Our government isn’t serious about defending the United States and its interests. In fact‚ it has fallen woefully short in carrying out this sacred obligation. I know this sounds harsh‚ but as we’ll see‚ the government’s own numbers prove the point. That our military is weak is not an indictment of the men and women who have volunteered to serve. It is an indictment of a system largely defined by the government and those elected to high office. That includes senior military officers whose primary obligation should be to ensure that our men and women have what they need to win in war—which is‚ after all‚ the primary purpose of our military. Yes‚ many people will say the purpose of a strong military is to deter war‚ but deterrence derives from the belief of the enemy that they would be defeated in battle. So if our military is at great risk of not being able to win … well‚ it doesn’t have much deterrent value. Our potential enemies can see this; the American public‚ not so much. At present‚ the U.S. military is roughly half the size it needs to be. Moreover‚ most of its primary equipment (planes‚ ships‚ tanks‚ etc.) is 30 to 40 years old. Soldiers‚ sailors‚ airmen‚ Marines‚ and guardsmen are training only a fraction of what they should to be competent in battle. Yet senior leaders in the Pentagon‚ White House spokespersons‚ and even members of Congress who have access to the facts (and should know better) continue to say that we have the best military in the world‚ as if saying so makes it so. It does not. Let’s look at the numbers‚ using references from near the end of the Cold War‚ when the U.S. last confronted a major competitor on a global stage. Recall that until the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s‚ the U.S. maintained forces able to compete with the Soviets in many regions at once‚ primarily in Europe (in land and air) but also across the seas where naval power was essential. Back then‚ Washington had to focus only on one capital and the ambitions of one authoritarian regime. Regardless of where military actions occurred‚ the signals reverberated to Moscow. Today‚ the U.S. must account for regimes in Moscow‚ Beijing‚ Tehran‚ and Pyongyang‚ and a host of smaller powers and terrorist regimes that challenge U.S. interests. They have different objectives and possess different cultures‚ values‚ and networks. Just because the U.S. acts in the Middle East to thwart Iran doesn’t mean that China alters its activities vis-à-vis Taiwan or its push on territorial claims in the South China Sea‚ or that Russia lessens its assault of Europe or attempts to divide NATO. They pose different threats to the U.S. in different ways. What they have in common is the objective of displacing the United States as a global power and reducing America’s ability to shape the future in ways that benefit Americans. To compete on a global stage against a multitude of adversaries who collaborate against the U.S.‚ at least opportunistically‚ America must possess military power commensurate with the realities of the current world‚ not one that is imagined years from now nor held in fond memory. Consider the following: In the late 1980s‚ the Navy possessed nearly 600 ships‚ keeping approximately 100 at sea on any given day. Today‚ it has 292 yet maintains the same number deployed‚ thus working both ships and crew twice as much. It is not uncommon for ships to be 15% undermanned. In 1989‚ the Army had 770‚000 soldiers in its active component. Today‚ it has 452‚000‚ shrinking by 33‚000 last year alone. By the end of this year‚ it will shrink further‚ to 445‚000. Since 2011‚ the Army has lost 121‚000 troops‚ 22% of its force. The service is the smallest it has been since the 1930s. Most of its major weapons were purchased in the 1980s. During the Cold War‚ the average Air Force pilot flew more than 200 hours a year and often exceeded 300 hours. Our pilots made fun of their Soviet counterparts for flying half that number. Today‚ the average Air Force pilot flies fewer than 130 hours‚ while their Chinese competitors fly 200-plus. The average age of an Air Force fighter is 30‚ older than the pilots flying the aircraft. The average age of the majority of refueling aircraft is 60 years—as old (or older) than the parents of the pilots flying them. Fourteen years ago‚ America committed to modernizing its portfolio of nuclear weapons. Since then‚ our nuclear enterprise hasn’t produced a single new weapon. Meanwhile‚ China has produced 100 nuclear missiles just the past year and is on track to quadruple its inventory by 2030. Iran is near-nuclear‚ having amassed enough uranium enriched to 60% to make a half-dozen warheads in 30 days if it committed to push the enrichment process to 90%‚ which it is capable of doing. Iran already possesses the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the Middle East and is placing satellites in orbit to refine militarily relevant technologies. Although Russia has taken a beating in its war against Ukraine‚ it has moved to a wartime economy and is making more missiles and tanks now than before it invaded Ukraine. New equipment is rapidly replacing the old Soviet inventory that Russia has consumed or lost in the past two years. And the soldiers who have survived the Russia-Ukraine war to this point are battle-hardened; U.S. forces last saw major combat when in Iraq‚ nearly 20 years ago. Perhaps things wouldn’t be so worrisome if we could count on strong‚ reliable allies. Unfortunately‚ their story is worse. During the Cold War‚ West Germany had 5‚000 main battle tanks. Today‚ it has 300 Leopard IIs‚ of which fewer than 100 are considered operational. But that’s better than in 2021‚ when only 13 were available for deployment. Germany’s defense minister has reported that the country won’t be able to field a ready division until 2025. Its military infrastructure is so decayed that it will take 300 billion euros (about $329 billion) and 50 years to modernize. In the United Kingdom‚ the army is the smallest since 1710 and leaders have said they would struggle to put a single division in the field. Britain’s military services combined (160‚000 service members) are smaller than the U.S. Marine Corps at 174‚000. The Royal Navy possesses a mere 20 surface combatants. France only has 19 large surface warships. In the days since the Cold War‚ the number of France’s tanks has dropped from 1‚349 to 222 and the number of fighter aircraft from 686 to 254. A senior defense leader has questioned whether the French military could operate longer than four days in high-intensity combat. Japan‚ a major U.S. ally in the Pacific‚ reportedly has such a limited inventory of munitions that its ships and aircraft could sortie only three times before having nothing more to shoot. Back at home‚ 3 out of 4 young Americans are ineligible for military service‚ without a waiver‚ due to physical or mental health issues‚ obesity‚ criminal records‚ or substance abuse. The recruiting environment is so bad that the Navy has increased the maximum age for new enlistees and has begun accepting enlistees in the lowest category of aptitude testing. In the Army‚ all captains are now automatically promoted to major. In the Air Force‚ all officers in flight school graduate‚ with less than one-quarter of 1% failing due to lack of demonstrated proficiency. Many Americans perceive the military as more interested in pushing social policy agenda programs than in ensuring that our forces are able to win in combat. Clearly‚ we have a problem. All of this is captured in gory detail in The Heritage Foundation’s recently released 2024 Index of U.S. Military Strength. The point of the index is twofold: to inform Americans about the state of their military and to prompt Congress and the Biden administration to do something about correcting the multitude of problems in our country’s ability to defend itself and its interests in a very dangerous world that seems to be spiraling out of control. Regular citizens can see to their needs for employment‚ food‚ medical care‚ personal protection‚ and spiritual fulfillment. They help each other in times of distress and routinely come together to celebrate successes in life. But they cannot defend the country at the individual or community level. That responsibility lies with the federal government‚ which is failing at the task. This must change‚ and Americans should demand it. Waiting until the next crisis is upon us will be too late. This commentary originally was published by The National Interest Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post Our Military Is Weak. That Should Scare You. appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The Department of Defense agency that runs schools for military children approved a contract worth up to nearly $2 million for extensive diversity‚ equity‚ and inclusion programming and consultations‚ according to a copy of the contract obtained exclusively by the Daily Caller News Foundation from the Functional Government Initiative. The Department of Defense Education Activity chose BCT Partners‚ a management consulting firm focused on “equity‚” to create an “action plan” for the agency’s DEI program in 2021‚ noting that “DoDEA has never had a systemic contract for this type of work‚” the document shows. Among a sweeping list of requirements‚ the contract includes a comprehensive assessment of DEI policies across DoDEA‚ ongoing consulting‚ program development‚ and professional learning for senior leadership‚ administrators‚ and even students. “DoDEA schools’ demographics reflect those of the U.S. military it serves. The DoDEA senior leadership and [headquarters] staff demographics are not identical to our schools’ demographics‚” the section of the contract describing performance objectives states. The contract‚ signed in November 2021‚ is described as “an indefinite-quantity contract” and included the possibility for optional renewals until May 2028. DoDEA has paid more than $600‚000 to date‚ according to open source federal award data. However‚ it has the potential to add over $1.2 million before the contract ends for a maximum of $1‚987‚347 over the one base year and four possible add-on years. “DoDEA recognizes that successful Diversity‚ Equity‚ and Inclusion (DEI) strategic implementation requires (1) well-informed leadership teams that champion DEI initiatives‚ (2) engaged leaders‚ managers‚ supervisors‚ and administrators that participate on diversity councils‚ (3) strong instructional leadership in every school‚ (4) informed employees that value the impact of race‚ diversity‚ equality‚ and inclusion on DoDEA’s culture‚ and (5) integrated approaches to promote DEI principles in curriculum implementation‚ educator preparation‚ and professional learning‚” the section of the contract labeled “background” stated. “DEI focuses on race‚ equity‚ diversity and inclusion which simply