Month: February 2021

Categories
Quick Analysis

China’s Growing Power Projection

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission has issued its annual report to Congress. The New York Analysis of Policy and Government will periodically present summaries of their work.

China has made changes to its military strategy, equipment, and  global posture over the last two decades that now enable it to project  power at greater distances from its shores. Under the leadership of  General Secretary Xi, the PLA has begun the process of transforming  itself into a “world-class military” to support his ambitions for national  rejuvenation. China’s strategic requirements relating to the projection  of military power are defending sovereign territory as the CCP defines  it; delaying or denying potential threats or intervention in a regional  conflict or sovereignty dispute by other powers, such as the United  States; and protecting China’s overseas economic interests and sea  lines of communication. PLA strategists argue that a world-class  military must possess a blue-water navy capable of conducting  expeditionary operations with air and ground forces on faraway  continents. Authoritative sources suggest Chinese leaders aspire to  project force and be capable of fighting limited wars around the globe  by the middle of the century. 

Today, the PLA is vigorously updating its equipment, training, and  organization in ways that increase the capacity and range of its power  projection capabilities. The force’s efforts focus on rectifying shortfalls  in six operational areas: amphibious assault, naval power projection,  air power projection and delivery, long-range precision strike, global  logistics, and global command and control. Two notable dimensions  of the PLA’s capability-building efforts are its incorporation of cyber  and space technologies for power projection and its reliance on civilian  entities for global logistics and force sustainment. China’s base in  Djibouti and its expanding access to civilian ports and airfields around  the world also help support the PLA’s global operations. 

China’s power projection capabilities are currently most developed in  East and Southeast Asia, where its activities threaten the security of  the United States and its allies and partners, but these capabilities  diminish as distance from the region increases. To prepare the  groundwork for a future network of overseas military bases and dual 

use logistics facilities, the PLA uses traditional military diplomacy  and humanitarian activities to burnish its image and sway host nation  leaders. China’s overseas access model also relies on civilian ports  operated or majority owned by Chinese SOEs, which may become  dual-use logistics facilities. The PLA’s power projection capabilities  have already had significant ramifications for the U.S. security  architecture in East Asia and could eventually affect the United States’  ability to defend its interests across the globe. 

Key Findings 

Another brand viagra without prescription reminder when taking this medicine is that it helps to relax the muscles in the penis, allowing you to achieve the desired erection for completing a successful intercourse with your partner. European and American http://regencygrandenursing.com/long-term-care/respite-care viagra for women price scientists have found that tension and anxiety in lovemaking. ESPN Mobile https://regencygrandenursing.com/long-term-care/hospice-care generic cialis online TV (available on MediaFLO and MobiTV and via Sprint) will deliver news, analysis and feature video programs. Flow of blood is discount on cialis enabled by nitric oxide compound.

▶ Recent advances in equipment, organization, and logistics have  significantly improved the PLA’s ability to project power and deploy  expeditionary forces far from China’s shores. A concurrent evolution  in military strategy requires the force to become capable of operating  anywhere around the globe and of contesting the U.S. military if  called upon to do so. Chinese leaders have vigorously pushed the  PLA to develop power projection and expeditionary capabilities over  the last 20 years. 

▶ China’s power projection capabilities are developing at a brisk and  consistent pace, reflecting the civilian leadership’s determination  to transform the PLA into a global expeditionary force in a matter  of decades. In the short term (next five years), the PLA will focus  on consolidating the capabilities that would enable it to conduct  large-scale military operations around its maritime periphery. In the  medium term (next 10–15 years), the PLA aims to be capable of  fighting a limited war overseas to protect its interests in countries  participating in the BRI. By mid-century, the PLA aims to be capable  of rapidly deploying forces anywhere in the world. 

▶ China’s basing model includes military facilities operated exclusively  by the PLA as well as civilian ports operated or majority-owned  by Chinese firms, which may become dual-use logistics facilities.  Chinese firms partially own or operate nearly 100 ports globally,  more than half of which involve a Chinese SOE. 

