State Department Contract Officer Keeps it in the Family

Gee, maybe we can find some money to cut from the State Department, since their contract officers give it out so generously to their own kin:

A special investigation by The Daily Caller has discovered that a State Department contract specialist participated in awarding more than $52 million in taxpayer-funded contracts to a company owned and operated by her husband and daughter.

Kathleen McGrade helped their company, Sterling Royale Group, win 43 federally funded contracts over the last few years.

McGrade acted as the Contracting Officer (CO) for awards to Sterling Royale Group. McGrade’s husband, Brian Collinsworth, serves as the company’s Vice President. McGrade’s daughter, J.L. (Jennifer) Herring, is its president and CEO.

When confronted, what did VP Collinsworth say? He tried to claim the he and McGrade were not married and that he is not the stepdad to Herring. But guess what?:

But wedding photographs and other personal pictures Collinsworth posted on MySpace.com suggest otherwise. TheDC has seen Collinsworth’s MySpace profile, last updated in early 2007, which declares that he is “happily married to my beautiful wife of one year, Kathy.”

“I have four children from a previous marriage and one brand new step-daughter (see photos),” Collinsworth adds in the profile. “At the moment, I’m working in the construction business doing Embassy work for the US Government.”

When TheDC approached him with this new evidence, Collinsworth cut off communications and has not returned further requests for comment.

Busted! But wait, there's more:

Since the State Department has refused to confirm or deny McGrade’s identity, TheDC presented photographs of Collinsworth and McGrade to Herring’s ex-fiancee, Keith Smithey.

Smithey confirmed that Collinsworth is married to McGrade, and that Herring is McGrade’s daughter. Smithey was at the wedding. “I was one of their groomsmen,” he told TheDC.

Smithey added that McGrade and Collinsworth covered their tracks and kept their marriage concealed from the State Department and others. “It was a big secret,” Smithey said. “In fact, they even told me it was a secret and not to tell anyone that they know that they are married, because of the whole conflict of interest and all that.”

In addition to photos documenting their marriage and their allegedly improper professional relationship, TheDC has discovered that McGrade and Collinsworth appeared as co-owners on a 2010 real estate record for a house in Stafford, Va. McGrade also publicly lists a condominium residence in downtown Washington, D.C.

When TheDC visited that building, a security guard confirmed that Collinsworth lives with McGrade at that address.

McGrade owns a boat named after Collinsworth’s and Herring’s company, too. According to records TheDC obtained, the ”Sterling Royale” is a 36.5 foot recreational boat registered to McGrade in Stafford County, Va.

Collinsworth’s name shows up on a dock space he and McGrade reserved for it at James Creek Marina in D.C. A staffer at James Creek confirms that they registered the spot but never brought that particular boat there.

What is Hillary going to do about this? Well, it has been referred to the inspector general. Read the whole article, as it further details the malfeasance and subterfuge of using the daughter so as to say the company was minority(woman) owned. Disgusting!

Coalition of the Forced Into Acting on Libya Crumbles....

So much for international love and consensus:

“What is happening in Libya differs from the aim of imposing a no-fly zone. And what we want is the protection of civilians and not the shelling of more civilians.”

-- Amr Moussa, secretary general of the Arab League, condemning the U.S.-led air assault on Libya

A second day of U.S. air strikes on Libyan positions came amid deepening anxieties among coalition partners about the means and objectives of the effort there.

But the coalition is currently suffering from a lack of direction and waning support.

Turkey blocked a bid to have NATO take over command of the operation, called Odyssey Dawn. The Arab League, which helped spur a sudden shift in the Obama administration late last week by calling for a no-fly zone, is now expressing misgivings about the size and ferocity of the effort.

The Russians and Chinese, who withheld a Security Council veto of a French-British-U.S. resolution allowing any military steps short of ground forces, are already tut-tutting the shock-and-aweish nature of the effort so far.

Much has been written about the conflict between the State Department and the Pentagon in the run up to the attacks on Libya – State reportedly favored action while the Pentagon publicly and privately warned of the cost and consequences of such a mission.

One retired general suggested to Power Play that while Hillary Clinton’s agency may have won the debate about intervention “it’s still up to the war fighters to fight wars.” The general’s “informed guess” was that the Pentagon was not interested in having weaker members of the coalition dictate strategy and insisted instead on overwhelming force if U.S. forces were to be put at risk.

“There’s a lot of anxiety from some people who see this as Iraq all over again.”

