Podcasts about Air Force Association

To influence for good, character paired with strong leadership skills is paramount. Brig. Gen. (Ret.) Dana Born '83 brings the two together in Ep. 8 of Long Blue Leadership. ----more---- SUMMARY Brig. Gen. (Ret.) Dana Born discusses the importance of character and leadership in the Air Force Academy's mission. She shares her background and career, including her time as the Dean of Faculty at the Academy. The General reflects on her class reunion experience and the impact of her family's military background. She explores the concept of leaders being born vs. made and highlights the value of curiosity and courage in leadership. Gen. Born emphasizes the importance of seeking help and mentorship and shares recommended readings for developing leadership skills.   OUR FAVORITE QUOTES "Character and leadership are paramount for Air Force Academy graduates to influence for good." "I think that if I were to say there's two really important takeaways, those for me have been, be curious, be more curious. And that is just really asking a lot of questions." "I think leading with your heart and leading with, like the recognition that things that are hard, make your heart rate go up. Courage, you know, our heart rate goes up when we're in danger physically, morally, psychologically. And I think leaning into that to where our heart rate goes up a little bit is how we learn and grow." "I think there's that keeping the both and in the integration of that is what helped me in some of those tough decisions. I mean, I remember having to take a security clearance away from a lieutenant colonel, for all the right reasons, but trying, you know, that person then was going to lose their position in the Air Force, because it required a security clearance. And, and it wasn't a situation that I put that person in, right, they put themselves in that position, but what I didn't want to do was deliver the news in a way that then the individual would feel like they have nothing left right to or would ultimately, you know, take their life, right, that always was present to say, uh, don't want this person to go away with anything other than, you know, your life is not over." "I think courage, you know, the root word of courage is heart. And I think leading with your heart and leading with, like the recognition that things that are hard, make your heart rate go up. Courage, you know, our heart rate goes up when we're in danger physically, morally, psychologically. And I think leaning into that to where our heart rate goes up a little bit is how we learn and grow."  - Brig. Gen. (Ret.) Dana Born '83   SHARE THIS EPISODE FACEBOOK  |  LINKEDIN  |  TWITTER  |  EMAIL     CHAPTERS 00:00  Introduction: Character and Leadership 01:22  General Bourne's Background and Career 05:36  Early Life and Decision to Attend the Air Force Academy 08:19  Becoming the Dean of Faculty at the Air Force Academy 11:49  Challenges and Lessons as Dean 22:59  Discovering Leadership Abilities 24:24  Lessons from Friction Moments 26:19  Pivoting and Overcoming Challenges 27:49  Best Attributes of Leaders 29:46  Seeking Help and Mentorship 32:06  Balancing Compassion and Difficult Decisions 34:26  Family's Influence on Leadership 38:12  Developing Leadership Skills: Curiosity and Courage 40:04  Purpose and Passion 41:53  Recommended Readings 44:42  Conclusion     GEN. BORN'S BIO Dana H. Born (Co-Director, Center for Public Leadership (CPL); Faculty Chair, Senior Executive Fellows (SEF) Program; Lecturer in Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School of Government) is a retired Brigadier General with 30 years of service in the United States Air Force. Prior to coming to Harvard, from 2004-2013, she served two terms as the Dean of the Faculty at the United States Air Force Academy where she was also the Professor and Head of the Behavioral Sciences and Leadership Department. Previously, Dana served as an Exchange Officer with the Royal Australian Air Force, Assistant Director for Recruiting Research and Analysis for the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force Management Policy), Deputy Chief of the Personnel Issues Team for the Department of the Air Force (DC/Staff Personnel), Aide and Speech Writer to the Secretary of the Air Force, Squadron Commander for 11th Mission Support Squadron at Bolling AFB, DC and in Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. A graduate with distinction of the United States Air Force Academy, Professor Born received her B.S. in Behavioral Sciences (1983), M.S. in Experimental Psychology from Trinity University, TX (1985), M.A. in Research Psychology from University of Melbourne (1991) and Doctorate in Industrial and Organizational Psychology from Penn State University (1994). She received Penn State University's Alumni Fellow Award (2012) and Distinguished Alumni Award (2018) and was awarded an Honorary Doctorate from Simmons College in Humane Administration (2007). Born is the recipient of the Secretary of the Air Force's Eugene M. Zuckert Award for Outstanding Management Achievement, Air Force Association's Hoyt S. Vandenberg Award for outstanding contributions to Aerospace education, Air Force Distinguished Service Medal, Legion of Merit and Defense Meritorious Service Medal. She has been honored with the Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Annual Teaching Awards as well as the Harvard Kennedy School of Government Innovation in Teaching Award in 2017. Dr. Born is a Trustee on the United States Air Force Academy's Falcon Foundation – serving on the Strategy, Governance and Scholarship Committees; Supporting Director on the USAFA Endowment Board, Past President of the Massachusetts Women's Forum; Senior Consultant for the Core Leadership Institute; Peer Evaluator for the Higher Learning Commission; Member of the Women Corporate Directors, International Women's Forum and Council on Foreign Relations; Council Member on Boston Mayor's Pay Equity Workforce; Advisory Board Member for “With Honor;” and “A Child's Guide to War” documentary, “Blue Star Families,” Senior Officer for Mission: Readiness; Past-President of the American Psychological Association (Society for Military Psychology) and previous Independent Director on Board of the Apollo Education Group having served on Compensation, Audit and Special Litigation Committees.  - Copy and image credit:  Harvard University         Gen. Born is a member of the HOW Conversations video (and podcast) series hosting team, bringing together a varied group of experts and leaders to discuss timely issues of our reshaped world through the lenses of moral leadership, principled decision-making, and values-based behavior. VIEW THE VIDEO SERIES  |  LISTEN TO THE PODCAST  - Copy and image credit:  Harvard University     ABOUT LONG BLUE LEADERSHIP Long Blue Leadership is a production of the Long Blue Line Podcast Network, drops every two weeks on Tuesdays, and is available on Apple Podcasts, TuneIn + Alexa, Spotify and all your favorite podcast platforms. Search @AirForceGrads on your favorite social channels for Long Blue Leadership news and updates!          FULL TRANSCRIPT   SPEAKERS Our guest, Brig. Gen. (Ret.) Dana Born '83  |  Our host, Lt. Col. (Ret.) Naviere Walkewicz   Gen. Dana Born  00:06 Through mentorship and wise counsel, in early days actually and magnified through the time at the Air Force Academy, that character is paramount. It's also not enough, because you want to be a person of strong character that also has leadership, qualities that help influence for good. We can have leadership where people are able to influence but maybe not for good. And we can have character but have people of great character that aren't able to mobilize the influence. And so, I have just been, I guess, embracing that character and leadership aspect of our mission.   Naviere Walkewicz  01:19 My guest today is retired Brigadier General Dana Born, a 1983, graduate of the Air Force Academy. I'm excited to host this conversation with General Born, a recognized and widely respected expert in moral leadership, serving as a lecturer in public policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. We're going to explore the trajectory of General Born's own development as a leader. Our conversation will begin with her days as a cadet at the Air Force Academy, where she received a Bachelor of Science degree in Behavioral Science and Leadership. General Born began building her body of work then, first as a student, then analyst and researcher, now writer, teacher and speaker on public policy and society in the field of moral leadership as a How Institute for Society Distinguished Fellow through her distinguished 30 year military career, and since her retirement from the Air Force in 2013, she has been formally recognized more than 20 times for her exemplary service and academic excellence. In 2004, she became the first female Academy graduate to return to her alma mater as the Dean of Faculty, a role she held for two terms. Her work has been published more than 40 times and she has delivered nearly 200 presentations. General Born has endorsed more than a dozen books on leadership and public policy, and has contributed to five others. In addition to her work at Harvard, she hosts a video podcast series called HOW Conversations during which she discusses the tenets of moral leadership. Her guests include nationally and internationally recognized leaders from the private, military and public sectors. General Born. Welcome, and thank you for being here today.   Gen. Dana Born  02:54 Thank you so much for the wonderful introduction. And it's great to be in the Long Blue Line conversation with you and all our other members of our tremendous extended family in our Air Force. So glad to be here.   Naviere Walkewicz  03:07 Thank you so much, ma'am. And you know, you recently were just here for a reunion. How was that experience?   Gen. Dana Born  03:13 It was spectacular. The only way I can describe it is like going to see family members that you haven't seen for a while. And even after 44 years, since our induction day, it was like just picking up where, you know, we left off in terms of the connection, the common bond, it was probably better than I anticipated. And I can't actually explain why. But it was just so special. It was poignant as well, because certainly during those times, we spend time reflecting on those that are no longer with us. And it was very powerful in terms of the way that our class decided to do that with. We don't call it a yellow cap, right, because there's nothing yellow in the military, but with our gold caps. And classmate who remembered our fallen friend, and lit a candle on behalf of them. And it was too many hats. It was too many candles, it was too many people that we have lost. But it was something that was spectacular in another way because we had such great stories to share that sort of brought back you know, the legacy and the person of our classmates. And so I think we left with a little bit more spring in our step in terms of let's make our lives and the lives of those we love count each day. So it was really inspiring and quite an amazing time.   Naviere Walkewicz  04:41 I love hearing that. I get to come back for my 25th next year and even though I'm, you know, here working in this capacity, there is something so special that's timeless. With graduates, when they come together, we really do just kind of pick up where we left off and so I'm looking forward to that as well.   Gen. Dana Born  04:57 We got together with our what we call "dooley squadron," but you know, with our classes that we were with for the first two years, and then also with the last two years, because we transitioned after our three-degree year, and there was one individual that was in my, like, all four years together. And so that was kind of fun as well, yes.   Naviere Walkewicz  05:18 What our listeners love to do is kind of get to know our speakers as well. So if we could travel back to maybe your childhood and early days before the Academy. We'd really like to get to know what Gen. Born was like back then, you know, where did you grow up? What were you like? What were you into? Maybe you can take us back.   Gen. Dana Born  05:36 That's going back aways because I entered the Air Force Academy in 1979. So it really is going back decades here. But I grew up in a small town in upstate New York called Penn Yan. And, you know, we maybe had two or three thousand people. It was a very small town. If you think of Norman Rockwell, that is kind of, you know, the the old world, maybe even American Graffiti. That is my hometown. Everybody knows everybody pretty much still to this day. And I graduated from high school, the same day that I flew out to start basic training the next day. I literally didn't get to stay for my whole high school graduation. Because on the East Coast, graduations tend to be late June and of course, that's when basic Cadet training begins. So I hopped on a commercial airplane for the very first time, the day I graduated from high school. I flew airplanes before I drove a car. But I flew with my flight instructor actually to the nearest airport and then flew commercially, for the first time in my life, to go start basic training. I'd never been west of Ohio, and of course, people think about Ohio as the Midwest. So it was really going into a brave new world for me, certainly.   Naviere Walkewicz  06:58 So, were you always someone very courageous looking at new things. I mean, you said you were flying before you got into a car. So that's a bit telling there. What are their characteristics? Would you say you had as a young girl?   Gen. Dana Born  07:11 Yeah. I think that's, I wouldn't have characterized it actually as courageous. But I was certainly enjoyed adventure and the outdoors. I mean, some of my favorite activities. My dad was the vice president of a local college. And we grew up on a lake. So you know, waterskiing sailing, you know, boating, I loved to run, I love to fly, I love to ski. So there was that adventurous spirit. And certainly, I think that was part of the selection to go to the service academy. But it was also my dad, being a college professional and administrator, he took me to a college fair at the University of Vermont, I still remember this. And my dad had been enlisted in the Coast Guard, and right after World War Two, but he taught me how to salute. And I was always just kind of enamored with that part of his life. And I saw a Coast Guard Academy booth at this fair. And I got really excited. I went back to my father who was at his booth for his college and I said, "Dad, I know where I want to go, I want to go to the United States Coast Guard Academy." And then, when I applied, they said, "Oh, you missed the application date for this year, you'll have to come next year." And I was not wanting to wait to go to college. Right? I was ready. And so they said, well, there's these other academies. And I went back and talk to my track and cross country coach, and he did some exploration for me. And he said, "What about the Air Force Academy?" And I said, "Where is that?" And they said, "Colorado," and I thought, okay, skiing, mountains, you know, running. And that really was, it was his kind of helping me search through, okay, if this isn't an option, you know, what are your other options? And it turned out to be serendipity, just a very good fit and very grateful to this day, you know, for his mentorship.   