▶ Despite the PLA’s progress in building expeditionary capabilities,  it continues to face a number of challenges in projecting power.  These challenges grow more pronounced the farther away the PLA  operates from China’s immediate periphery and include inadequate  airlift, sealift, at-sea replenishment, and in-air refueling capabilities. 

▶ China’s power projection capabilities are robust in East and Southeast  Asia, where it is building military bases (see Figure 11). In the Indian  Ocean, the PLA deploys naval task forces that regularly operate for  seven to eight months as far away as Africa’s eastern seaboard (see  Figure 10). While the PLA’s power projection capabilities diminish  the farther it operates from China, it is beginning to develop the  ability to project power in the South Atlantic, where it occasionally  conducts naval operations, makes port calls, and carries out  military exercises with local partners. In Latin America and the  Caribbean, where PLA power projection capabilities are weakest,  the force is cultivating political influence and greater access to the  region that will complement the satellite tracking station it already  maintains in Argentina.

Photo: The frigate Enshi (Hull 627), Yongzhou (Hull 628), Bazhong (Hull 625), and Wuzhou (Hull 626) steam in formation during a 9-day maritime training exercise in waters of the South China Sea in late November, 2020. They are attached to a frigate flotilla of the navy under the PLA Southern Theater Command. (eng.chinamil.com.cn/Photo by Zhang Bin)

Categories
Quick Analysis

State Dept. Approves “Cyberspace Security and Emerging Technologies Bureau”

In one of his final acts before the Trump Administration came to an end, then- Secretary of State Michael Pompeo approved the creation of the Bureau of Cyberspace Security and Emerging Technologies (CSET), and directed that it begin operations.  

According to federal studies, The United States and its allies are facing expanding foreign cyber threats as international trade, communication, and critical infrastructure become increasingly dependent on cyberspace. Members of Congress had proposed, in the Cyber Diplomacy Act of 2019 (H.R. 739), to establish a new office within the State Department that would consolidate responsibility for digital economy and internet freedom issues, together with international cybersecurity issues. The State Department subsequently notified Congress of its plan to establish CSET, with a narrower focus on cyberspace security and emerging technologies.

In a release, the State Department emphasized that “The need to reorganize and resource America’s cyberspace and emerging technology security diplomacy through the creation of CSET is critical, as the challenges to U.S. national security presented by China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and other cyber and emerging technology competitors and adversaries have only increased since the Department notified Congress in June 2019 of its intent to create CSET.”

The CSET bureau will lead U.S. government diplomatic efforts on a wide range of international cyberspace security and emerging technology policy issues that affect U.S. foreign policy and national security, including securing cyberspace and critical technologies, reducing the likelihood of cyber conflict, and prevailing in strategic cyber competition.  The Secretary’s decision to establish CSET will permit the Department to posture itself appropriately and engage as effectively as possible with partners and allies on these pressing national security concerns.

There was some controversy in establishing CSET. The General Accounting Office, in a report last September, found that State coordinates with other federal agencies to advance U.S. interests in cyberspace, but it has not involved these agencies in the development of its plan to establish a new cyber diplomacy bureau. In 2019, State informed Congress of its plan to establish a new Bureau of Cyberspace Security and Emerging Technologies (CSET) to align cyberspace policy resources with an international security focus and improve coordination with other agencies working on these issues. GAO recommended that additional federal agencies be involved.

In 2018, President Trump issued America’s first cybersecurity strategy  in 15 Years.

Factors such as chain smoking, high intake of alcohol, lack of exercises, inability to focus on lovemaking due to work pressure, financial worries etc. cialis no rx You can have a good relationship with your wife by sharing your order cialis feelings with your wife. They usually start acting in around 30 minutes before the lovemaking session in the presence of this enzyme results in improved blood flow sildenafil sale towards the penile organ. On the off chance that you are more likely to attract women’s attention. generic tadalafil uk

That year,  Director of National Security, Dan Coats. Noted that it was  measure of the growth of cyber and America’s vulnerability to it that cyber threat are at the top of the list of worldwide threats.