-- House Democratic aide to Power Play discussing Operation Odyssey Dawn in Libya

There is bipartisan grumbling on Capitol Hill that President Obama, despite his denunciations of his predecessor for failing to further consult with Congress over invading Iraq, told lawmakers about his Libya attack plans rather than seeking approval or advice in advance.

While most Republicans say they would have given authority for the air strikes undertaken so far, there is growing concern on the right that the military, already obligated to fighting two wars, will be further stretched if the situation in Libya devolves. House Speaker John Boehner says he wants to know exactly what the mission is before the mission changes again.

There is deepening anxiety among Democrats though. While liberals generally appreciate the efforts to obtain U.N. blessing for the operation, there is unhappiness that Obama did less to consult with Congress about his Libyan attack than President George W. Bush did in advance of his invasion of Iraq.

Aw, snap! Barry didn't consult enough with Congress. Gee, could it be said that Dems in congress are missing GWB now? Guess Barry really does see our military as subservient to the whims of the UN. Hmmm.

But wait, there is more grumbling abroad:

cracks started to show Monday in the military coalition hastily assembled to take action on Libya as the Arab League and some EU countries wavered.

Criticism of the operation came swiftly after French jets took to the skies on Saturday to launch the first air strikes on Libyan targets in support of UN Security Council Resolution 1973.

Arab League Secretary General Amr Mussa caused concerns on Sunday when he said the air strikes went beyond the scope of the resolution to implement a no-fly zone and said he was concerned about civilians being hurt in bombing.
Advertisement: Story continues below

But after a meeting with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in Cairo on Monday, Mussa got back behind the military strikes.

"We are committed to UN Security Council Resolution 1973, we have no objection to this decision, particularly as it does not call for an invasion of Libyan territory," Mussa told a press conference with the UN chief.

However the Arab League's concerns seemed to have left their mark when European Union foreign ministers gathered for talks in Brussels on Monday.

Germany, which abstained in the Security Council vote when the resolution was passed on Thursday, said Mussa's criticism showed that Berlin had been right to fear military intervention.

Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle said: "We calculated the risks, and when we see that three days after this intervention began, the Arab League has already criticised this intervention, I think we see we had good reasons."

Italy said its offer to contribute eight Tornado jets to the military operation was accompanied by concerns that the allied campaign "shouldn't be a war" on Libya.

"We want to verify all the actions undertaken are consistent with the mission objectives" under the UN Resolution, said Foreign Minister Franco Frattini. "We do not want to go beyond the scope of the resolution."

Analysts say Germany and Italy's criticism stemmed from the coalition's targeting of Libyan tanks and forces on the ground, rather than simply limiting their actions to implementing a no-fly zone.

Germany's objections "are a mixture of political considerations, classic pacifism", annoyance at its fellow European power France's leading role in the operation "or poor diplomatic handling", said Dominique Moisi from the French Institute of International Relations (IFRI).

Italy, formerly a close ally of Moamer Kadhafi's regime, was playing its role as "a voice of discord".

While the Arab League returned to a more consensual position Monday, Mussa's approach illustrates the "schizophrenic position" of Arab states, said Jean-Pierre Maulny, of the Paris-based Institute of International and Strategic Relations.

Western nations have boasted of Arab participation in the coalition, but until now only Qatar has committed fighter jets.

The United Arab Emirates said Monday its involvement in Libya is limited to humanitarian assistance, despite reports that it too would send warplanes.

"Many countries are torn between the imperatives of their domestic and foreign policy: the Arab League knows Kadhafi is a problem and wants him to go, but at the same time there is a fear that Western intervention will be badly viewed by the Arab public opinion," he said.

In fact, everything hinges on the definition of the "no-fly zone".

Resolution 1973 permits "all necessary measures" to establish a no-fly zone, protect civilian areas and impose a ceasefire on Kadhafi's forces.

Gee, where is all that hopey changey, the world loves the US stuff we were supposed to get when Barry assumed office? Yet another campaign lie. The world now sees Obama for the joke that he is. And this pathetic loser appreciates it because he doesn't want to lead the free world. It is too much for him. Then, dude, there is the door. GET OUT.

North Korea Could Produce 2 Nukes a Year? Where was the State Department?