Naviere Walkewicz  09:07 Well, I was going to ask how the Air Force Academy came into the picture. And it was by chance from the US Coast Guard Academy timing being off.   Gen. Dana Born  09:16 It was meant to be, I think, and, you know, I've had fun, you know, with over the years certainly while I was the dean working closely with the leadership at the Coast Guard Academy, you know, just kind of puns you know, they've changed their application date, I think to be more aligned now, but it was it was funny in talking with them about that, but it worked out really for the better. Well, you're also aware I have a mixed family in terms of you know, having Marine Corps and Air Force and Navy and Coast Guard. So we're all really in the same profession.   Naviere Walkewicz  09:56 We went kind of back in the early childhood days, but you just about your family kind of having mixed roles in different services. What does that all look like?   Gen. Dana Born  10:05 Yeah, I actually just recalled, as you were asking that question, I thank you for digging deeper there, because I forgot to mention Army as well and certainly my brother in law was a West Point graduate.   Naviere Walkewicz  10:16 We did that for him.   Gen. Dana Born  10:19 So appreciate that. You know, it's interesting, because I did not other than my dad's Coast Guard service really did not have a lot of military in my family. And but when I met my now husband, who is a Naval Academy graduate, when we were assigned to the Pentagon, it opened up a whole like military side of the family, because he does have a brother that went to VMI, one that went to West Point, he went to the Naval Academy, his father was a WWII aviator, who retired from the Navy. And so I and my family was primarily all educators, right? So I must say that it was providence, right, to get to the dean of the faculty position where I think it was keeping both sides of the family happy the educators as well as blended military service. And then of course, we have two daughters who are serving now, and one of them is 2020, graduate from the Air Force Academy, whose IP instructor pilot in helicopters and our youngest, who's a Naval Academy graduate who is in the Marine Corps now and just heading over to serve in Okinawa for three years as a comm. strat. officer in the Marine Expeditionary Forces. So we are certainly in a family business of of military service.   Naviere Walkewicz  11:41 Ma'am, you just shared a little bit about your time at the Academy as dean, first female graduate to become dean and then you serve two terms. What was that like?   Gen. Dana Born  11:50 It's interesting, that you asked that question and, of your, I know your own background in working a lot of issues, particularly women in leadership issues in diversity, equity inclusion, I find it actually paradoxical to think of myself as kind of the, you know, the first female dean because it is a fact, I'm just really grateful that we have a currently serving dean who's also a female. And it's interesting, because we just want to fit in, right, and just be the dean. And yet, if we don't say female dean, then we're invisible. And so it really is paradoxical. Anytime you're a minority of having a an adjective that caveats or clarifies, you know, that your your role. So I recognize that, but I'm really just so thrilled that I had the opportunity, and again, through a lot of mentors, encouraging and supporting through that journey, because I think I like many others, particularly women, take ourselves out of the running, because we haven't seen somebody go into that kind of an authority position before that look like us or are like us. So it was really people telling me, you know, don't you think it's your duty, you know, to offer to serve in that capacity, you know, why take yourself out of the running, if the Air Force thinks you're the right person at the right time, and you're willing to, then it's your duty to put your name in. And, and that was really the thinking that drew me to apply. And I'm really glad to have had that opportunity, not just for one term, but for to, and to see that, you know, there's more behind me that are more, you know, diverse, that is really good for our Academy.   Naviere Walkewicz  13:36 I'm glad you brought that up, because I actually struggled in asking that question for the similar reasons of saying first female to do something and at the same time, having been walking in those paths, understanding that sometimes people need to see people who have walked in those shoes that look like them, etc. So I'm glad that you kind of talked about the importance of recognizing those things, even though at the same time we see ourselves as I'm the qualified person to be doing this. So I appreciate you showing that.   Gen. Dana Born  14:01 It's hard to do though, too, because, you know, if you think about the generation of the first several classes to go through the academy, it was really a token time. I mean, I think we had 8.4% women that came in in our class. And so we didn't want to be seen as anything other than fitting in. And so it is hard for us also. And I remember when General Desjardins and I were serving together as the comm and the dean, right the first time you had two females in those two roles. And we had to kind of get over that. We had many conversations to say, hey, if the current population is wanting to have conversations, you know about women in the military, we need to have those conversations. Those are, you know, part of what we bring and it was and we had to listen a lot, right, because there was so much we didn't know about how the experience is similar and we're different for the now cadet, right, while we were in those positions.   Naviere Walkewicz  15:03 And that was actually one of the questions I had, from your experiences as a cadet, the highs and lows. And then what did that look like for you in the role then if dean, how did that change your perspective? Or, you know, looking at how you improved things, or made a difference?   Gen. Dana Born  15:17 I'm gonna go back to the highs and low question because the high was clearly meeting some of the most amazing, talented, diverse people that I had been exposed to, if you think about coming out of this small town, to the cadet wing that was twice the size, much more diverse representing countries around the world. I was, I was so in awe of look at who I'm here with, I was also very scared because we all got that, you know, warning that look left look, right, one, one or two of you aren't going to be there, right, at graduation. So it was a little, a little bit of a fire, right to say I better stay giving it my best, but I really think that's a high. And to this day, that's and even as the dean, it was always a wow moment to look around and see the incredible people that we got to be in the kind of common cause with and gave me great hope always for the future, both while I was a cadet and as the dean and now serving, you know, with the Air Force Academy Foundation, it's really inspiring and elevating, and provides hope during times that, you know, can be very daunting. The low, I would just want to get that out of the way, right? The low is always hard to talk about. But I think one of my low points, but it didn't last long. Because I I really had a love of flying, and a love of the air, I lost my pilot qualification probably because I was not studying properly. And, you know, my flashlight under my covers trying to pass that "EE" test or something. And so I did not have the opportunity to fly upon graduation. And that was hard. Because one the culture, you know, we're so oriented towards, "What you're, you're not going to fly?" And I couldn't, it was just not an option for me. And so I really just had to pivot in terms of what are the other needs and ways that I might be able to serve. But that that was a hard time to do that. And it was actually right before commitment. And so people were asking, you know, are you still gonna stay? And I thought, "Well, why wouldn't I am sure the Air Force has other, you know, ways to serve." So, but that was that was kind of a low. And I think another I don't know is if it's a low, but it might be one that I look back on. I was intercollegiate for 12 seasons. And so I had a whole lot of depth of really athletics, and really close friendships because of that, and a lot of travel to places I've never traveled to. But I also then think I didn't get as much breadth of experience of because time was so precious and trying to keep up academically. You know, and I think as I look back, you know, I had participated in theater when I was in high school, but I didn't have time for you know, Blue Bards or anything outside of really athletics and some of the military work that we got to do and keep up with academics and, you know, try to do well there and in my major.   Naviere Walkewicz  18:50 So ma'am you mentioned something about the pivot you had to make and you know, some of the disappointment that came with that. How did you kind of get to that positive headspace when your plan changed so dramatically.   Gen. Dana Born  19:02 It's hard for me to go back and put myself in what did it there. But I can think of examples like right now what comes to mind for me is the iRobot or the I don't know what how you refer to it, but those, you know, round circular vacuums that if yes, if they get up against a wall, they know that they're there to clean the floor, and they just find a redirect and they keep going. And that's sort of what I think it's been for me, you know, when you kind of stay oriented on your purpose and what you are passionate about. It's easy to not give up but to find another way. And that happened to me when I was fortunate enough to be in a PhD program sponsored by the Air Force Academy in the Air Force to go to Penn State University and right after my second year, the Air Force was downsizing and trying to provide opportunity for people to not have a commitment to school and to be able to basically give up that commitment and not come into the Air Force. And I got that letter that said, "Hey, you can you know, we're sorry. But right now we have an option if you'd like to, you know, get out of the Air Force, you can." And I remember thinking like, you've invested in me to be here for this PhD program. And, you know, I'm hopeful that there's something with this I can do for my Air Force. And so no, I don't want to get out. And so it was kind of like that same iRobot response of I'm here to do this. And so I'm going to figure out a pivot to be able to stay and contribute in a way that might be valuable.   Naviere Walkewicz  20:44 That is a great analogy, ma'am. That's fantastic. Well, I know this is not new to you, ma'am. Because with you're hosting other podcasts on leadership, there's questions that you know, our listeners love to learn about, that you're very familiar with. So I'd like to start with one that you ask often about leaders being born versus made. And I know your thoughts on this, that they are both born and made. But I'm hoping you might be able to share a little bit more about what led you to that perspective.   Gen. Dana Born  21:12 I think it's through mentorship and wise counsel, in early days, actually, and magnified through the time at the Air Force Academy, that that character is paramount in terms of us being effective humans. And it's also not enough, because you want to be a person of strong character that also has leadership, qualities that help influence for good. And I remember, during my time, even as the dean when we were developing the character and leadership center, and talking about do we call it the in because it used to be the Center for Character Development? Or do we call it the Center for Leadership Development? And are they the same, and I was fascinated with those conversations, because we really got to a point where it is both and and we need to call out character and leadership. Because we can have great, or I won't say great, but we can have leadership where people are able to influence but maybe not for good. And we can have character, but have people of great character that aren't able to mobilize the influence. And so I have just been, I guess, embracing that character and leadership aspect of our mission, primarily, from the time at the Air Force Academy to present day research and investment in teaching and working with executives, graduate students, undergraduates and boards.   Naviere Walkewicz  22:50 Was it would you say at the Air Force Academy is when you knew yourself to be a leader? Or, when did you have the desire to lead?   Gen. Dana Born  22:59 Interestingly enough, I think about that back at my small town of Penn Yan, New York, and some of that, I have to attribute to the fact that we didn't have many people. I mean, my school had 1,000 people but bused in from 20, or 30 miles in every different direction. And so the because the town wasn't that big, so we had a chance. Matter of fact, I was like, I was Miss Flying Club, you know, for the parade. I was, you know, the head of women's athletics for my school, I got to be on Student Council and be a treasure for my class, and, you know, captain of the cross country team and the track team, it really did stretch me into places that I might not have sought out myself. But people kind of put me in those positions, and then helped me to learn through those positions. But I must say, most of my learning was when things didn't go so well, you know, how come you know, people aren't buying into this, you know, motto. And, you know, what is the dynamic that's happening? You know, we're, we're fractured as a team, you know, how can we fix this? And so it was really through some of those friction moments that I probably learned the most and really loved the opportunity have an input and an influence?   Naviere Walkewicz  24:19 Can you share some of those because I think some of our listeners are certainly in parts of their leadership journeys, where they're, they may be facing some of those, you know, friction moments or their early parts of their leadership lessons. You know, what were some of the early lessons that you took on that you might share with them if they experience something like that?   