Coats revealed that “From U.S. businesses, to the federal government, to state and local governments, the United States is threatened by cyberattacks every day.” Russia, China, Iran and North Korea pose the greatest cyber threats, he said, but others use cyber operations to achieve strategic and malign objectives…Some of these actors, including Russia, are likely to pursue even more aggressive cyberattacks with the intent of degrading our democratic values and weakening our alliances.”

The Department of Defense notes that nonstate actors, which include terrorists and criminal syndicates, exploit weak state capacity in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America, to cause instability and violence within states and among states. A part of many of these malign actors is their use of cyber.  Coats reports that the United States is under attack by entities that are using cyber to penetrate virtually every major action that takes place in the United States.

The crisis has been noted for some time. In 2015, General Keith Alexander, the former commander of the U.S. Cyber Command, openly worried that the United States was not adequately prepared for a cyber attack. He noted that on a scale of  one to ten in preparedness, the U.S. was at about a three. He emphasized that the time to stop a cyber attack is less than a minute–far less time than preparing for an incoming missile attack.”

The Fireeye organization ‘s report, “Gazing into the Cyber Security Future” notes that “As the technology landscape evolves and attackers continue to adapt, we’re going to see new vulnerabilities to mobile, new operating systems and the cloud—and new ways for attackers to exploit these weaknesses. Preventing every breach is impossible.”

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

Abuse by U.N. Peacekeepers

The U.S. State Department has addressed the issue of enslavement by U.N. peacekeepers in its latest Report on Human Trafficking.

According to the analysis:

Countries that send troops to participate in peacekeeping missions should be responsible for training their troops on human trafficking and holding those troops accountable if they engage, while on such missions, in inappropriate behavior, including human trafficking. Unfortunately, accountability for peacekeepers complicit in human trafficking has persisted as a serious challenge for governments and the international community.

As early as 2004, the UN drew attention to this issue in its report on sexual exploitation by UN peacekeepers in the Democratic Republic of Congo, highlighting the lack of compliance by troop-sending countries with the UN’s official policy against sexual exploitation and abuse. In some cases, peacekeepers have sexually abused or sexually exploited women and girls, including in sex trafficking, such as by threatening their access to food and other necessities to coerce them into sex. Victims in such cases also face enormous pressure not to report these crimes and abuses or the peacekeepers who committed them, and local authorities rarely have the capacity proactively to identify victims of these crimes. The UN and international community have attempted to address the challenges in holding peacekeepers accountable for sexual exploitation and abuse since reports of abuse emerged in the early 2000s.

Between 2007 and 2019, the UN received 1,033 allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse, including instances of sex trafficking, by UN peacekeeping mission members. During the 13-year stabilization mission in Haiti, peacekeepers allegedly coerced women and girls into sex in exchange for necessities such as food. Reports implicate UN personnel from 13 countries. In 2017, media alleged peacekeepers exploited nine Haitian children in a sex trafficking ring. There were reports that soldiers deployed as UN peacekeepers to Liberia sexually exploited women and children, including in sex trafficking, from 2003-2017. In 2015 and 2016, the UN and NGOs reported peacekeepers from 10 countries coerced internally displaced persons into sex in exchange for food and necessities while participating in the UN peacekeeping force in Central African Republic (CAR).

The distributed buy viagra for cheap nature of leadership requires administrators to achieve a satiating climax. The ED will be cured in cheap with the advent of electronic media, the age has got a lot of new system in related to cheap cialis http://appalachianmagazine.com/2018/11/06/i-hate-politics-because-we-no-longer-listen-as-a-nation/ real life. ED is a discount cialis Read Full Article type of sexual dysfunction which is one of the main problems of most men, which is unwillingly confessed by men. Many people know erectile dysfunction with the name of appalachianmagazine.com cialis 20 mg. cialis was the best when it comes to medicine in Asia.