Perhaps if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were more concerned with keeping the peace instead of having diplomats spy and learn about what makes the leader of Argentina cry, we would have been more in front of this North Korean Debacle:

North Korea, which fired dozens of artillery shells at the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong this morning, could make one or two bombs' worth of enriched uranium per year if its new enrichment facility is fully operational, a nuclear analyst says.

The shells killed two soldiers and set houses ablaze, according to Reuters, in one of the heaviest attacks on South Korea since the Korean war in the 1950s. The two countries then exchanged further fire.

These events closely follow reports on 20 November by an engineer and two nuclear policy experts from the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University in California that they saw an industrial-scale uranium enrichment plant in a visit a few days earlier to North Korea.

North Korean officials told the team that the plant has 2000 centrifuges that are already being used to separate fissile uranium-235 from the more abundant uranium-238.

If that is true, North Korea could make 30 to 40 kilograms of highly enriched uranium per year, enough for one or two nuclear weapons, says Hui Zhang of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.

Although North Korea is believed to already possess plutonium-based nuclear weapons, uranium-based weapons can be more efficient, allowing them to produce more powerful explosions, says Robert Alvarez of the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington DC.

However, it is nice to know what Nick Sarkozy is eating and that Quadaffi travels with a Ukrainian blonde nurse. Don't you feel safer knowing these things?

Hillary's State Department

I just caught this in today's recap of today's State Department briefing:

MR. WOOD: Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to the briefing. If you like, I’d run down – I’ll run down some of the Secretary’s calls that she’s had over the last couple of days. Okay, let me start. Well, first we’ll start in the Middle East. She’s spoken with Israeli Prime Minister Olmert, Israeli Foreign Minister Livni, Israeli Defense Minister Barak, Egyptian Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit, the Jordanian King Abdullah, Palestinian Authority President Abu Mazen, Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Fayyad, and Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faysal.

We’ll go over to Europe. She’s spoken with UK Foreign Secretary Miliband, French Foreign Minister Kouchner, German Foreign Minister Steinmeier, Czech Foreign Minister Schwarzenberg – Czechoslovakia holds the EU presidency, as I think most of you know.

QUESTION: Except that, I’m sorry, Czechoslovakia hasn’t existed for a while.

MR. WOOD: Did I say – excuse me, the Czech Republic. It’s just one of those things.

QUESTION: First day jitters, eh?

MR. WOOD: No, no, no. (Laughter.) You know, that is – that would be a good little story.

Anybody hear about Hillary chatting it up with a country that doesn't exist? Care to guess what the odds would have been if this were McCain't (or still Bush's) administration?

Bush Did What?!?!?

This is simply astounding. Those of you who think WMD bows and worships the Bush administration ought to take special notice of what I am about to say...

If President Bush was aware and responsible of this activity, he deserves every condemnation heaped upon his administration for it. That the State Department would even consider reparations to Libya for American retaliation over a terrorist attack is absurd, but that's the State Department for you.

The only reparations that Libya deserves is $0.35 so they can call somebody who cares...

I am pretty disgusted with this news...and the American people should be as well.

Major Passport Changes Effective Friday, Feb. 1, 2008

From the Boehner e-Bulletin:

Beginning Friday, Feb. 1, a number of passport changes will go in effect, including new passport card, new fees and a change in the age at which both parents must consent to a minor child obtaining a passport. You can click here to go to the U.S. State Department's main travel website for more information.

• Passport Card: The Passport Card may be used only for land and sea travel between the U.S. and Canada, Mexico, Bermuda and the Caribbean. It cannot be used for international air travel. Like passport books, the cards will be valid for 10 years for persons 16 years and older and valid for five years for those under 16 years. Click here for more information about Passport Cards and to see a sample graphic.

• New Fees: Depending on your age, there are different fees and application costs for a passport. Age 16 and older the total cost is $97; under age 16, the total cost is $82. Click here for more information on passport fees.

• Age of Consent: All minors under age 16 will be required to provide the consent of both parents or legal guardians to obtain a passport.

Doesn't This Mean War?

AP News Alert:

KHARTOUM, Sudan (AP) A U.S. official says an American diplomat in Khartoum has died of injuries suffered in a shooting.

I thought that this meant war... I suspect that instead of that, we'll get what the State Department types call a "proportional response" which means we'll do essentially nothing and certainly nothing that would equal the taking of the life of one of our diplomats.

Now before the liberals start calling me a warmonger or worse, let me state that I don't think we should go to war with Sudan. I do think we ought to get to the bottom of who did this and then "bring them to justice." By which I do mean that we ought to kill whomever was responsibile.