Gen. Dana Born  24:38 I think what came to mind for me, more recent examples, clearly, because they're still pretty fresh. But what came to me when you were talking about maybe early years, was I think we're I may be let myself downs nd we're I didn't feel as though I did well enough to be considered a leader. Right? You have to, you know, it's the hero's journey. And I think that I've learned over the years that you don't need to be perfect as a leader. Quite the contrary, right people can relate and, and really be on their own development journey more when we are human and imperfect. And that took me a long time to really embrace because there is that pressure, right, that we feel like we have to be perfect. And we have to know so much, and do so well. And I think that that's, that's not people know that humans aren't perfect, right? So if you're coming across perfect, right? People look for the chinks in the armor. And the higher you are, the higher you fall. So I think that I had that experience at the Air Force Academy, I shared recently in a Sabre Society, talk that, you know, I had been a commander during 9/11, at Bolling, Air Force Base. And it really, I was so proud of how my unit did, and the people that were recognized for just excellence, and we were prepared, and we were responsive. And it was really exciting. And I chose to stay in and ended up at the Air Force Academy as a department chair. And I brought my same self and my same, you know, you know, command energy and I failed miserably in the first, you know, several months, we were going through the sexual assault and sexual harassment crisis, and I was being fairly directive, which worked well with the population I was leading in Washington, DC during 9/11 did not work as well, when you have a very small but mature, you know, mostly PhDs, professional faculty, that I needed to listen to more and not be directive, and it took not long, you know, for what we call it, the Air Force Academy, the blanket party for quite respectable people to come in and say, ma'am, this isn't working and to swallow that humility pill, and, and realize, okay, we need to, I need to adapt here, not lose myself, but adapt to this new environment and situation,   Naviere Walkewicz  27:11 Maybe you can share some of the best attributes that you've you've come across in leaders, because, you know, everyone leading from the authentic selves, brings it forward in their own ways. But what are some of the ones that you see time and true, and again, that are really spoken with you as best attributes?   Gen. Dana Born  27:27 I think what I have grown to really value is people who probably listen well, and who are curious, and, and I've, I've, I've also found people who see the individual in each person, like, what makes Naviere tick, what is it that's important to you personally, and professionally? You know, what are the ways that you are at your best, and that I think is, is really helpful. I also, I don't know why it just came to me, but I'm kind of led to share it is, I heard some great advice. When I was a younger officer, and for where people were not performing to expectations, instead of blaming the individual or feeling as though you know, they're no good, we need to their poor performer label and move them on. It's really better when we asked three questions, when somebody's not meeting, a standard, you know, have I been as a person, you know, leading? Have I been clear in the expectations? And if I have, then the next question is, have I prepared them? Or given them the right training? Or, you know, opportunity to be good at what I'm asking them to do? And then the third is, if the answer to the first two is I have, I did, then what else is happening in their lives that for whatever reason, they're not meeting, you know, the expectations or standards. And if there's nothing there, then you start the performance plan. But, that was, I think, when people are like giving you space to learn and grow and taking kind of a co collaborative ownership of performance. I've, I've, I've thrived in those situations more than and I hope people in my leadership have thrived in those situations more as well, because it is more of a approach that is a shared approach to getting the mission accomplished and taking care of people.   Naviere Walkewicz  29:38 That's an amazing nugget that you shared. I mean, I'm just I can think back throughout my career and times when I probably should have leveraged something like that, and I might have been more effective. Thinking about what pieces have I not maybe done as well or have I done those things, as you said, kind of do a reflective piece from a leadership perspective, to be able then to collaborate in a you know, a better way forward. That's awesome, ma'am. Thank you.   Gen. Dana Born  30:02 Yeah, I had a couple of terrible times of moral discernment, I would say, in decision making when those situations came up, particularly when, you know, you're having to make a decision where somebody's going to be incarcerated. And, you know, I, I had one of those situations where, you know, I was actually eight months pregnant, and the individual was a failure to show up for he was an honor guardsman failure to show for several funerals. And his, his wife was eight months pregnant. And here I was sitting, as you know, the summary court official having to decide if I'm going to throw, you know, him in a situation where he's absent from his family, and, you know, and what kind of financial, leeway will I have in order to help the family but still hold him accountable. And that was very, very difficult because of my own, you know, situation and empathy. But at the same time, it hit me during that decision that there are a lot of airmen who are not there for the birth of their kids or for special events and are deployed in harm's way. And they're doing the mission, not A.W.O.L.. And so I ultimately decided to, you know, incarcerate him for his failure to go and being A.W.O.L. and also try to protect with some leniency, his family situation.   Naviere Walkewicz  31:39 Leading with compassion, but always being accountable, ma'am, that's, it's tough. And I think, you know, we have many listeners that find themselves in those situations. And I've often been asked, you know, I'm a mom, how can I advance my career professionally, I have to do all these other things as well. And so maybe a question that I might tie to that a little bit. You know, how do you how did you balance, that compassion side of leadership and still be able to make some those difficult decisions in the moment? And you know, what would you share with others and how they might do that and think through things when it maybe feels a little bit too hard or too daunting?   Gen. Dana Born  32:15 It is very hard and is daunting. And you use the term balance, and I, I love the word balance. You know, I'm a middle child, and I'm a Libran. You know, I like balanced, but I have found balance to be very difficult. There's a term called. "balance is bunk." And I like that because it's anytime I feel like I've had anything in balance, it's about ready to go on tilt. And so I try to change out the word balance with the word integrate, that works better for me or Harmonize How do I bring together those things and the Airforce in the time that I was working at the in the Chief of Staff's personnel office came up with a motto, "People First in Mission Always," and it can be, "Mission First." And people always, but it's sort of like the chicken and the egg, they both actually go together. And they're very important. And so I think there's that keeping the both and in the integration of that is what helped me in some of those tough decisions. I mean, I remember having to take a security clearance away from a lieutenant colonel, for all the right reasons, but trying, you know, that person then was going to lose their position in the Air Force, because it required a security clearance. And, and it wasn't a situation that I put that person in, right, they put themselves in that position, but what I didn't want to do was deliver the news in a way that then the individual would feel like they have nothing left right to or would ultimately, you know, take their life, right, that always was present to say, uh, don't want this person to go away with anything other than, you know, your life is not over. But you know, this is a very serious trajectory that you have to decide how you're going to go forward from this point. And that was hard, very hard, but it's both people and mission that I think we have to embrace in the way that we carry on what we're responsible for, for our nation.   Naviere Walkewicz  34:25 Well, I think about you know, some of those stories that you shared and some of the experiences you had, I mean, you probably had to go home and, and your your network at home, your family was there with you through all of the journey. How has your family influenced you as a leader and maybe what role do they play in that?   Gen. Dana Born  34:40 I talked a lot with my family, like the time around the dinner table was really sort of transparency. And that bothered my children because I started to hear things back that I thought they shouldn't have to be hearing some of this, and so I also kind of drew inward and decided that that I, "Who can I talk with," right, because I don't want to bring work home, so to speak, that weighs down the family. I want to focus on them. And so I went through a period where I suffered in silence. And I think many leaders and many people, as particularly when you have, you know, security issues that you can't talk about certain things with others. I think we need to find a way and I ultimately did find someone that I could go to and say, I need some advice. And that was monumental, because it helped me understand that I had not been doing that with with great mentors. And I thought about it. And it shocked me that I was not asking for advice. And I thought, How do I feel like if Naviere or someone comes to me and ask for advice, I feel like, wow, if they think I have, yeah, exactly. They're including me, I have something to offer. They care about what I have to say. And so I really had an epiphany that said, I need to do that more. And I started to reach out. And in one case, I reached out to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, you know, having talked with the superintendent first. And it was phenomenal. Because I had such a different perspective on something I was ruminating over. And I thought Why did I wait so long?   Naviere Walkewicz  36:26 What advice would you give to some that are suffering in silence, and maybe can't see that next step? And to doing that what actually helped you to go seek help and ask for help or ask for guidance and mentorship?   Gen. Dana Born  36:39 I think recognizing, well, in some cases, vulnerability is a strength. And, you know, Brene Brown, who I really do love her work. And her, her, her YouTube or, you know, Netflix, a lot of great science and also practice, but she said, What makes you vulnerable, makes you beautiful. And I think that that is part of it is to recognize that, you know, we're all vulnerable, or we're all broken in maybe different places, right to quote some history. And so I think it connects us and builds trust when we are willing to be vulnerable. And I think it takes courage as well, to let ourselves be seen for all, you know, we have a saying that's warts and all. And, you know, to let ourselves be really fully seen,   Naviere Walkewicz  37:33 That resonates with so many people. I think a lot of times people when they're listening to podcasts, and they're, they're just trying to learn and get better in their professional career in their personal lives. Just a can take one little thing that someone really resonates with. And I think you sharing that bit about being reflective and not necessarily suffering in silence, but but looking for helping others I think is going to be really powerful for some. So thank you for sharing some of that.   Gen. Dana Born  37:56 I think the key takeaway is, is just building on what we just talked about, like if I had a foot-stomper, right from our Air Force Academy days, that's like, if you're starting to fall asleep, right? I use that at Harvard. And I'm like, "Does anybody know what foot stamper actually means?" It means, you know, this, is it pay attention. And I'm, I'm really motivated by the John F. Kennedy quote, "Leadership, well, learning and leadership are indispensable from each other." I think that if I were to say there's two really important takeaways, those for me have been, be curious, be more curious. And that is just really asking a lot of questions. Leaning into not judgment, but leaning into really digging into and trying to understand. And that gets us, I think, in a whole different place. That is a good place. And so I haven't always done that. Well, curiosity is like a growth mindset. And I think that is something that I really would recommend to our listeners, be more curious. And I think that's being helped by Chat GPT and Generative AI because it's all about the questions you ask. And, and then it kind of gets at what answers you get. And I think that's maybe training us to be, you know, more curious and careful in how we're asking and being curious. The other is courage. And you brought this up earlier, but I think courage, you know, the root word of courage is heart. And I think leading with your heart and leading with, like the recognition that things that are hard, make your heart rate go up. Courage, you know, our heart rate goes up when we're in danger physically, morally, psychologically. And I think leaning into that to where our heart rate goes up a little bit is how we learn and grow and how we basically can make positive change. So, those two things together, curiosity and courage, under the umbrella of learning and leading go, you know, they're indispensable to each other is the takeaway. I thought you might ask me like, you talked about purpose earlier. What is your purpose? What is it that gets you out of bed in the morning? And what is it that keeps you going through the tough times? And what is it at the end of your, you know, last breath that will have been your dash in your life, your purpose, your why, and mine actually is a simple phrase to myself. I use the term, "kick chocks", and "kick chocks" is, you know, the bricks in front of the wheel of the airplane, and when you're ready to go, you gotta get, gotta get rid of them, or you can't take off. But sometimes you have to kind of have the chocks there, to pause and to, you know, refuel and to do things. So kick chocks, to me has sort of been a way that I am channeled. Some call it your true north, or your Polaris, your compass, and it speaks to me because I can, I can go, go, go, go and never put chocks in front. I also can keep chocks in front of myself and, and limit myself and, and I'm passionate about what is it that somebody needs to have a break? You know? And when is it when somebody has got something in the way or team or organization that's holding them back? And how do I help identify that and kick chocks with them so we can take off. So, it speaks to me. But yeah, the purpose I think, purpose and passion and the individualization of that, so because everybody is so different comes from our life stories, and I love learning about people's purpose.   