means ‘fairness or justice in the way people are treated‚ especially when dealing with the seven protected classes of people‚'” the “background” stated. DoDEA served approximately 66‚000 students at 174 schools in the U.S. and at military bases around the world at the time the contract was written‚ according to the description. Over the next year‚ BCT Partners would have provided a “DEI Evaluation Assessment Report” of survey data DoDEA had already compiled. The assessment would include identifying supposed “inequities‚ barriers and gaps” that prevent DoDEA from implementing DEI principles throughout the agency‚ influencing everything from recruitment‚ retention‚ and promotion to teaching and learning practices. Another objective was to provide at least 75 annual “interactive expert DEI consultation services‚” running 90 minutes each‚ to 50 members of the senior executive service‚ other senior leadership‚ the DEI director‚ and members of 12 working groups. At the time‚ Kelisa Wing served as DEI director for the agency and is listed as a point of contact on the contract. The Pentagon reassigned Wing in March‚ citing routine personnel “restructuring” needs‚ although the move came after a social media post Wing made criticizing white people sparked controversy. BCT Partners would help draft DoDEA’s DEI Charter and Strategic Plan‚ provide ongoing professional support services‚ and guide the agency step-by-step through evaluating and inculcating DEI across the agency‚ the contract shows. The Pentagon has announced it will disband the DoDEA DEI unitThis news comes shortly after Rep Roy shed light on how American taxpayers were funding this divisive training led by a racist diversity chiefThis is just the beginning of draining the swamp! #ShrinkDCGrowAmerica pic.twitter.com/nanPNuKdhH— Rep. Chip Roy Press Office (@RepChipRoy) April 12‚ 2023 The contract also included a list of words and definitions related to DEI‚ including‚ “micro-aggression‚” “gaslighting‚” and three different definitions for the word “racism.” Anti-racism was defined in the contract as an “active and conscious effort to work against multidimensional aspects of racism.” It also included a definition for critical race theory explicitly based on the work of Kimberle Crenshaw‚ described as “a founding critical race theorist and law professor at UCLA and Columbia universities.” “Systematic racism‚” states this definition in the contract‚ “is part of the American life and challenges the beliefs that allow it to flourish. It is an approach to grappling with a history of white supremacy that rejects the belief that what is in the past is in the past and that the laws and systems that flow from that past are detached from it. It attends not only to laws transformative role which is often celebrated but also to its role in establishing the very rights and privileges that legal reform was set to dismantle.” Two contract modifications were also awarded‚ one in June 2022 and another in April 2023‚ increasing the funding ceiling for the contractor. The specific increase was redacted. The contract was awarded in accordance with President Joe Biden’s executive order aimed at promoting race-conscious policies and training throughout the federal government‚ according to the contract. In 2021‚ DoDEA rolled out a four-year plan to implant DEI in areas of recruitment and retention‚ promotion and development‚ and teaching and learning; established the DEI Headquarters team and launched DEI working groups at headquarters and in its each of its eight school districts‚ according to the Department of Defense’s 2022 Equity Action Plan. DoDEA and BCT Partners did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment. “CRT is a controversial academic theory that asserts racial inequality is ongoing and endemic in America‚ rooted in legal systems‚ policies‚ economic markets‚ and education. Critics argue it is fundamentally at odds with the military’s meritocratic values. Nevertheless‚ CRT has found a way into the U.S. defense establishment‚” the Functional Government Initiative told the Daily Caller News Foundation in a statement. Originally published by the Daily Caller News Foundation Have an opinion about this article? To sound off‚ please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the URL or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state. The post Internal Documents Shed Light on Biden Administration’s Plan to Impose DEI on Pentagon-Run Schools appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Established in the 1770s‚ the United States Army is one of the eight branches of the U.S. uniformed services. The mission of the U.S. Army is “to fight and win our Nation’s wars‚ by providing prompt‚ sustained land dominance‚ across the full range of military operations and the spectrum of conflict‚ in support of combatant commanders.” Here are some unique facts about the U.S. Source

This could help recovery.

Will Georgia Children Be Protected From Adult Groomers?

In the heart of Milwaukee‚ a spirited 16-year-old Shih Tzu known for his love of adventure found himself at the center of an unexpected journey. His human‚ Jenny Hazard‚ reminisces about his younger days as a “runner‚” a trait that foreshadowed the evening’s events. As it turns out‚ Bear isn’t done with his adventuring just... The post Woman searching for her missing senior dog finds him “hamming it up” at a local bar appeared first on Animal Channel.