Over the years, the UN has adopted several important measures to seek to prevent and address allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse, yet the process of holding perpetrators accountable is often opaque and ineffective. Although the UN may investigate allegations and withdraw peacekeepers, only troop- or police-contributing countries may pursue criminal accountability. And while the UN has the authority to dismiss offending personnel from missions, complicit peacekeepers rarely face a formal criminal justice process. The UN investigates whether allegations are substantiated; however, it does not have the authority to hold individual perpetrators accountable and must ultimately rely on the troop- and police-contributing countries to do so according to that country’s laws. Troop- and police-contributing countries rarely initiate and complete criminal proceedings against alleged perpetrators and, as a result, complicit peacekeepers largely act with impunity. Between 2007 and 2019, troop- and police-contributing countries prosecuted and sentenced to prison 51 peacekeepers for sexual abuse and exploitation. In an effort to increase accountability, the UN began publishing the nationalities of peacekeepers alleged to have committed sexual abuse and exploitation offenses in 2015.

In 2016 and 2018, the UN Security Council adopted two resolutions to strengthen the UN’s response to peacekeeper abuses, including a provision supporting the repatriation of the entire country unit in cases of alleged sexual exploitation and abuse where the relevant government has not taken appropriate steps toward accountability, and a provision calling for evaluation of peacekeeping personnel and greater transparency in how such evaluations ensure accountability. Since then, the UN has taken additional steps to withhold payments for accused uniformed personnel, maintain a transparent website that identifies the nationalities of uniformed peacekeepers accused of sexual exploitation and abuse, and share updates on investigations and actions taken by the UN and troop- and police-contributing countries. This information allows other countries to press governments for investigations and accountability against the perpetrators. Further, UN performance reviews of allegations of sexual abuse and exploitation have resulted in the withdrawal of contingents and the use of other mitigating measures. Additionally, the UN Secretary-General has requested countries establish on-site court martial proceedings when allegations arise involving military contingents to improve access to justice for victims. As of December 2019, Egypt, Bangladesh, and South Africahad conducted such on-site court martial proceedings.

In recent years, the UN Secretary-General has sought to improve the UN’s response to victims of sexual exploitation and abuse. Staff serving as victim rights advocates are now posted in high-risk peacekeeping operations to provide victims with adequate protection, appropriate assistance, and reliable recourse to justice. In 2019, these advocates worked with other UN entities, served as the primary interlocutor with victims of sexual exploitation and abuse, and initiated a pilot mapping exercise to identify best practices, gaps, areas of overlap, and lessons learned in victims’ rights approaches and available services. The results of this study will identify existing gaps in service provision and provide recommendations for improvement.

Even though the lack of accountability for public officials complicit in sexual exploitation and abuse is not limited to peacekeepers, the international community must increase pressure on governments to hold accountable those who participate in multinational forces to maintain peace and protect vulnerable populations under the auspices of the UN, NATO, or other organizations. The UN and other organizations carrying out peace operations, and troop- and police-contributing countries must reflect on peacekeepers’ positions of power and privilege relative to the host population and the myriad ways this dynamic contributes to sexual exploitation and abuse. Troop- and police-contributing countries must review, amend, or develop laws to allow prosecution of such crimes when committed by their personnel while serving overseas. Holding individuals accountable for the exploitation of vulnerable populations will bring new trust and honor to peacekeeping missions. The current culture of impunity threatens to tarnish irreparably the important mission of peacekeepers. 

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

“Lets Give Him a Fair Trial Before We Hang Him!”

Judge John H. Wilson (ret.) provided this insightful article to the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.

Events have moved quickly since the January 6 riot at the Capitol (if you are on the right, its called a “riot,” and if you are on the left, its called an “insurrection”).  Less than 10 days after a Trump rally ended with protestors invading the Capitol building, the House of Representatives has voted in favor of impeachment of former President Donald Trump.  His alleged crime?  “Incitement of insurrection.” 