Was it not true that all a citizen of Rome needed to do was proclaim that he was a civitas Romani (you Latin people feel free to correct my usage) and know that if he should be killed by a foreigner, that Rome would avenge his death with interest? It is that sort of power that our enemy would respect; but we dare not claim it, for whatever reason. Our enemy knows this...and is using it to his advantage.

Bush's Legacy

George W. Bush is doing what every second term president does: try to get the Palestinians and the Israelis to break bread, smoke a little peyote, and sing a verse or two of "Kumbaya."

The AP News report:

WASHINGTON (AP) The State Department has announced that the U.S. will host a Middle East peace conference at Annapolis, Md., on Nov. 27.

This has not worked before and it will not work now. When the Palestinians are tired of killing and dying, then there will be peace. But until Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia are dealt with, that will NEVER happen... Call me crazy, but the only way this problem gets fixed is if Islamofascism dies and these regimes start working for peace in earnest.

President Bush need not worry about his legacy...that was solidified on September 11th, 2001.

Bush's State Dept Wusses Out Again

AP News Alert:

WASHINGTON (AP) The State Department is dropping plans to force diplomats to serve in Iraq, The Associated Press has learned.

Did they get volunteers for the mission or not? That is the question...

Unbelievable Exchange on Russian Aviation During State Department Briefing

Here is an excerpt from today's State Department briefing. See if this bugs you as much as it does me...

QUESTION: We have a report that Russian strategic bombers have resumed a cold war practice of flying long-haul mission --

MR. MCCORMACK: What kind?

QUESTION: That Russian strategic bombers have resumed a cold war practice of flying to areas patrolled by NATO and by U.S. forces and there's an incident in which a Russian bomber flew over a U.S. military base in Guam and then apparently made some kind of exchange --

MR. MCCORMACK: This is the --

QUESTION: Pardon me?

MR. MCCORMACK: The bear bomber? Is that it?

QUESTION: I don't know if it's the bear bomber, but --

MR. MCCORMACK: I was just curious whether they're flying those things.

QUESTION: Yeah. What I'm wondering is, is this -- does this -- you know, does this trouble you guys at all? Are you even aware of it? I've flagged it to people this morning. Is it just sort of, you know, friendly --

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, as I said, you know, they're still flying those things? Look, if -- you know, I'll leave it to the military to ascribe any particular significance or non-significance to this event. Beyond that, I don't think I have anything really to say.

QUESTION: Sean, you seem to be awfully dismissive of the Russian aviation -- of Russian aviation capabilities. Why --

MR. MCCORMACK: No, no. He's just saying cold war bombers are continuing to fly --
QUESTION: A cold war practice.

MR. MCCORMACK: Oh, a cold war practice. Like I said, I'll leave it to my colleagues at the Department of Defense to see if they believe that this is a significant act.

It's not that McCormack didn't know about the report. I can imagine all kinds of things going on in the world that the spokeman for the United States Department of State might not get briefed on... It is the fact that through all of this, McCormack thinks the question is about what type of aircraft the Russians are using. Either the question wasn't that clear, or McCormack wasn't paying attention. Either way, that ain't good.

Passports Update

Via email:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman John Boehner (R-West Chester) today commended the U.S State Department for continuing to work through the backlog of passport applications that occurred due a rules change earlier this year. Passport Services continues to hire specialists to process passport applications, and the number of applications pending has dropped to 2.5 million.

The agency has set a goal of reducing the application processing time from the current 10 to 12 weeks down to eight weeks by the end of September, and down to six weeks by the end of the year. The Departments of State and Homeland Security temporarily eased rules requiring all U.S. citizens traveling by air to Canada , Mexico , the Caribbean and Bermuda to carry a passport; the restriction will be re-instated Sept. 30.

“I’m pleased to see the State Department making progress in clearing the backlog of passport applications before the new rules are put back in effect,” Boehner said. “While it’s important that we know who is traveling in and out the country, we must balance that with our constituents’ need to make travel plans without worrying whether their passports will be ready in the timeframe quoted by the agency. We continue working with Ohio 8th District constituents who encounter problems with their passport applications.”

Passport Services is on-track to issue 17 million passports by the end of the fiscal year, having issue more than 13 million passports year-o-date. Last year, 12 million passports were issued. From July 19 through July 25, the service issue 492,129 passports – beating the previous record set the week before by almost 15,000 passports.