The post 30 Pics of animals so unbelievably wholesome our hearts are about to burst appeared first on Animal Channel.

The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) and a George Soros-funded organization are worried about a supposed lack of election censorship. A Feb. 10 PBS segment hysterically asked‚ “Can social media companies safeguard the 2024 election against misinformation?” To emphasize the supposed gravity of an alleged lack of election-interfering censorship‚ PBS cited the woke‚ conservative-hating Free Press‚ which also happens to have received multiple grants from Soros‚ the leftist billionaire and Democratic megadonor. PBS also brought on former Facebook Director of Public Policy Katie Harbath. She called for government-tech censorship collusion and approvingly described election censorship spending from Communist Chinese government-tied TikTok. Host John Yang said at the beginning of the segment‚ “In December‚ an advocacy group called‚ ‘Free Press’ said Meta‚ YouTube and X have rolled back a total of 17 policies intended to protect against hate speech and misinformation. The group also said layoffs at the three companies make it harder to enforce the safeguards that remain.” Yang condemned social media platforms’ concessions to free speech but also cited the Free Press‚ a demonstrably left-wing advocacy group‚ to do so. He later whined that Meta and Google allow ads questioning the honesty of the 2020 election. Blogs on Free Press’s website include such blatantly biased pieces as‚ “The Media Must Atone for Enabling Trump's Fascism.” The website of Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) shows four grants awarded to Free Press between 2017 and 2021‚ for a total of two million dollars. Free Press wasn’t the only biased source for the segment‚ though. Harbath complimented platforms that‚ according to her‚ are trying to keep elections “safe” from free speech. “Some‚ such as TikTok have invested a lot into this. In a recent hearing‚ their CEO [Shou Zi Chew] mentioned they're going to invest 2 billion into trust and safety‚” Harbath stated‚ before mentioning the billions Meta spent on election interference. Harbath confessed that Big Tech can “actually end up taking down more legitimate speech than probably what many people would want.” That didn’t prevent her from demanding more investment in Big Tech meddling in elections worldwide. She even urged tech-government collusion‚ especially in light of artificial intelligence. “But we absolutely need the government‚ too‚” the former Facebook executive asserted. A Media Research Center poll found in November 2020 that 17 percent of then-presidential candidate Joe Biden’s voters would not have voted for him had they known the scandals censored by Big Tech and the legacy media. Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency on AI‚ clarity on so-called hate speech and an equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us using CensorTrack’s contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

A leftist legal group heavily funded by leftist billionaire George Soros is trying to convince a federal appellate court that the First Amendment right to free speech doesn’t necessarily protect … free speech. The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (LCCRUL) actually argued that if the speech in question could be considered to constitute the murky concept of “harmful election disinformation‚” First Amendment protections should be tossed to the curb. The group broke down its dystopian stance in a press release summarizing the sentiment of an amicus brief it filed with the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals for the ongoing United States v. Douglass Mackey case. Soros injected LCCRUL with at least $10‚729‚441 between 2016 and 2021 alone.  The LCCRUL’s extensive monetary connections to Soros are especially concerning given the latter’s deep investment into undercutting free speech online writ large. MRC Free Speech America released a study in September 2023 uncovering how Soros had funneled over $14.8 million to at least 50 leftist anti-free speech groups attempting to quash so-called “disinformation” online and elsewhere between 2017-2021. LCCRUL based its argument on the initial outcome of the Mackey case‚ which RealClearInvestigations Editor-at-Large Benjamin Weingarten referred to as a “straight-out-of-the-Soviet Union case.” The defendant — a Twitter troll — was sentenced to prison by a U.S. District Court judge for posting an anti-Hillary Clinton meme on his Twitter account in 2016. “Avoid the line. Vote from home. Text ‘Hillary’ to 59925‚” the spoof ad read. The Second Circuit Court later stayed the initial prison sentence in favor of Mackey until after his appeal was adjudicated. The Soros-funded LCCRUL was clearly triggered. "[T]he First Amendment does not protect efforts to spread harmful election disinformation with the intention of disenfranchising” voters‚ the group whined in its press release. In essence‚ objectionable speech on elections must be verboten‚ even if it’s a meme!  