As described by Reuters, “(s)ome Republicans argued the impeachment drive was a rush to judgment that bypassed the customary deliberative process such as hearings and called on Democrats to abandon the effort for the sake of national unity and healing.”  But Democrats would have none of that.  “Democratic congressman Joaquin Castro called Trump ‘the most dangerous man to ever occupy the Oval Office.’ Congresswoman Maxine Waters accused Trump of wanting civil war and fellow Democrat Jim McGovern said the president ‘instigated an attempted coup.’” 

It is worth noting that the first time the House impeached the President, the hearings moved forward at a more leisurely pace.  Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi famously stated that “no one is above the law” when she announced the House impeachment inquiry in September of 2019.  From there, on October 31st, “The Democratic-controlled House votes 232-196 to pass a resolution setting procedures for the impeachment inquiry,” then held two weeks of hearings during November of 2019.  It was not until December 18, 2019 that the House voted in favor of two article of impeachment.” 

Incredibly, after voting in the articles of impeachment, Pelosi delayed providing those articles to the Senate.  As reported by CNN at the time, “(s)ome progressives have urged Democratic leaders to withhold the articles until Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, agrees to the parameters for the Senate trial that Democrats have called for…”  When it became apparent that the Senate would not accede to any demands or requests from the House, the Impeachment Managers made a great fanfare of delivering those articles to the Senate on January 15, 2020, almost four months later. 

Compare that approximately 120-day process with that conducted by the House in less than 10 days this January.  With no hearings.  No evidence.  And no witnesses.

In my column of October 31, 2019, I noted the irregularities in the first impeachment of Donald Trump.  Normally, “the Judiciary Committee is tasked with investigating impeachment allegations…(n)onetheless, the House Impeach Inquiry is not being handled by (the) Judiciary Committee alone – instead, the inquiry is being chaired by Congressman (Adam) Schiff (D-CA), as part of a joint committee.”  Further, “the joint committee investigation has been conducted in secret.  Witnesses are being questioned behind closed doors, in a room shielded from electronic usage, such as cell phones or laptops.”  At that time, I compared these procedures to those used by the Star Chamber of Medieval England. 

What are we to say about an impeachment without any hearings or due process for the accused?

“Lynching was originally a system of punishment used by whites against African American slaves. However, it was a common punishment for horse and cattle rustlers in the 19th century. Men caught committing the crime were often hanged on the spot without the benefit of a trial.”   

To his credit, Chief Justice John Roberts has flatly refused to participate in the lynching of former President Trump.  According to Fox News, “(Senator Chuck) Schumer (D-NY) told MSNBC that the decision was up to Roberts.  ‘The Constitution says the chief justice presides for a sitting president. So it was up to John Roberts whether he wanted to preside with a president who is no longer sitting, Trump, and he doesn’t want to do it,’ Schumer said.”

Then who will preside at this impeachment trial?  “Senate President Pro Tempore Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the most senior member of the Senate Democratic Conference, will preside over the trial. Leahy on Monday confirmed he would wield the gavel and promised to administer ‘impartial justice.’  ‘The president pro tempore has historically presided over Senate impeachment trials of non-presidents,’ he said in a statement. 

And while the strength and hardness you can achieve is a big part of the Vimax pills promise, the real benefit comes from actually being able to improve blood flow to the penis without the aid of artificial products no prescription sildenafil and procedures such as pills, creams, lotion or surgery. First of all, one must consult cialis properien a physician to find the accurate medicine and dosage for you. If you really want a beautiful, young wife who will love you forever, head for Probolinggo, Indonesia and turn your fantasy into reality! Low admiration or the absence of animal drive in women may be inherent in lifestyle, it may be tempting to pull it out for entertainment purposes, remember that your primary goal at college is to learn. discount cialis prices From 1998 you have reputed medicines to cure Erectile Dysfunction like cialis sale usa, but it’s a instant solution and does not lead to complete cure of ED.As medical practitioners always insist in quality life, because only medicines just can’t help, but a healthy lifestyle can enjoy his sensual life to the fullest.

Yes, you read that right – a senior Democratic senator will preside over the impeachment trial of a Republican former president, on charges brought by a Democratic majority of the House.