Naviere Walkewicz  41:51 General born, might you share with us, you know, maybe what you're reading, watching or listening to that's helped you develop your leadership skills.   Gen. Dana Born  41:59 I love to listen to everything. I mean, I am a listener, you know, we all know how we we learn best, I'm really auditory. So podcasts I pick up, I really do a lot with the Council on Foreign Relations. I do listen also to a lot of leadership podcasts, because I just find the whole topic of leadership fascinating for so many different approaches to what we think we're all talking about the same, it just really is expansive of my understanding. And I also now there are so many ways that you can have, you know, auditory books, and or listen to even academic journal articles. So usually, it's a treadmill thing to listen. And I just, I think that is my approach. I also I do like to read, and I think my favorite leadership book is going to shock you. But it's it's sort of got a nautical theme, I think, not an Air Force theme, but its endurance about Shackleton and Antarctica. And there's so many leadership lessons in that book, endurance is one of my favorites. And another one of my favorites is and they're both kind of historical, is Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl, written in 1946. I've read that so many times, and he wrote it in nine days, but it's because he wrote it while he was a prisoner in the Nazi prison camp. And then he rewrote it after it was burned. And he was liberated. And it's just an amazing, timeless evergreen read about life and about leadership, about purpose about meaning. And then most recently, for a current one is True North, and that is emerging leaders by Bill George and Zack Clayton. And I just think that that is a great pedagogy of thinking about ourselves. Put our own oxygen mask on first so that we can better care for the mission and the people that are entrusted to us and the change we want to see in the world. So, that's a current reader TrueNorth for emerging leaders.   Naviere Walkewicz  44:24 It's been amazing. Thank you so much for taking the time, ma'am. It's been a pleasure and an honor.   Gen. Dana Born  44:28 It's a pleasure and an honor. And I thank all our listeners for listening in and we wish you well.   KEYWORDS Air Force Academy, leadership, people, Air Force, talk, family, dean, work, leader, serve, flew, cadet, Academy, Coast Guard Academy, recognized, years, terms, leading, long, podcasts       The Long Blue Line Podcast Network is presented by the U.S. Air Force Academy Association and Foundation      

The US Space Force, the newest branch of the American military, takes national defense to a new frontier. Here on Faster, Please! — The Podcast, I sit down with AEI senior fellow Todd Harrison to discuss the state of the Space Force and its evolving mission.Harrison has served as senior vice president and head of research at Metrea, a defense consulting firm, been a senior fellow for defense budget strategies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, directed the Defense Budget Analysis and Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and served as a captain in the US Air Force Reserve.In This Episode* Creating the Space Force (0:53)* A New Kind of Warfare (9:15)* Defining the Mission (11:40)* Conflict and Competition in Space (15:34)* The Danger of Space Debris (20:11)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationCreating the Space Force (0:53)Pethokoukis: I was recently looking at an image that showed the increase in the number of satellites around the earth, and it's been a massive increase; I imagine a lot of it has to do with SpaceX putting up satellites, and it's really almost like—I think to an extent that most people don't understand; between  government, military, and a lot of commercial satellites—it's really like the earth is surrounded by this information shell. And when looking at that, I couldn't help but think, “Yeah, it kind of seems like we would need a Space Force or something to keep an eye on that and protect that.” And I know there was a lot of controversy, if I'm not mistaken, like, “Why do we need this extra branch of government?” Is that controversy about why we need a Space Force, is that still an active issue and what are your thoughts?Harrison: To start with where you started, yes. The number of satellites in space has been growing literally exponentially in the past few years. I'll just throw a few numbers out there:  In 2023 alone, about 2,800 new satellites were launched, and in that one year it increased the total number of satellites on the orbit by 22 percent, just in one year. And all the projections are that the number of satellites, number of launches, are going to keep growing at a pace like that for the foreseeable future, for the next several years. A lot is going into space, and we know from all other domains that where commerce goes conflict will follow. And we are seeing that in space as well.Like the Navy protecting the shipping lanes. Yeah, exactly. So we know that to a certain extent that's inevitable. There will be points of contention, points of conflict, but we've already seen that in space just with the military dimension of our space. Back in 2007, I think a lot of the world woke up to the fact that space is a contested environment when the Chinese tested an anti-satellite weapon, which, by the way, produced thousands of pieces of space debris that are still in orbit today. More than 2,600 pieces of debris are still in orbit from that one Chinese ASAT test. And, of course, that was just one demonstration of counter-space capabilities. Space has been a contested war fighting domain, really, since the beginning of the Space Age. The first anti-satellite test was in 1959, and so it has become increasingly important for economic reasons, but also for military reasons. Now, when the Space Force debate kicked into high gear, I think it took a lot of people who weren't involved in military space, I think it took a lot of people by surprise that we were having this debate.Yeah, it really seemed like it came out of nowhere, I think probably for 99 percent of people who aren't professionals tracking the issue.In reality, that debate, it started in the 1990s, and there was a senator from up in New Hampshire who had written a journal article basically talking about, “Hey, we need to separate space into its own military service.” You had the Air Force chief of staff at the time in the mid-1990s, General Ron Fogleman. He said that the Air Force should eventually become an Air and Space Force, and then one day a Space and Air Force. So you had the seeds of it happening in the '90s. Then you had Congress wanting to look at, “Okay, how do we do this? How do we reorganize military space?” They created a commission that was led by Donald Rumsfeld before he became Secretary of Defense for the second time. That commission issued its report in 2001, and it recommended a bunch of reforms, but it said in the midterm, in five to 10 years we should create a separate military service for space, something like a Space Corps.Nothing happened, even though Rumsfeld then became Secretary of Defense. We kind of took our focus off of it for a while, there were a few other studies that went on, and then in 2016, two members of Congress, a Republican and a Democrat, Mike Rogers and Jim Cooper, who were on the House Armed Services Committee, they took this issue up. They got so fed up with the oversight of looking at how the Air Force was shortchanging space in many ways in terms of personnel and training and funding and modernization, that they then put a provision into the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act that would've created a Space Corps, they called it: a separate military service for space. And that bill actually passed the full House of Representatives.The Senate did not have a similar provision in their bill, so it died. It didn't make it into law—but then, all of a sudden, a couple of years later, President Trump, pretty much out of the blue floats this idea of creating a Space Force, and he did it at a rally that was at a Marine Corps base out in California, and, for some reason, it caught on with Trump. And then you already had the votes, a bipartisan group in the House of Representatives who had already pushed this, and so it started to gain momentum.It was very controversial at the time. The secretary of the Air Force at that time was adamantly opposed to it. Eventually, Trump forced it on the civilian establishment at DoD, and Congress ultimately enacted it, and the Space Force became a military service in December… I think December 20th, 2019. Now, there was some question, will the Biden administration keep it?Is this here to stay?It is written into law, so a president cannot unilaterally take it away, and, at this point, it's got its own roots in the ground and the Space Force is not going anywhere.A little bit off topic, but was there a similar debate when they separated the Air Force out of the Army?There was, yeah, and it lasted for a long time. So you had folks like Billy Mitchell who were in the Army Air Corps way back before World War II—I think in the late '20s, early '30s—they were advocating for a separate military service for Air. And I believe Billy Mitchell actually got court marshaled because he disobeyed orders from a superior about advocating for this with Congress.And so the idea of a separate service for Air pretty much died out until World War II hit. And, of course, that was a war that we were brought into it by an attack that came from the air, and that really brought air power into full effect in terms of a major component of military power. So then, at the end of World War II, the Air Power advocates got together, they created the Air Force Association to advocate for a separate military service and they got it in the National Security Reform Act in 1947, I think the Air Force actually stood up in 1948.It took longer, I would argue, a lot more advocacy and it took a World War, a crisis, to show us how important Air was to the military in order for us to actually create an Air Force. Now, I think, thankfully, we did that in advance of a crisis in terms of creating the Space Force.Right now, what the Space Force does, is it tracking satellites, tracking and space debris, is it a monitoring and tracking service? It's not a fighting service yet?Well, yes and no. A lot of what the Space Force does on a day-to-day basis is they provide space-enabling capabilities to the other military services. So if you want to get intelligence, reconnaissance, surveillance from space, you can go to the Space Force. Separately, we have intel space that's run through the National Reconnaissance Office—that has not changed its organization. If you want to get GPS, the Space Force runs our GPS constellation of satellites, and they're responsible for defending it against all forms of attack, which it is attacked daily. If you want satellite communications, the Space Force delivers that. If you want missile warning… So the Space Force delivers lots of enabling capabilities for other parts of the military. At the same time, it is tasked with defending those capabilities, and it's not just against kinetic forms of attack where an adversary is literally trying to shoot a satellite out of the sky.A New Kind of Warfare (9:15)I guess that's the first thing that popped in my mind. Too much science fiction maybe, but…Well, that is real, that's a real threat. The truth is there's not a lot you can do to actively protect against that—at least, we don't have a lot of capabilities right now—but the forms of attack we see on a daily basis are cyber, electromagnetic, and other forms of non-kinetic attack like lazing the sensors on a satellite. You could temporarily, or even permanently, blind the sensors on a satellite with a laser from an aircraft or from a ground station.I'll give you an example: When Russia invaded Ukraine, at the very beginning of the invasion, one of the first attacks they launched was a space attack. It was cyber, and it was against a commercial space capability. What they did is they exploited a vulnerability, previously unknown, in ViaSat modems. ViaSat's, a commercial satellite communications company, they had some sort of a vulnerability in their modems. The Russians, through a cyber attack, basically bricked all those modems. They locked them out. The Ukrainian military relied on ViaSat for satellite communications, so it locked up all of their terminals right at the beginning. They could not communicate using Satcom. Incidentally, it locked up lots of ViaSat terminals across Europe in that same attack. So we see this happening all the time. Russian forces are constantly jamming GPS signals. That makes weapons and drones much less effective. They can't use GPS for targeting once they go into a GPS-denied environment.But the Space Force has ways to overcome that. We have protected military GPS signals, we have ways of increasing the strength of those signals to overcome jamming. There's lots of things you can do with counter-space and then counter to the counter-space.The problem is that we kind of sat on our laurels and admired our advantage in space for a couple of decades and did not make a concerted effort to improve the protection of our space systems and develop our own capability to deny others the advantage of space because others didn't have that same advantage for a long time.Well, that has changed, and the creation of the Space Force, I think, has really set us in a positive new direction to get serious about space defense and to get serious about denying others the advantage of space if we need to.Defining the Mission (11:40)The Chief of Space Operation at the Space Force recently published a short white paper, which I guess begins to lay out kind of a doctrine, like, “What is the mission? How do we accomplish this mission?” Probably the first sort of Big Think piece maybe since Space Force became a branch. What did that white paper say? What do you make of it?Yeah, so I think one of the criticisms of military space for a while has been that we didn't really have space strategy, space doctrine, we didn't have a theory of space power