A processing center in Hot Springs , Arkansas , opened in March with the single mission of printing and mailing passports. Soon, all Passport Agencies will be able to electronically transmit information on approved applications so that passports can be printed and mailed within 24 hours of an agency center receiving the data. Passport Services has recruited retirees with significant training and experience to help process the backlog of applications – currently 90 retirees have returned to help.

The National Passport Center now has a staff of more than 500 representatives to handle public inquiries, and temporary call centers have been set-up for overflow calls. Travelers with imminent plans will soon be able to schedule appointments at Passport Agencies online. Additional representatives are available for Congressional inquiries on passport applications. All Passport Agencies are working overtime on weekdays and weekends to process applications.

Anyone who paid for expedited service but believe the application was processed within the expedited timeframe can request a refund of the $60 fee through the passport center website, [Link]. Regular application or processing fees are not refundable.

Travelers should apply for a passport as soon as possible when making plans. Application information may be found at [Link]

Iran/US Talks Going Nowhere

Remember when the liberals and the Crying Man, our Senator RINOvich (but I repeat myself) was screaming and hollering about the United States meeting with Iran over Iraq issues and how if we'd only just sit down and talk over tea and crumpets everything would be just grand? You remember that don't ya? Well, we're talking to Iran in Baghdad and it sounds like a whole lot of nothing is getting done except exchanging pleasantries...

From today's State Department briefing:

QUESTION: On the Iran-Iraq-U.S. talks in Baghdad today, first, are you satisfied that you met whatever goals that you had for this meeting?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, in terms of Ryan, our Ambassador Crocker -- Ryan Crocker -- being able to convey our views directly to Iranian Government representatives, yes. Now, the larger question I think that underpins what you've just asked is: Are we going to see any results from the Iranian Government? Are we going to see any change in behavior? That I can't tell you. We shall see. That's going to be entirely up to the Iranian Government whether or not we see any change in behavior, whether or not their actions match their stated policy aims of strategic stability in Iraq.

Well, that's just fabulous...glad to see RINOvich's plan is working so well..... See? I told you so...

"The War's Upon Us"

Jonah Goldberg calls this piece by Cale Hahn less than optimistic, and I have to agree with him.

The peace process is dead. The time of wars has begun. Israel has been sufficiently weakened for the Muslim world to once again attempt annihilation of the Jewish state. The facade of Muslim desires for peace is lowered, and behind the curtain looms a violent and murderous religion that brooks no opposition.

And if that doesn't paint the picture clear enough for you, there's more:

The Muslim nations are actively preparing for war; to declare there is hope for peace given the mountains of evidence to the contrary is manic delusion. Unfortunately, those who say these things are currently running the country.

This is precisely the reason the Muslims will soon attack. Israel is led by a coalition of political hacks who exhibit colossal incompetence and cinematic buffoonery. They possess no will to fight beyond a staged photo op. They are hollow men, empty shells without convictions and without courage beyond self-preservation.

And it is starting to look as if Israel is seriously fatigued:

As Ehud Olmert confessed, "We are tired of fighting, we are tired of being courageous, we are tired of winning, we are tired of defeating our enemies."

In previous wars, Israel was armed with superior US weapons systems, while the Muslim armies fielded inferior Soviet-bloc material. Though significantly outnumbered, Israel possessed enough of a qualitative advantage to overcome significant quantitative disparities.

Not so anymore. The Muslim nations are armed with the latest Western weapons platforms and, for the first time, possess not only numerical superiority, but qualitative parity with Israel in many areas. Under the auspices of enlisting Muslim support in participating in its "War on Terror," the US has armed Israel's enemies with its latest weapons systems. Examples include Harpoon anti-ship missiles, F-16 fighters, Apache helicopters, Abrams main battle tanks, JDAM bombs, AWACS radar planes and Avenger Air Defense Systems.

And, as usual, the boys in DeeCee don't really seem to fathom just what is at stake:

Israel has voiced deep alarm to Washington at Muslim weapons parity vis-a-vis the Jewish state, but to no avail. Washington continues arming Israel's enemies, knowing these systems may soon be employed against the Jewish state.

And it really doesn't get much more clueless than this:

Knock one domino down and it is connected by a tripwire to others, which will blow from Gaza to Afghanistan in a quick succession of cataclysmic explosions. Islamic war planners deliberately engineered the structure as such.