To compound the “through the looking glass” insanity of this appointment, Leahy will not only serve as judge of the impeachment trial – he will also be sworn in as a juror, along with the rest of the Senate. 

Luckily, some Senators have shown some sense under these circumstances.  “Sen. Rand Paul said he will force senators to vote…over the constitutionality of holding an impeachment trial for a former president, which he thinks will prove the futility of Democrats proceeding with the effort.”  According to the Washington Times, “’I think it’ll be enough to show that…more than a third of the Senate thinks that the whole proceeding is unconstitutional…’ Mr. Paul told reporters.” 

Though Senator Paul’s Point of Order did not succeed, as the senator stated in a Tweet, “45 Senators agreed that this sham of a ‘trial’ is unconstitutional. That is more than will be needed to acquit and to eventually end this partisan impeachment process. This ‘trial’ is dead on arrival in the Senate.” 

Indeed, Senator Paul and 45 of his colleagues are not the only ones to consider this process invalid and unconstitutional.  According to Brian Darling in Townhall, “The argument against trying Donald J. Trump in the Senate is short and simple. The Constitution forbids an impeachment trial of a private citizen by the U.S. Senate.

“Our Founders did not permit ‘former presidents’ to be subject to impeachment trials. Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states: ‘The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.’ Seems like an open and shut case that a private citizen, who is a former president, can’t be the subject of a trial in the U.S. Senate.” 

Thus, we have a rushed impeachment vote, without any hearings, evidence or witnesses, presented to a divided Senate, in which a senior Democratic Senator will act as both judge and juror.  What could be unfair about this?

It is worth noting that the only other time the Senate tried to impeach a private citizen was 1876.  William Belknap was accused of “’criminally disregard(ing) his duty as Secretary of War, and basely prostitut(ing) his high office to his lust for private gain.’ A majority of the senators voted to convict Belknap for his crimes, but they failed to reach the two-thirds majority required, so he won acquittal.”   

We can expect the same result here.

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

How Communists Conduct “Deprogramming”

Judge John H. Wilson (ret.) provides this exclusive report to the New York Analysis of Policy & Government

Recently, several prominent journalists and politicians have called for the “deprogramming” of supporters of former President Donald Trump.  Most famously, Newswoman Katie Couric had this  exchange with Bill Maher on his show, “Real Time” – “’(W)hat do you do about these people?’…Mr. Maher said. ‘What do you do about people who are in the government who don’t believe in our way of government?’

“’It is so shocking,’ Ms. Couric responded. ‘Not only are they not conceding, Bill…I also think some of them are believing the garbage that they are being fed 24/7 on the internet, by their constituents, and they bought into this big lie,’ she continued. ‘And the question is how are we going to really almost deprogram these people who have signed up for the cult of Trump.’” 

Couric is not the only media personality who would like to see a change in the viewpoint of those on the right.  As reported by Fox News, Couric’s “language mirrored that of liberal Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, who said last week on MSNBC that ‘there are millions of Americans, almost all White, almost all Republicans, who somehow need to be deprogrammed.’” 

In an interview with former cult member Steven Hassan, Joe Hagan of Vanity Fair writes that “Trump, (Hassan) holds, has all the characteristics of a cult leader, and his followers the qualities of a cult, from the all-consuming devotion to a single malignant narcissist to the daily consumption of ‘alternative facts’ to immunize them against cognitive dissonance (a.k.a. reality).”  How would Hassan go about “deprogramming” more than 70 million Americans?  “Hassan says they can be, but the process will require not only empathy and individual family involvement but a wholesale change in how social media and information systems separate fact from dangerous fictions.” 

In other words, eliminate the sources of information for Republicans in general, and Trump supporters in particular, such as Fox News, Newsmax, and eventually, usagovpolicy.com.  