that was well developed. I would argue we had some of those, but it's fair to say that they have not been that well developed. Well, one of the reasons you need a military service is to actually get the expertise that is dedicated to this domain to think through those things and really develop them and flesh them out, and so that's what this white paper did, and I think it did a pretty good job of it, developing a theory of space power. He calls it a “theory of success for competitive endurance in the space domain.”And one of the things I thought was really great that they highlight in the paper, that a lot of US government officials in the past have been reluctant to talk about, is the fact that we are under attack on a daily basis—gray zone-type aggression in the space domain—and we've got to start pushing back against that. And we've got to actually be willing and able to exercise our own defensive and counter-space capabilities, even in the competition phase before we actually get to overt conflict, because our adversaries are doing it already. They're doing it to us. We need to be able to brush them back. We're not talking about escalating and starting a conflict or anything like that, but when someone jams our satellite communication systems or GPS, they need to feel some consequences. Maybe something similar happens to their own space capabilities, or maybe we employ capabilities that show them we can overcome what you're doing. So I thought that was a good part of the theory of success is you can't just sit by and let an adversary degrade your space capabilities in the competition phase.How much of the focus of Space Force currently, and maybe as that paper discussed what the department's mission is, focused on the military capabilities, protecting military capabilities, the military capabilities of other nations, versus what you mentioned earlier was this really expanding commercial element which is only going to grow in importance?Today, the vast majority of the Space Force's focus is on the military side of providing that enabling military capability that makes all of our forces more effective, protecting that capability, and then, to a lesser extent, being able to interfere with our adversaries' ability to use space for their own advantage.They are just now starting to really grapple with, “Okay, is there a role for the Space Force in protecting space commerce, protecting commercial space capabilities that may be economically important, that may be strategically important to us and our allies, but are not directly part of a military capability?” They're starting to think through that now, and it really is the Space Force taking on a role in the future that is more like the Navy. The Navy does fight and win wars, of course, but the Navy also has a role in patrolling the seas and ensuring the free flow of commerce like we see the US Navy doing right now over in the Red Sea: They're helping protect ships that need to transit through that area when Houthi Rebels are targeting them. Do we need that kind of capability and space? Yeah, I think we do. It is not a huge priority now, but it is going to be a growing priority in the future.Conflict and Competition in Space (15:34)I don't know if such things even currently exist, but if you have satellites that can kill other satellites, do those exist and does the Space Force run them?Satellites that can kill other satellites, absolutely. That is a thing that exists. A lot of stuff is kept classified. What we know that's unclassified is, back in the 1960s and early '70s, the Soviets conducted many tests—a couple of dozen tests—of what they call a co-orbital anti-satellite system, that is a satellite that can kill another satellite, and there's still debris in space from some of those tests back in the '60s and '70s.We also know, unclassified, that China and Russia have on-orbit systems that appear to be able to rendezvous with other satellites, get very close. We've seen the Russians deploy a satellite that appeared to fire a projectile at another Russian satellite—looks like a test of some sort of a co-orbital weapon. So yes, those capabilities are out there. They do exist. We've never seen a capability like that used in conflict, though, not yet, but we know they existLooking forward a decade… One can imagine a lot more satellites, multiple space platforms, maybe some run by the private sector, maybe others not. One could imagine permanent or semi-permanent installations on the moon from different countries. Are plans being made to protect those things, and would the Space Force be the one protecting them? If you have a conflict between the Chinese military installation on the moon and the American, would that be in the Space Force domain? Again, it seems like science fiction, but I don't think it's going to seem like science fiction before too long.Well, that's right. We're not at that point today, but are we going to be at that point in 10, 20, 30 years? Perhaps. There are folks in the Space Force, like in the chief scientist's office that have thought about these things; they publish some papers on it. There's no real effort going into that right now other than thinking about it from an academic perspective. Should that be in the mandate of the Space Force? Well, I think it already is, it's just there's not a need for it yet, and so it's something to keep an eye on.Now, there are some rules, if you will, international agreements that would suggest, “Okay, some of these things should not happen.” Doesn't mean they won't; but, for example, the main treaty that governs how nations operate in space is the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. The Outer Space Treaty specifically says that you can't claim territory in space or on any celestial body like the moon or Mars, and it specifically says you cannot put a military installation on any celestial body.So, should China put a military base on the moon, they would be clearly violating the Outer Space Treaty. If China puts a scientific installation that happens to have some military capabilities on it, but they don't call it that, well, you know, what are we going to do? Are we going to call them before the United Nations and complain? Or if China says, “Hey, we've put a military installation in this key part of the lunar South Pole where we all believe that there is ice water, and if anyone tries to land anywhere near us, you're going to interfere with our operations, you might kick up dust on us, so we are establishing a keep-out zone of some very large area around this installation.”I think that there are some concerns that we could be headed in that direction, and that's one of the reasons NASA is pushing forward with the Artemis program to return humans to the moon and a set of international agreements called the Artemis Accords, where we've gotten, I think, more than 20 nations now to agree to a way of operating in the lunar environment and, to a certain extent, in Earth orbit as well, which will help make sure that the norms that develop in space, especially in deep space operating on the moon, are norms that are conducive to free and open societies and free markets. And so I give credit to former NASA administrator, Jim Breidenstein and the Trump administration; he came up with the Artemis Accords. I think it was wonderful. I would love to see us go even further, but NASA is still pursuing that and still signing up more countries to the Artemis Accords, and when they sign up to that, they can be part of our effort to go back to moon and the Artemis program, and right now we are on track to get there and put humans back on the moon before China. I just hope we keep it that way.The Danger of Space Debris (20:11)Let me finish up with a question based on something you've mentioned several times during our conversation, which is space debris and space junk. I see more and more articles about the concerns. How concerned are you about this? How should I think about that issue?Yeah, it is a concern, and, I mean, the physics of the space domain are just fundamentally different than what we see in other domains. So, in space, depending on what orbit you're in, if something breaks up into pieces, those pieces keep orbiting Earth indefinitely. If you are below about 600 kilometers, those pieces of debris, there's a tiny amount of atmospheric drag, and, depending on your mass and your surface area and solar weather and stuff, eventually things 600 kilometers and below are going to reenter the Earth atmosphere and burn up in weeks, months, years.Once you get above about 600 kilometers, things start staying up there much longer. And when you get out to geostationary orbit, which is 36,000 kilometers above the surface of the earth, those things aren't coming down, ever, not on their own. They're staying up there. So the problem is, imagine every time there was a shipwreck, or a car wreck, or a plane crash, that all of the debris kept moving around the earth forever. Eventually it adds up. And space, it's a very large volume, yes, but this stuff is whizzing by, if you're in low-earth orbit, you're going around 17,000 miles per hour constantly. And so you've got close approach after close approach, day after day, and then you run the risk of debris hitting debris, or debris hitting other satellites, and then creating more debris, and then increasing the odds that this happens again and again, the movie Gravity gave a dramatic effect to this.I was thinking about that scene as you're explaining this.Yeah. The timeline was very compressed in that movie, but something like that, the Kessler Syndrome, is theoretically possible in the space domain, so we do have to watch out for it. Debris is collecting, particularly in low Earth orbit above 600 kilometers, and ASAT tests are not helpful at all to that. So one of the things the Biden administration did is they instituted a unilateral moratorium on antisatellite testing by the United States. Well, it's easy for us to do. We didn't need to do any anti-satellite tests anymore because we already know we can do that. We have effective capabilities and we wouldn't want to use kinetic anti-satellite attacks anyway, 'cause it would hurt our own systems.We have been going around trying to get other countries to sign up to that as well, to a moratorium on ASAT testing. It's a good first step, but really you need Russia and China. They need to sign up to not do that anymore. And India, India conducted a kinetic ASAT test back in, I think, 2019. So those are the countries we really need to get on board with that.But there's a lot of accidental debris production that happens as well. When countries leave a spent rocket body up in orbit and then something happens. You know, a lot of times they leave their fuel tanks pressurized or they leave batteries on there, after five, 10 years in orbit, sometimes these things explode randomly, and then that creates a debris field. So there's more that we can do to kind of reach international agreements about just being smart stewards of the space domain. There are companies out there that are trying to work on technologies to clean up space debris. It's very hard. That is not something that's on the immediate horizon, but those are all efforts that should be ongoing. It is something to be concerned about.And actually, to circle back to the chief of space operations and his theory of success in his white paper, that's one of the tensions that he highlights in there, is that we want to use space for military advantage, including being able to deny other countries the ability to use space. But at the same time, we want to be good stewards of the space domain and so there's an inherent tension in between those two objectives, and that's the needle that the Space Force is trying to thread.I have one final question, and you may have no answer for it: If we were to track a large space object headed toward Earth, whose job would it be to stop it?So it would be NASA's job to spot it, to find objects like near-Earth orbit asteroids. Whose job is it to stop it? I think we would be figuring that out on the fly. First of all, we would have to figure out, can we stop it? Is there a way to stop it? And it would probably require some sort of an international effort, because we all have a common stake in that, but yeah, it is not in anyone's job jar.Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Welcome to podcast number 67 for Thanks for your Service. Our focus is on historical topics relating to the Australian military. You can find us on Facebook, Twitter and Youtube.  Just search for Thanks For Your Service.  Our website is www.thanksforyourservice.net  .  You can also email us at info@thanksforyourservice.net One of the great experiences of doing these podcasts is coming across remnants of Australian military history that not a lot of people know about.  Who knew that Ballarat in Victoria played a major role in training RAAF personnel during World War 2.  Peter and Janet from the Air Force Association of Ballarat joins us to talk about 1 WAGS (Wireless Air Gunnery) school. The website for 1 WAGS is https://www.1wags.org.au/  We are keen to hear your feedback by leaving a review on your podcast app.   Your reviews helps new listeners find our podcast. You can help support this podcast via Patreon or Buymeacoffee.  The links are on our website and facebook page. Your support helps us with the production of this podcast. Thanks for listening and thanksforyourservice. 

On this week's Defense & Aerospace Report Business Roundtable, sponsored by Bell, Dr. “Rocket” Ron Epstein of Bank of America Securities, Sash Tusa of the independent equity research firm Agency Partners, and Richard Aboulafia of the AeroDynamic Advisory consultancy join Defense & Aerospace Report Editor Vago Muradian to discuss the week on world markets, implications of parked commercial passenger and cargo aircraft, Vietnam Airlines order for 50 Boeing 737 Max jetliners, RTX's $3 billion charge on Geared Turbofan engine problems that will ground 350 jetliners a year through 2026 to repair, rationale for downgrading RTX stock, GE's decision to sell down AerCap stake, and key takeaways from DSEI tradeshow and Air Force Association's Air Space Cyber conference.

Walter Isaacson's new biography on Elon Musk sparked controversy with the revelation that the SpaceX founder withheld Starlink internet services to Ukraine in a military operation on Russia last year. While the company was not under military contract at the time—and has since received funding from the Pentagon— the disclosure fueled the debate that U.S. government and allies are too reliant on SpaceX. U.S. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall joins Morgan Brennan from the floor of the Air Force Association's annual Air, Space, Cyber conference to discuss national security contracts, China, AI and more.