America is feverishly working to keep this from happening. US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack cautioned, "We've urged them [Israel] to consider the consequences of defending themselves."

Has the State Department considered the consequences if Israel DOESN'T defend herself? Israel is the only democratic ally we have in the Middle East. Does Washington seriously think it is good policy to let the Islamofascists continue to have their way in this volatile region of the world?

But global war is precisely the goal of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It is the prerequisite for the Islamic Messiah (the Mahdi) coming upon the world stage to lead the Islamic ummah ("nation") to global victory. Ahmadinejad believes he is the one chosen to usher the Mahdi's coming.

The whole of the Middle East is a mountain of munitions atop a rumbling, ash-belching volcano. Late summer or fall appears to be the intended point of detonation. When it erupts, it will blow the US from the Middle East and propel Israel to the brink of destruction.

At some point, we are going to have to start taking these people seriously. A global war on terror is being fought with conviction and purpose by one side of this destructive conflict. ...and it isn't us.

Read the whole thing here.

Boehner Statement on Rep. Waxman's Subpoena of Secretary Rice

Via email:

Lacking in Legislative Accomplishments, Democrats Use Political Theater at the Expense of Legitimate Oversight

House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today released the following statement on the decision by the Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to issue a subpoena for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice:

"This partisan show trial is a waste of time and taxpayer dollars, and undermines U.S. diplomatic efforts in the Middle East. By subpoenaing the Secretary of State, Democrats have revealed how beholden they are to left-wing activist groups while stealing the Secretary's time away from critical diplomatic missions. While Democrats have made their attempts to embarrass the Bush Administration a top priority, they've only embarrassed themselves with the absence of any real legislative accomplishments and their reckless disregard for America 's national security.

"Subpoenaing Secretary Rice has more to do with political theater than legitimate oversight goals. Chairman Waxman's questions on the events of four years ago have been asked and answered, definitively, time and time again. This inquiry is designed more to obfuscate than to address the threats facing this country today and for the foreseeable future. Republicans are committed to meeting these threats and challenges head-on. That's where the American people want us to be."

Iran Update

Originally posted at 12:52PM on 4/18/07

AP News Alert:

JERUSALEM (AP) U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates says diplomatic efforts with Iran over its disputed nuclear program are "working."

I'm not getting that impression from the State Department briefings...

3:40PM UPDATE - From today's State Department briefing received via email:

QUESTION: (Inaudible) today in Israel, I believe, Secretary of Defense Gates made some comments about some -- seeing some forward movement or said something to the effect that the diplomacy is working with Iran and the nuclear issue. I mean, are you aware of those comments? Do you agree with those comments? And can you tell us why you think it is?

MR. MCCORMACK: I haven't seen his comments, Charlie. You know, I'm not going to try to interpret them for you. I can tell you that in our view the diplomacy has moved forward in the sense that you -- if you turn back the clock to 2005, the United States found itself in a position of being relatively isolated on the issue of Iran and its nuclear program. We don't have -- when we looked around, there weren't too many people standing to either side of us, telling Iran that it has to meet the conditions of stopping their enrichment and actually get into negotiations so that they can realize a peaceful nuclear program and not a nuclear weapons program. The Europeans were -- came onboard early on in that regard.

But now we have gotten to a point where we have a -- two 15-0 Security Council resolutions, Chapter 7 resolutions that have made it quite clear to Iran that their behavior is unacceptable, that they need to take up the P-5+1 on their offer of negotiations and that you have had strong support in the IAEA Board of Governors, including among -- including from those states that count themselves as members of the Non-Aligned Movement. So in that sense, absolutely, the diplomacy has moved forward and in that sense, it has worked. Now, have we gotten to the point where Iran is stopping its enrichment-related activities? No, we haven't. But we are hopeful that the diplomatic strategy that we're pursuing of gradually increasing pressure on the Iranian Government to get them to change their behavior will yield positive results. And by that I mean actually getting them to the negotiating table under the conditions the international community has set out. We're not there yet.

State Dept. on Speaker of State Pelosi's Proposed Trip to Iran

From today's briefing received via email:

QUESTION: A couple things on Iran. First of all, Pelosi says she's thinking of going there now with Tom Lantos in tow. Can you give me any reaction on that?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I'm not sure that that has happened in 27 years that you've had the Speaker of the House travel to Iran. You know, I don't know how serious she is about those plans and I don't think that we have heard from her that she plans to do it. I know that there's a mention of this in a press conference. So at this point, I'm not going to try to react to something that was just mentioned in perhaps an off-hand way in a press conference. But it would certainly be a departure from 27 years of past practice.