The LCCRUL even spun race into its argument by assuming that if the Court doesn’t adopt its dystopian anti-free speech view‚ minority voters will be too stupid to think for themselves. “[I]f the court provides protection to the kind of conduct at issue in Mackey‚ it has the potential to threaten the exercise of the right to vote by populations targeted by such deceptions—often Black communities and other communities of color.” In another amicus brief to the Second Circuit opposing the dystopian position‚ attorneys Russell B. Balikian &; Cody M. Poplin pointed out that Congress has established no federal statute prohibiting false speech about elections: The First Amendment likely tolerates narrow and clearly defined bans on disseminating knowing lies regarding election procedures—that is‚ false statements of fact (not opinion‚ humor‚ parody‚ hyperbole‚ or the like) made with actual malice regarding the time or place of an election‚ or the procedures one must follow to lawfully cast a valid vote. But Congress has not enacted any federal law that clearly criminalizes such conduct‚ [emphasis added.] In fact‚ Balikian and Poplin argued‚ “the district court's broad reading of Section 241 [of 18 U.S.C. that led to Mackey’s jailing] brings the statute into conflict with the First Amendment and risks chilling protected political speech.” The statute‚ as America First Legal pointed out in a press release on a separate brief it filed in support of Mackey‚ is “generally referred to as the Ku Klux Klan Act.” Specifically‚ said AFL‚ “Speech about elections and political rivals – even if misleading or inaccurate‚ and especially satirical speech – is as old as democracy itself‚ yet no one ever thought Section 241 made that a crime." In its press release‚ AFL noted that it was “telling that the government has cited no cases where section 241 has been applied to deceptive speech on any topic.” The LCCRUL proceeded to racialize the case in its rant by diminishing minority voters’ capabilities to determine facts for themselves. “There continue to be significant developments in the technologies that allow people to create misleading and harmful election disinformation and deter marginalized communities from exercising their voting rights. Our democracy cannot afford to let this trend continue unchecked‚” propagandized LCCRUL senior counsel Marc Epstein in the press release. Free speech be damned! Conservatives are under attack. Contact your representatives and demand that Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment while providing transparency‚ clarity on so-called hate speech and equal footing for conservatives. If you have been censored‚ contact us at the Media Research Center contact form‚ and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

This week‚ I tried out the Apple Vision Pro. That’s the device you’ve been seeing on the news: the bulky‚ unwieldy headgear; the bizarre images of people attempting to manipulate the air in front of them; even some people driving while looking like Geordi La Forge from “Star Trek.” It’s extraordinary. As a piece of technology‚ I’ve never seen anything like it. It takes the apps on your phone and places them in the world around you: you can pin them in various rooms in your home. This essentially makes television extraneous; it allows you to post lists of groceries on your refrigerator; it allows you to speak with people in real-time while navigating the real world. The graphics are in the early stages‚ but they’re just as mind-boggling: one app called Encounter Dinosaurs introduces you into a prehistoric landscape‚ complete with dinosaurs. Remember how terrible movie 3D is? This is nothing like that. It’s totally immersive‚ and reacts to you. So‚ what does this mean? On a raw level‚ it means that entertainment like movies and gaming will be leagues better than anything now available. You’ll be fighting with a lightsaber like Luke Skywalker in “Star Wars”; you’ll be surfing waves along with Kelly Slater. You’ll also be in landscapes far from your office or cubicle — you can already seat yourself in the midst of a nature landscape near Mount Hood‚ complete with soundscapes and full 360-degree view. But as the technology progresses‚ it means something far more dangerous: the complete transformation of human relations. Why? Because right now‚ everyone knows that you’re engaging in a mixed reality; after all‚ you look like an idiot wearing around scuba gear in broad daylight. But presumably‚ the technology will get smaller and less obtrusive. It’s not hard to foresee a future when people will have all the same capabilities and more‚ but projected into contact-lens type technologies. And when that happens‚ everything changes. Imagine walking around‚ being able to access answers to any question by referring to ChatGPT — without anyone knowing you’re doing so. Every conversation becomes a supplemented conversation. Every job interview becomes a test of AI rather than a test of the human being. Every date becomes a date between two AI prompts. Or imagine a shared reality in which everyone wearing the technology sees the filters projected by others — so that normal human appearance disappears‚ corrected by the technology toward the unobtainable ideal. Imagine an even more dystopian world in which Apple or another major corporation controls what you see and hear by barring certain content or mandating certain language. The world of supplemented reality can open new vistas. But it can also become jet fuel for human frailty and sin‚ the same way smartphones have been. Imagine children growing up with such technology‚ removed from the normal consequences of life‚ their thinking atrophied by AI superpower‚ never having experienced the difficulty and beauty of normal human relationships. We are opening a can of worms here. And that can of worms can’t be closed. All of which means that even as our society throws away classical virtue‚ nothing is more necessary than its rapid reinstitution. If we advance technology and give people new capacities while ignoring the natural limitations of human beings‚ we are likely to meet with the ugly consequences of unknown unknowns.