Walter Isaacson's new biography on Elon Musk sparked controversy with the revelation that the SpaceX founder withheld Starlink internet services to Ukraine in a military operation on Russia last year. While the company was not under military contract at the time—and has since received funding from the Pentagon— the disclosure fueled the debate that U.S. government and allies are too reliant on SpaceX. U.S. Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall joins Morgan Brennan from the floor of the Air Force Association's annual Air, Space, Cyber conference to discuss national security contracts, China, AI and more.

You think you know the full story of the devastating Hawaii wildfires? Think again. This isn't just another tale of nature gone wild. It's a wild time to be alive, and it's time to wake up from the mainstream slumber. In this eye-opening episode of the Adams Archive, We dive headfirst into the blaze of confusion and conspiracy surrounding the Hawaii fires. Including documents that prove the government has been working on directed energy weapons capable of causing a terrible wild fire since before 1975. We then go deeper into the modern applications of this technology and who is behind them... could it be the same organizations looking to take over the sacred Maui land? Join me as we unearth the hidden secrets and questionable narratives that the 'powers-that-be' would prefer you to ignore.  What were those government-funded experiments all about? Why are so many conspiracies suddenly becoming realities? And most importantly, how long can we remain oblivious to the shadows that lurk behind these tragedies? All the Links: Https://linktr.ee/theaustinjadams Substack: https://austinadams.substack.com   Full Transcription:   Adams Archive. Hello, you beautiful people and welcome to the Adams Archive. My name is Austin Adams, and thank you so much for listening today on today's episode, we are going deep into a recent topic that has come up as a result of the devastating fires in LA High. Hawaii. Now, if you don't know anything about this, you've probably been sleeping under a rock for the last week, but that's okay. I'll catch you up to speed. Uh, so basically what's been going on is there's been horrific, horrific wildfires that have been spreading across a specific island in Hawaii, and not just any island, but one of the most affluent areas that there is. Now, as a result of this, you know, there was, uh, a lot of conversations being had about a specific topic, but. The first conversation to have is, it's terrible. It's horrific. All of these people are losing their livelihood, uh, potentially hundreds if not thousands of people have lost their lives. I've seen video after video of, of men, women, and children escaping from their cars and running into the water on the side of the road to escape from these horrific fires. So my heart goes out to all of them. My heart goes out to the island. My heart goes out to the people of Hawaii. Uh, what a terrible tragedy that this is, but something has come up as a result of this that has directed the conversation into something that makes people believe that maybe this wasn't the organic fire I. That were being sold, that it was, a lot of people in Hawaii itself are coming out and saying that they, they don't believe that narrative. And we've seen this happen in California. We've seen this happen now in Canada with, with smoke going all over the United States to where, you know, I, I woke up here and look outside on certain days and you can barely see the sun. It's, it's, it's a wild time to be alive. And so now another time. In Hawaii. So one only has to wonder how much of an anomaly is this? We, we, I cannot recall this many devastating wildfires at any given time. Now, what the mainstream narrative will tell us is that it's climate change, right? It's because you drive your vehicle to work every day and you fill it up with gas instead of our electric vehicles, which, you know, we create the batteries from, you know, coal and, and other fossil fuels. But, um, I digress. That's what we're talking about today. What this led into a conversation about was now being called a conspiracy, which is the idea of directed energy weapons, which I will dive into you with you. I didn't believe, I didn't understand this. I didn't know this was a thing. There's very few conspiracies that we go into, conspiracies that we go into that I don't have a clue going into it. And I took a deep dive into this over the last 24 hours and have been really, uh, Learned a lot about how longstanding these military operations and government funded science, uh, scientific experiments have been happening for, and I'm blown away. I I had no idea that this was going on. So I'm gonna take you through my findings. We're gonna walk through what's happening in Hawaii, uh, and we're gonna read it from the accounts of some, some people that were there, some accounts of people who have broken this stuff down. But the longer you stick around, the deeper. We get, all right. As always, leave a five star review. Hit that subscribe button. If you're here with me for the first time, I appreciate you. If you're here with me for the second time or however many times after that, go ahead and leave a five star review. Um, uh, it's literally the only way that you can give back to what I'm doing here today at this time, and that's all I want from you is if you know I'm putting a lot of work into this, if you can. Show that you appreciate that by just going in there, leaving a five star review. I hope that you enjoyed our silent weapons for quiet wars deep dive that we did last week, that we tied up with a bow. Uh, if you go to my Instagram, the Austin J. Adams, and you go to the most recent video on there about silent weapons for quiet wars, you can actually comment silent weapons onto that and I will automatically send you the documents and both of the deep dives. Alright. Before we get into all of that, I am going to dive into, or, or just jump into a, a video that has gone viral across the entire United States, because so many people are hungry, hungry to hear the, the narrative of the people and not the narrative of the propaganda that we're being sold. So stick around for that. But first, let's jump. Into it, the Adams archive. All right. The very first thing that we're gonna jump into today is going to be a musician by the name of Oliver Anthony. And if you have not heard this song yet, you have been living under a rock. Alright. In the last six days from this video being posted from a no-name artist, Oliver Anthony is now a one of the biggest country stars that there is. Okay? Six days, 10 million views. Wild to see how something in, in a time where, you know, we hear about the, the Renaissance time and, and, and the, you know, cultural movements of art and how art truly speaks to the times that people were living in and, and what, what the soul needs to be quenched when it's thirsty during those time periods. And I think that this song is one of those times I think that, that the American people are so thirsty, so, so, Fed up with the mainstream narratives, with the mainstream news corporations, with the, with the mainstream politicians. They're so fed up with it that it was just absolutely perfect timing for a song like this to come out. So, I'm gonna start your day off right? Let's go ahead and listen to this song that's been stuck in my head for five straight days. Joe Rogan posted this song about 36 hours ago, and I'm actually the number one comment on that post, giving a quote from this song that I love of has over 12,000 likes. Just my comment on this Joe Rogan post. But, um, Uh, there's some really amazing parts to this, so I'll, I'll give you a few of my favorite parts, but let's go ahead and, and listen to this because Oliver, Anthony just crushes this and I'll set the scene for you. I'll actually go ahead and, and show this on my screen for you as well. Uh, What I'm gonna pull up for you is actually the music video that he did in a, just a, a surrounded by trees in the woods. A deer stand in the background, three dogs at his feet, and what this like, awesome looking guitar in his hands. Um, so here we go. This is Oliver Anthony, rich Men north of Richmond.  I've been selling my soul working all day overtime, hours for bullshit pay so I can sit out here and waste my life away, drag back home and drown my troubles away. It's a damn shame. What the world's gotten to for people like me, people like you wish I could just wake up and it not be true, but it's, oh, it's living world with and so. These richmen. Know through Richman, Lord knows all wanna have total control. Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do and they don't think you know, but know that you do because your dollar ain't shit. And it's tax to know him calls a I wish politicians. Look out for miners and not just miners on an island somewhere. Lord, we got folks in the street. Ain't got enough in the heat and the whole beast. Milk and welfare. But God, if you're five foot three and you 300 pounds, taxes don't. Not to pay for your bags of fudge round, putting themselves six feet in the damn country. Does. Is keep on kicking them down, Lord. Hits a damn shame what the world's gotten to for people like me, people like you wish I could just wake up and it not be true, but it is. Oh it is living in the new. These rich men know the rich men. Lord knows they all just wanna have total control. Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do, and then don't think you know, but I know that you do. 'cause your dollar ain't shit and it's taxing. No hand calls. I've been selling my soul working all day overtime, hours for bullshit pay. Ooh. And if that doesn't speak to your soul, son, you have not been paying attention. God, that's amazing. All right, so Oliver, Anthony, as I just said, has had some incredible, incredible songs come out, but none other than that one right there that has just spread like wildfire across the entire psyche of the American public. And there's a few lines in there now. You know, I'll give you some, some context here. The rich men north of Richmond are the politicians, right? That's Washington dc. Some of the other parts that I found to be, you know, the comment that I made, That was the number one comment on Joe Rogan's Instagram of this post was that I wish politicians would look out for minors, not just minors on an island somewhere, calling out a number of politicians who were seen on Epstein's Island's flight logs, including our very own president. Bill Clinton, I believe it was some 17 times, bill Clinton was on the flight logs and 21 times or 21 times he was on the flight logs 17 times that he was logged into the White House. Epstein was, while Bill Clinton was in office, right? And, and, and so he talks about inflation, right? Your dollar ain't shit. It's taxed to no end. We talked about that in our last episode. The salesman that comes up to you and tries to sell you this idea of the government, and it just doesn't make sense today with all these frustrations that we have and all, all of the, all of the totalitarian control that he's referencing. They just, they just want total control. And he perfectly articulates this in the song and captures the, the essence of the American frustration in, in, in three minutes and 10 seconds perfectly. And as a result, this man now gets his due. He will be one of go down as, as one of the most famous country artists. Ever, I believe with a, you know, the, the, the songs that he's singing right now just resonating across state lines, county lines. Right. And, and there was some, you know, I posted that on, on Joe Rogan's. Video of this and, and some people were arguing about whether it was minors with M I N O R S or m I n E R S, right. I wish politicians would look out for minors, not just minors on an island somewhere. And what I believe that he was referencing and, and you know, we won't know for a little bit until the actual. Lyrics of this come out, but, and what a lot of people seem to think is that he, he's talking about m i n e r s. I wish politicians would look out for minors. I wish politicians would look out for the, the blue collared workers, the people doing overtime, hours, just trying to make ends meet. And, and again, I think this just perfectly encapsulates what we've been missing in the public. And, and speaks to the frustration, speaks to the, the angst of the American people. And, and the, the, the, the. Wanting to rid ourselves of the grossness. That is the, the hands of the politicians on everything that we do. Right? So I just wanted to play that for you. Start this thing off. Right. We'll move into the next topic. Right now, but I hope you enjoyed that song. I hope you go follow Oliver Anthony, uh, on YouTube, on Instagram, anywhere that you can find him. Um, go, go look it out or go, go listen to him. Go follow him. Pretty incredible stuff. Alright, let's move on to our very first topic of the day. But man, that song just hits home. Alright, uh, here we go. So this is the video. Of a news anchor who is showing the Maui wildfires, which is now the deadliest wildfire in American history. Let's watch this video. Maui where we have just learned that this is now the deadliest wildfire in modern US history and just behind us, this is the remnants of a house burned in another blaze as the entire island is battling ideal conditions right now for wildfires. What we know about this tragedy is already unbearable. Nearly 100 dead, more than 2000 homes and buildings destroyed. We are still so far from understanding the full toll, and we'll explain why tonight. This is the overhead view of the sweeping devastation in La Hana. We now know that only 3%, 3% of those homes have been checked for bodies. Just next to where we're broadcasting tonight, we have two cars incinerated by the wildfires. That right there was a Tesla. You can see what's left of the front row seats in the distance. That was a lush green hill. Now scorched to its core. It shows the power of these wildfires. The governor has been warning that the death toll will go up, and there are still so many residents who escape the flames but are now searching for their loved ones. And tonight, angry at officials and a warning system, they say failed them. MG Room, third room. Third MGM Tonight. This is what it looked and felt like. Escaping the LA wildfire. Oh, no guys. No, we, we. This new video showing the sheerer panic as a family stuck in a line of cars, had minutes to escape before the flames