QUESTION: Do you think if she does go that this is, you know, a dangerous trend that's happening and the Democrats kind of trying to circumvent what you're trying to do?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, whatever members of Congress ultimately decide to do with respect to their travel schedule, I don't think that there's any confusion on the part of the American people or the international system as to who is responsible for the formulation of foreign policy as well as its execution. That is the Executive Branch led by President Bush, so I don't think there's any confusion about that.

That's diplomat for "Chick better get off our turf."

Democrats Should Cut State Department Funding

In less than one week, Speaker Pelosi met with the President of Syria (a state-sponsor of terrorism), declined a meeting with the President of the United States regarding the funding of American troops fighting the Global War on Terror in Iraq and Afghanistan, and expressed being "open" to visiting Iran - one of the globe's terrorism sponsors-in-chief.

Democrats should propose cutting the funding for the State Department because apparently they think Congress is supposed to have the diplomatic responsibilities of our government. There is no reason to duplicate efforts and confuse our allies and enemies alike as to what the policy of the United States of America really is...

Nevermind that the Constitution of the United States clearly states that foreign policy is to be directed by the President, the Speaker of the House clearly has no intention of following the law. The Justice Department should be directed to open an investigation of the Speaker's willful violation of the law and she should be detained.

There is a difference between "fact finding" and open negotitation with our enemies. Speaker Pelosi wants to undermine the foreign policy of the duly elected government of the United States and that should not be tolerated.

Missing American in Iran

This is a story that I have been following through the State Department briefings and this is the first story I've seen on the situation. Iran is saying they are "unaware" of the missing former FBI agent.

UPDATE: From today's State Department briefing:

QUESTION: Speaking about the Swiss and Iran, the Iranians apparently got back -- according to what Tom said, got back to the Swiss asking for more information about the missing American.

MR. MCCORMACK: Right. We --

QUESTION: Do you know what kind of information they're asking for?

MR. MCCORMACK: I think they're interested in when did he arrive there, how did he arrive there, essentially what was the flight number so they can better determine and track when and where he might have come in to Iran. This -- we take this request for information on the Iranians' part as actually an attempt to try to clarify who this person is, where he came in, in order to help determine where he is and what his current situation is right now. We don't view it as any sort of throwing up any sort of obstacles on their part.

QUESTION: So you think that this is kind of a -- this is a standard --

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, I think it's --

QUESTION: I mean, they're actually trying to be helpful or --

MR. MCCORMACK: I think it's a legitimate request for information. They're trying to -- they're working within their system trying to determine when and where this guy came in and that -- apparently, this information will help them out.

QUESTION: But was that information not given to them at --

MR. MCCORMACK: Apparently not. Apparently, we gave them some basic biographical information and they asked in return for this additional information, which we think is a reasonable and legitimate request. We're going to try to gather it up and provide it to them.

QUESTION: That has not been done yet that you know of?

MR. MCCORMACK: Not that I know of, no. I don't think it has been. I think we're doing that right now.

QUESTION: Okay.

MR. MCCORMACK: Yeah.

QUESTION: In your request to the Iranians, did you ask specifically whether any arm of the Iranian security forces or other officials were holding this particular gentleman?

MR. MCCORMACK: No, we didn't make any presumption as to where he is at the moment. We just asked as a general matter if they had information about his whereabouts and, if so, what was his condition and if they could assist us in putting him in contact with his friends and family and if he desired to leave to assist him in leaving Iran.

Pelosi Thinks She is Secretary of State

Nancy Pelosi has decided to visit Syria, her second trip to the Middle East which means she wants to put her stamp on foreign policy. Anybody see THAT in the Constitution?

This topic came up in Friday's briefing with the State Department. Here is a taste:

QUESTION: Nancy Pelosi is visiting Syria. The White House criticized her decision to go. I was wondering what you think of this. And it's my understanding that the Bush Administration tried to dissuade her from visiting Syria at this time, didn't think it would be appropriate.

MR. MCCORMACK: Right.

QUESTION: Can you speak to that?