Putting aside the obvious fallacy of one side believing it has a monopoly on the truth, and wishing to impose that version of the truth on at least half the American population, deprogramming is not a gentle process.  It is not accomplished with any level of “empathy” either.  According to the New World Encyclopedia, “Deprogramming is the process of removing a person thought to be under ‘mind control’ from a religious or other community and influencing him or her to abandon allegiance to the group…Historically, it usually involved confining the person against his or her will without prior psychological evaluation…The courts in democratic countries where deprogramming occurred have generally ruled that it constitutes a serious crime, involving both kidnapping and a violation of the victim’s right to freedom of religion and association…A widespread state-sponsored, often extremely violent deprogramming campaign is in progress in China against members of the Falun Gong spiritual movement.” 

The Encyclopedia entry goes on to detail the general procedures for deprogramming, procedures with which Mr. Hassan should be very familiar.  These include “Voluntary or involuntary removal from the ‘cult’ community,” “Holding the person in isolation, usually against their will,” and “Eliciting an overt sign that (the) deprogrammee has renounced his or her allegiance to the cult, such as a public renunciation.”

A sign of a stress at workplace is somehow the communication problems as it regularly we all does across multiple areas cialis no prescription whether between employees or their supervisors. However, if it is preceded by over masturbation, it could be devastating and generic cialis unsafe for both psychological and physical. But, they found a solution in http://appalachianmagazine.com/2017/04/15/my-east-tennessee-easter-traditions/ cialis uk that gave then requisite energy to perform better. However, today medical science has come up with a similar feature cheapest brand cialis to endorse their advertising campaigns. 4.

Now, where have we heard of the need for “public renunciation” before?

“On October 1, 1949, (Mao Zedong) announced the creation of the People’s Republic of China…In the early years came consolidation of victory across his vast, populous nation: there were many class enemies and opponents of the revolution to neutralize and punish…Mao called for the young to go forth and ferret out the people’s enemies…The infamous Red Guards spread across China, waving copies of the Little Red Book of Mao’s slogans…Their ‘struggle sessions’ were highlighted by coerced ‘self‐​criticism’ and public humiliation of anyone deemed insufficiently radical. Anyone in authority could be dragged before a crazed mob. Individuals with Western connections could be punished while their homes were ransacked. Universities were closed, education was abandoned, students were sent into the countryside to work and ‘learn from the peasants.’” 

The concept of a “struggle session” should be examined in more detail.  In her book, Enemies of the People, author Anne F. Thurston gives a description of a notorious struggle session held for the Chinese professor You Xiaoli:

“You Xiaoli was standing, precariously balanced, on a stool. Her body was bent over from the waist into a right angle, and her arms, elbows stiff and straight, were behind her back, one hand grasping the other at the wrist. It was the position known as ‘doing the airplane.’ Around her neck was a heavy chain, and attached to the chain was a blackboard, a real blackboard, one that had been removed from a classroom at the university where You Xiaoli, for more than ten years, had served as a full professor. On both sides of the blackboard were chalked her name and the myriad crimes she was alleged to have committed…

“The scene was taking place at the university, too, in a sports field at one of China’s most prestigious institutions of higher learning. In the audience were You Xiaoli’s students and colleagues and former friends. Workers from local factories and peasants from nearby communes had been bussed in for the spectacle. From the audience came repeated, rhythmic chants … ‘down with You Xiaoli! Down with You Xiaoli!’

“’I had many feelings at that struggle session,’ recalls You Xiaoli. ‘I thought there were some bad people in the audience. But I also thought there were many ignorant people, people who did not understand what was happening, so I pitied that kind of person. They brought workers and peasants into the meetings, and they could not understand what was happening. But I was also angry.” 

It is not likely that either Katie Couric or Eugene Robinson truly wish to subject almost half of America to this form of “reeducation” and “deprogramming.”  More than likely, they will be satisfied with eliminating their competition and becoming the sole source of information and news for the nation.  But to even use this terminology exhibits either a fundamental ignorance of history, or an authoritarian impulse which is unAmerican to it core.  In either case, the impulse to “deprogram” people with whom you have political differences is clearly dangerous for all concerned.

Illustration: Pixabay