engulfed the road out. This is a disaster. That drive through hell is how Rafa Ochoa and his family made it out alive. I knew it was bad and it was moving fast, and it was moving fast, really fast. It got it got to our homes within seconds. With the fast moving fire, closing in on his home, Ochoa heroically grabbed both his kids and his friend's children. Their parents were at work and scrambled everyone out. Did you hear any alarms? Did you get any kind of warning? No alarms, no warning. Nothing. No. That's something that will come up in a little bit about the To police. Police rolling by telling us to evacuate or anything. Warning the desperation of those chilling moments. Now turning to anger. Where were you guys too? To try and get us out. Evacuate us. You know, we're mad. We're mad. No, we didn't just lose our homes. We lost our town. Lost history. You know, our kids are traumatized. You guys messed up real bad. Hawaii emergency officials have said sirens on the island weren't activated during the fire. Wow. The other alerts by phone crazy and broadcast were having seen that storm. Uh, we have, we have doubts. That much could have been done with a, a fiery, um, fast moving fire like that. The scale of the devastating loss now unprecedented in modern times, the deadliest wildfire in the US in more than 100 years, claiming at least 93 lives, just so you know, 3%. That's what's been searched with the dogs 3%. When we pick up the remains and they fall apart. And so when you have 200 people running through the scene yesterday, I don't know how much more you want me to describe it, that's what you're stepping on as FEMA and the governor survey, the damage search teams with cadaver dogs that just arrived to Maui yesterday. Now scouring the ruins of historic Lana again today. Are you saying we're just at the beginning of this disaster? So for the first few days we had done searches in the streets. Now the guy that you hear talking is the police chief. Uh, let me see if I can get his title up here. But he's the police chief of Laina of Hawaii, um, in Maui. Now, this man. If I'm not mistaken, I, I believe it is this man right here. There's some questions around this man, because apparently, and let's, let's double check first from some of these articles that I have up here, but apparently Yep. That's the same guy. The guy running the show in Maui right now during these wildfires is the, this, the police chief in Maui is the same guy who ran the show during the Vegas massacre. Something even crazier about this police chief is that he is a federal agent with a top secret clearance according to LinkedIn. Hmm. Now what would a man with a top secret clearance, a federal agent finding himself in the midst of two of the biggest crises in American history? One being the largest massacre, I believe, the largest mass shooting of any ever. And now the largest death toll, the deadliest wildfire of any in US history. What are the odds of that? What are the odds of that? How many police chiefs are there out there, and how did he find himself moving from Vegas to now Maui as the police chief? The same guy who ran the show during the Vegas massacre. Interesting. So let's go ahead and let's look a little deeper into that because the police chief, the one answering all the calls, the one talking to all the news media, coordinating every single part of the narrative here is the same exact guy. The same guy that did it during the Vegas shooting. And if there's a, you know, Hamm's razor. Would tell us if I'm, if I'm using that correctly, right. The least, the, the most likely scenario is the likeliest, right? It's like the, the one that involves the least moving parts. Sometimes that can be used in a different way. It's like, what? What is the likelihood that the same man. Right. Well, the, the, the most likely scenario here seems to be telling us that it's not a coincidence that this man was there in both instances, because statistically speaking, that just shouldn't be the case. Right. So let's go ahead and read more about this individual.  So let's start back at the Vegas investigation. If you recall. What ended up happening with that is they spent years of investigations tearing the guy's history apart. This says and spent millions of dollars, and they still had no idea what his motive was, why he was there with the guns, or that anyone anywhere was aware of it. Somebody else said the, that a reminder of the Vegas coverup, a high ranking Saudi aristocracy. Aristocrat got drunk and drugged and started shooting from their, her hotel window into a crowd. The United States helps cover up, but asks for the punishment of the guy, which the Saudis agree upon, and do it. Hmm. So they point to the Wikipedia, ar, or Wikipedia pages of the Las Vegas shooting. And if you recall, let's go ahead and just read this real quick. A 64 year old man from Nevada Open Fire on the crowd attending the 91 Harvest Music Festival on the Vegas Strip from the 30 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Hotel. He fireboard a thousand bullets, killing 60 people, and wounded at least 413. Wow. The ensuing panic brought the total number of injured to approximately 867. About an hour later, he was found dead in his room from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. How convenient The incident is, the deadliest mass shooting by a single gunman in American history. It focused attention on firearm laws in the us, particularly with regard to bump stocks. Ooh. Hmm. Says the 64 year old former auditor in real estate businessman who had been living 80 miles of northeast of, uh, northeast of Las Vegas in a retirement community in Mesquite, Nevada. Yeah, that sounds like who's gonna shoot 400 people. Had a long-term girlfriend and had no known children. He was son of Benjamin Paddock, a bank robber who was on the FBI's most wanted list between 1979 and or 1969 and 77 Pex only inter uh, interactions with law enforcement were traffic citations. Hmm. Yeah. Interesting. So same guy who was the police chief during this time. Right. Let listen what the governor of Hawaii had. Oh, alright. Jumping ahead of ourselves first about preserving. So let's go ahead and read a little bit about what people are saying about the Hawaii situation because some people are pointing to what the mayor. Uh, in, or I'm sorry, the governor is saying about the land already, right? They're saying that a lot of people seem to think that this is some type of land grab. So let's see what we have here. It says the governor of Hawaii already having ideas for the land being Laina moving forward. I'm already thinking about ways for the state to acquire that land so that we can put it into workforce housing to put it back into families or to make it open spaces in perpetuity as a memorial to people who were lost. We want this to be something that we remember, uh, after the pain path. Okay? I gotta tell you guys, I am so frustrated with investors and realtors calling the families who lost their home offering to buy their land. How? Dare you do that to our community right now. Frustrated hearing since yesterday that multiple families that I know personally were reached out and offered money from investors and realtors. Shame on you. Shame on you. If you are a Maui realtor contributing to that, karma's gonna come and get you. Hmm. Here is another video had to say about the fires of the destruction of Laina. It does appear like a bomb and fire went on. It does appear like a bomb and fire went on. All of those buildings virtually are gonna have to be rebuilt. It will be a new Lana in its own image, its own values. It's gonna be billions of dollars. We are so coordinated with state, county, and federal support that it took less than a quarter of a day, six hours to get the approval from the president to bring those resources in. This was, of course, a shock to see a hurricane and its winds. I think that we're seeing this for the first time in many different parts of the world. I've been contacted by several governors across the country to share their experiences in a time where global warming is combined with strengthening students. So let's just go over a few of the red flags there. It is the very first time that anything like this has ever happened. Hmm. Very interesting. They want to acquire the land as quickly as possible and turn it into government subsidized housing. And also there's been discussions around turning Le Hana into some sort of smart, connected city, right? You recall some episodes that we did on the 15 minute cities where basically it's just completely under totalitarian control exit. He said, very coordinated bomb and fire went off. All right. There's the other one. A bomb and fire went off according to the governor of Hawaii, why would you use the word bomb in a wildfire? I, I wonder how many, how many other wildfires you could go find where the governor of the state mentions bombs? Hmm. All we will need to rebuild is billions of dollars in its own likeness and own image with its own values. What does that even mean? And it's so coordinated with state, county, and federal support that within less than six hours, they got six hours, got approval from the president to bring resources, hurricane type wind that just happened to be the same time as the bomb, like fire governors calling to share their experience. So we start the press conference out with bombs and explosions, then set up how we're gonna get some smart cities in Hawaii and then we end it with 2030 propaganda of global warming. Right? Yep, exactly right. So we see all of these things coming together and, and we're gonna get into eventually how people are thinking that this actually happened. I wanna set the stage for you, right? The governor is saying bomb like fires. He's saying the immediate resourcefulness of the federal, state communities coming together to fund this operation, to buy out this land. Now, this land wasn't just, isn't just a piece of Hawaii. This land was originally a, a piece of land that is one of the most sought after pieces of land in Hawaii, in Maui. Um, the, these waterfront properties are worth tremend, like billions of dollars combined, and they would not sell the property to the government no matter how many times they came to them. Right. Now there's certain amendments within the Constitution that would allow them to, under certain circumstances, to basically take over this land by purchasing it at a fair price, uh, without the consent of the owners. And so let's watch one more video, maybe a couple more on this, and then we'll move into the actual directed weapons. It looks like there's a fair amount of videos actually on this, but I don't want to go too, too deep into other people's stuff. We'll do our own deep dive here, but I do wanna set the stage for you now. There's a guy named Matt Kim, who does a pretty good video on this that we'll go ahead and watch, and then we'll go from there. Several wildfires have broken out on the island of Mau. What's going on in Maui? There is a lot to unpack, so try to keep up. Several wildfires have broken out on the island of Maui, creating mass devastation and destruction, most notably, the town of Laina. This is not the people's fault, and our hearts go out to those affected. Why is Laina significant? It was once the capital of the kingdom of Hawaii. Prior to the forced US annexation and the eventual move to Honolulu, Lena is filled with native property and business owners that have dug their heels in and have refused to sell their properties to conglomerates such as BlackRock, Vanguard, and Oprah Glob Prime oceanfront property, still owned and managed by the natives. So what caused this destruction? Short answer, no one knows. All government agencies, local and federal have vehemently stated that it is unknown. However, there are two competing theories online. One environmental, the perfect combination of a major hurricane, 200 miles off the southern shore of Maui, combined with northern pressure to create massive dryness and winds were too diabolical. Something the conspiracy theorists call A D E W Direct Energy Weapon. And you will find that that's not just the conspiracy theories. That's articles from back from 1979 that we're gonna read that talk about directed energy weapons, so not just the conspiracy theorists. These are articles from like the Washington Post in the seventies talking about the Soviet directed energy weapons. What? I had the same response. So I started Googling the first article that pops up when you Google Maui. D e w is from Newsweek. It starts like this. The devastating wildfires in Hawaii have brought a new conspiracy theory from climate change deniers who suggest that the destruction was orchestrated by the federal government's direct energy weapons. Ugh. Anytime a propaganda media article starts with conspiracy theory by climate change deniers makes me wanna believe it more. Mm-hmm. Next article, fact checked. False. Wait, what? I thought the facts were unknown. How can we rule out trending theories as impossible already? Joe Biden just announced that the federal government will provide aid to those that lost their homes. That means homeowners who lost their houses and properties can now loan money from the federal government at a low interest rate. Your super valuable property that is skyrocketing value. You can now get a new mortgage courtesy of Uncle Sam. There are also countless efforts by the people to send aid and support to devastated areas. This would be great, except local residents are now saying that they're having difficulty delivering such aid and only FEMA and Red Cross aid is being allowed in roadblocks everywhere. No one allowed in or out. Hmm. And Maui is an island surrounded by water next to one of the largest US military bases. Local residents are saying that they received no advanced warning and that they only evacuated once. They saw the thick black smoke at their doors. Now that's an interesting concept that a lot of people are starting to talk about in some of these videos is that, that the, they said that, uh, some of the residents in this area said that every single Saturday at the first of each month, they do their emergency warnings every Saturday without fail, and all of the sudden there's a huge wildfire, wildfire that is creeping up to their doorsteps. And they don't, they aren't notified at all until the smoke is seeping through their doors. And if you recall, there was a false, like nuclear text message claiming that there was a nuclear bomb headed towards Hawaii at one point where they falsely stated that from a military individual who pressed the wrong button, now all of a sudden they don't know how to find the right button when there's a, a cata catastrophic fire coming and creeping up to the people's doors all around an entire island killing. Tens and hundreds of people, right? As they said in that article, there's only 3% of houses that have been searched so far, and there's 93 deaths. Let's do some math, right? 