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, we've -- you know, our message both to Republicans and Democrats alike who either have visited Syria in this recent period or intend to, as Speaker Pelosi does, has been consistent, it's been the same. In our view, it's not the right time to have those sort of high-profile visitors to Syria mostly for the simple fact that the Syrians, despite a number of different pleas and approaches from the United States as well as other countries, have refused to change their behavior vis-à-vis support for Palestinian rejectionist groups, for their support for -- their unhelpful stance with respect to Lebanon. And we don't think it would be appropriate for high-level visitors, even those from the Congress, to pay a visit to Syria right now.

A typical Syrian MO on this is to use these visits to tell the rest of the world and say, "Look, there's nothing wrong. We're having all these visitors come to Syria, coming to Damascus, there's no problem with our behavior," and they point to the visits as proof that there is no problem with their behavior and that they are not, in fact, isolated. So that's the simple reason why we have encouraged others as well as Speaker Pelosi not to travel.

That said, congressmen and representatives are going to make their own decisions about where they travel. And in this case, they made the decision to go forward. We are going to provide all the support that might normally be expected to be provided to a member of Congress traveling to a foreign country. We provided a briefing for Speaker Pelosi's staff and those traveling with her. So that's about -- that's really where we stand right now.

QUESTION: Will anyone from State be accompanying Speaker Pelosi?

MR. MCCORMACK: No.

It doesn't sound like the career diplomats at the State Department are too happy with the trip either...

BizzyBlog's Tom Blumer emails this:

I think it means the surge is working, and that they're going to tell the Syrians to "step it up, for cryin' out loud; you can't let US forces win."

They would have made an additional stop for the same purpose in Tehran if it weren't for the British hostage situation. That's okay; Assad will pass it on.

Well, I'm not sure that Pelosi is going to encourage the enemy, but her trip will be interpreted by our enemies as something being in their favor. Democrats still seem to view the Global War on Terror as a limited conflict with al Qaeda...it is bigger than that. It always has been. 9/11 was the trigger event that brought western civilization in to the conflict, but the Islamofascists have been fighting this war long before bin Laden was anybody.

Is Syria an Islamofascist country? I'd have to say, "Yes." Does that make Syria an enemy of this country? I think so... The first rule of international relations is that countries will do what is in their nation's best interest first and foremost at the time. When you are honest with yourself about what Syria's motives and goals are, you will see that they line up perfectly with Iran and the rest of the Islamofascists. You know, the guy who wat Israel wiped off the map while shouting "Death to America!" It's time we start taking those people seriously...they mean what they say and it is time we give them their due attention.

That is who Nancy Pelosi plans to visit...

3:00PM UPDATE: New SOB Alliance Member Liberally Conservative points out that Ohio Republican Congressman Hobson went along on Nancy trip...

US State Dept on British Hostages in Iran

From today's briefing received via email:

QUESTION: On this again. Is there a concern that the Iranians are trying to use this to draw the U.S. in?

MR. MCCORMACK: Draw us into?

QUESTION: Into whatever malevolent, nefarious schemes they --

MR. MCCORMACK: You know -- scheme they may have, right. You know, again, Matt, an answer to that really requires some insight into their thought processes. I think that it stands to reason that they would like to use it as a means of distracting the rest of the world from Iran's current set of problems: you know, the fact that they just were subject to a second Chapter 7 resolution as well as the international spotlight on a number of their behaviors over recent months. But I couldn't say definitively whether or not they want to draw us in or not, but we're stating quite clearly that we don't -- we reject any sort of linkage between this particular issue and any other.

QUESTION: Is it fair to say that any attempt to draw you in would be unsuccessful?

MR. MCCORMACK: We -- as I said, we're out of hand stating that there is no linkage between this as well as any other issue, and I think you're hearing the same thing from the Brits.

QUESTION: And not willing to -- not willing at all under any circumstances to allow this --

MR. MCCORMACK: Matt, we reject any linkage between the -- between this incident and anything else.

No, I wasn't at today's breifing...but the question is one that I would have asked. Notice how the State Department is essentially taking military action off the table...it is talk like that that allows the Irans the cover that they need to do the sorts of things that they do.

Mark's Remarks

The State Department has been a travesty since the post-George Marshall period. Instead of being part of the government, it thinks it supercedes the government. It is more interested in serving international whims than in protecting and advancing American interests. Now, before all the lefties begin saying I don't understand nuance, you are wrong. I have taken quite a few courses in international relations, but don't you think the Iranians have as well? Historically, all the nations of Islam have understood is strength and power. Doing the diplomatic tongue wagging does nothing but make them believe we are all bluster and no boom.