an international organization that seeks to establish a worldwide Islamic theocracy, is increasing its efforts to spread its message and recruit members in the U.S.
- HT held its first major event in the U.S., a conference entitled “Fall of Capitalism and Rise of Islam,” at the Hilton in Oak Lawn, Illinois on July 19, 2009. AlthoughHT America’s Web site states that the group “does not work in the West to change the system of government,” speakers at the conference focused on HT’s larger agenda of establishing a global Islamic caliphate, or Islamic rule worldwide, which entails ousting existing governments.
- A closer look at the group’s ideology and international activity reveals that HT not only promotes Islam as a way of life, but is also fundamentally opposed to capitalism and democracy and is explicitly hostile toward Israel and Jews. These basic tenets, along with its record of advocating violence, contradict the group’s attempt to portray itself as a political party seeking change through nonviolent means.
- HT’s statements in response to the Israeli naval operation to stop a flotilla of ships en route to Gaza <http://www.adl.org/main_Anti_Israel/free_gaza_movement.htm?Multi_page_sections=sHeading_1> , which called on Muslim armies to “fight the Jews” and “blow ‘Israel’ off the map,” further demonstrate the group’s acceptance of violence.
SOUNDBITE FROM 2009 CONFERENCE IN ILLINOIS- BLAMING CAPITALISM FOR THE WORLD’S PROBLEMS
Session 1: Capitalism is doomed to fail (part 2)
“Secular Capitalism: the evil sick twisted ideology that is the root cause of today’s problems.
1. the poverty that we see in Allah’s abundant Earth
2. Colonial Wars Iraq and Afghanistan
3. the slaughter of Innocent Muslims and non-Muslims
4. The Drug, Alcohol, other social problems.
5. The world’s debt to the banks
6. Wealth inequality
7. the struggle for most of us to make it day to day is doomed to fail
This system is doomed to fail.