93. Let's multiply that times three. That's, uh, two hundred and seventy nine, two hundred eighty. Multiply that by 10, that's 2,800 deaths, potentially based off of the 3% rate at 93 deaths. That's just the math, right? And maybe there's more people, and maybe there's less people, but the off of the 3% math that we can do right there, that's what what we're probably looking at around a thousand people, more than that, right? That are dead as a result of this. And some people are asking why. Even the people that are on the the island are very, very skeptical of who and what caused this. And they, they don't seem to be convinced that it was a hurricane or a random fire. Right. It's like less than 3% of fires are caused by non manmade ways, and we're seeing this in every single wildfire instance. We're seeing that there's multiple locations being targeted that like a singular time that causes this massive, massive fire right around the time that there's extremely high winds, right? You cannot tell me that that's a coincidence. You cannot, I don't believe you. All of these wildfires happening simultaneously in all these weird areas coming together perfectly at the right time when there's a massive amount of winds. I don't believe you. So a lot of people seem to be very skeptical as well, especially when you have back to back, to back to back. You see California on fire. We see Canada on fire now. Maui on fire. Completely unrelated circumstances, and all of them seem to have to do with climate change according to, like he said, the most frustrating part about this, one of the most frustrating parts about this is that these fact checkers come out and say that, oh, it's absolutely can't be directed energy. Weapons fact check. False, not true. You don't know. You have no idea. Why are we ruling out the idea? Nobody's saying no. You know, it's, it almost shows the blame, right? It, it almost shows that, that they're so scared of this narrative when it could be Russia, it could be China, it could be any number of different countries that are targeting us with these weapons that they've been developing for over 50 years. But you want to immediately write it off, and that makes you look more guilty than anything. Alright? Um, Here we go. Let's go ahead and watch this. Let's go ahead and read this article here. Let's exit out of that video. Alright. There's another portion of this, and again, this comes from a video on Twitter from Paul's corner 21, and it says, many are speculating that the fires could have been intentionally set to disenfranchise The natives who owned the historic ocean from properties that were devastated in the blaze. Others believed the fires were started to level the area to make way for 15 minute cities promoted by the likes of the World Economic Forum. Hmm. Interesting. Even more people are curious why there are brick and mortar buildings burnt into rubble while surrounded by trees. That's kind of weird. So let's look at this video. Uh, mentioning some of the, the ideas around this and didn't flood them, didn't give them, you know, crazy, you know, other things. But it caused fires. It caused fires, and not only on Maui. But it caused fires in the most precious parts of real estate in Maui. Laina Front Street is worth billions. The Hawaiians that have been holding out and the Kanaka have been holding out for years not wanting to sell their property in Laa due to these big million dollar companies. It is not a coincidence, I don't believe how in the most precious parts of Maui, Kula, Laina, and that the locals that are standing strong and do not want to give up Oprah Winfrey's fucking view up in Kula that the Hawaiians are holding out on that the fire was going to the ho, the Hawaiians and the Kanaka that was holding right there on Front Street. Hmm. Interesting. So specifically targeted areas that seem to be worth lots of money where people were digging their heels in. Right now, when we get to what these directed energy weapons are and who is developing them, one of the largest names is Lockheed Martin, and when you look into who's the largest shareholders of Lockheed Martin, the list goes like this. State Street, 14% State Street, 14% of Lockheed Martin, Vanguard 9%, and BlackRock 7%. The very same companies that this man is claiming are going and after these properties and have been trying to buy them out. He didn't name them by name, but he's talking about those companies going to buy them out and take over this property, right. Now another conversation that comes up is around 15 minute cities. So the idea here is that Hawaii and the different islands of Hawaii have been used for test experiments, right? You wanna go back into shock testing and economic, uh, data mining and all of those things that we talked about in silent weapons for quiet wars. These are perfect areas. Each of these islands is its own economic institution, which can be leveraged and utilized in ways that you cannot imagine for data mining, right? You can release viruses, you can release, uh, uh, you know, you can make toilet paper scarce. You can do whatever that you want within these individual islands and use it as a way to leverage the data that you are, that you are getting because there's no other outside factors coming into these areas, right? And each one of them is their own control group. So that's why they're looking at Hawaii. And Maui specifically being a big part of the 15 minute city rollouts, right? The one that the World Economic Forum has been bragging about for so long, you'll own nothing and you'll be happy. Oh, and to get you there, we just have to burn down your current city with directed energy weapons. Maybe here's a video, maybe not, not a video. It's a picture of a video. It says, new mind-numbing conspiracy theory about this is from politics and Ed on Twitter around 15 minute cities is Maui fires in Hawaii, where supposedly set so they rebuild into 15 minute cities. Disgusting. It says, Hmm. Well, and you go back to what the governor was saying and the governor was saying that, you know, it will be a new. City it will be a, it will have its own culture. It will have a new feel to it, right? Hmm, hmm. Lemme go ahead and read this to you. This article that he's referencing, this is the, the Federal Agency concerned with weather modification activities are the departments of Agriculture, commerce, defense, and Interior. Plus the Environmental Protection Agency, the national, uh, aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Science Foundation. The Department of State is also interested in the effects on other countries of weather modification efforts. Uh, And some states also conduct weather modification programs in 1977. The federal government will spend about $20 million compared to 3 million in 1963 for such activities as fog, cloud and precipitation modification, ball and lightning suppression, uh, amite amyl, lation of severe storms and hurricanes, and other related activities. Most of the information gathering and analysis asked for the study required by the SS 1383 has already been performed recently by the federal government. During the past year. The domestic council through the Environmental Resources Committee, subcommittee of Climate Change, has completed an extensive study of the role of the federal government in weather modification. Hmm, maybe I don't know, causing such type of hurricanes so that you can then spark these types of fires with that much wind. That's interesting. Hmm. Yep. And we'll go into that in just a minute, right? It says that, uh, and yet others have put forward the theory that wildfires could have been started by environmentalist arsonists to justify climate change. Talking points already put out by the likes of the New York Times, which the New York Times claimed the n Maui fires are already one of the deadliest wildfires in modern US history. How did it happen? In a state defined by its lush vegetation, the explanation is straightforward as the planet heats up. No place is protected from disasters, says the New York Times. And yet no fact checkers coming here to say, well, actually nobody knows what happened here. Right. We don't know if this is from climate change. We have no reason to believe that. Yet you're jumping to conclusions while calling other people conspiracy theorists. Hmm. Sounds like you're directing the narrative. And there's some, there's some really horrific videos of people, uh, trying to get out of these, uh, uh, these fires. Right. The wildfires started Tuesday. Have, starting Tuesday, have scorched over 2000 acres of land, including most of the town of Lahaina, a rich cultural and historical area of the Hawaiian Island. Though the cause of the fires have yet to be officially determined, when the establishment makes a decision to quash conspiracy theories and questions, before all the facts are in, there's reason to be suspicious. And now you might say space lasers. Directed energy weapons. That sounds like something from Star Wars and you might be correct, but also this is something that we as a culture, as a species, have been studying since the sixties and have been implementing since very close to that. So let's go ahead and figure out what are directed energy weapons. What are these space lasers that people are referring to that could have started this fire? That's a good question. I'm glad you asked. Let's jump into it. So to to reference a few other things that mention this. This isn't the first time that this has come up. There's a Reuters article that says, Russia uses new laser weapons in Ukraine. Zelensky mocks wonder weapon. Now this was May 18th, 2022. And it says Russia dips into its secret laser arsenal. Russia on Wednesday said it was using a new generation of powerful lasers in Ukraine to burn up drones, deploying some of Moscow's secret weapons to counter a flood of western arms. Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2018 unveiled an intercontinental ballistic missile, underwater nuclear drones, a supersonic weapon, and a laser weapon. Lulu is known about the specifics of the new laser. Putin mentioned one called Pervet per per pervet. I don't dunno. I don't speak Russian. Named after a Midieval Orthodox Warrior monk, Alexander Pervet, who perished. Im Mortal Kombat. Yuri Borisov, the Deputy Prime Minister in, in charge of military development told a conference in Moscow that Pervet was already being widely deployed and they could blind satellites up to 1500 kilometers above Earth. He said there was already more powerful systems than Pervet that could burn up drones and other equipment. Bov cited a test on Tuesday, which he said had burned up a drone five kilometers away within five seconds. Great, and, and I want you to notice that keyword burned up. It is thermal. This action of this laser is just heating this up to the point where it burns it, right? That that is written by Reuters. Right? We are not talking about conspiracy theories. We are talking about a technology that is here today, right now that most of you are not aware of, that you should be horrified of. Because if this type of technology exists, imagine the implications of this when there's riots in the street for, I don't know, authoritarianism. Hmm. So just wanted to start this off with, this isn't all that crazy? Right? And if you still don't believe me, let's go back in time to Nikolai Tesla. Nikolai Tesla had created what he had as a theory of technology, which he called a death Ray. Let's go ahead and watch this short clip about it. An Israeli arms company known as Raphael Advanced Defense Systems reveals details of a laser defense system capable of shooting missiles from the sky with a pulse of energy, the futuristic military hardware. Is called iron beam. The concept of iron beam is that it's essentially a high energy laser that is designed to rapidly heat up the target that it's aimed at. We're talking about aircraft, drones, missiles. Anything that could launch an attack on a city could be literally destroyed in the sky by I and D. This sounds very much like Tesla's death, Ray. This is exactly the kind of technology that Tesla was talking about in the 1920s and thirties of using these beam weapons to shoot down missiles and projectiles. The war department sided with Einstein and Oppenheimer's atomic bomb, not with Tesla. But now what we're seeing is that Israel is developing this. Iron beam technology because they realized that atomic weapons were far too destructive. Is it possible that Tesla developed a time viewing or time travel technology and that he became aware of these developments? Tesla was once quoted as saying, the present is theirs, but the future for which I have really worked is mine. Did Tesla in fact see into the future might Iron Bean be proof that plans for the death Ray not only existed, but also may have even been confiscated and carried out by the United States government? There are those who believe that Nicola Tesla was not only in contact with extraterrestrials. But was sent here to earth by them to fulfill a mission and usher in a new age for mankind. One of the big questions is who is Tesla? Is he, in a sense, an avatar, an enlightened being that comes to the earth to help humans? No one really knows exactly what's going on, but I think all great artists and Tesla saw himself as artists, feel that they're instruments of a higher purpose, and Tesla certainly felt that he was working. Along those lines, there is an agenda for humanity. There is a plan, and in every generation, whatever power it is that's behind the plan sends to earth certain specific souls who are by birth more inclined and able to be receptors to the higher knowledge. Interesting. But that just starts the conversation right now. There's a whole deep dive that we could do into Tesla, which is super interesting in all of the technologies that he built and some of the things that they actually referenced there, which I seem to be, that's pretty interesting, right? The idea that there's these enlightened, uh, individuals who are these, you know, uh, satellite or, uh, re satellite, uh, boxes or, you know, that take in the, the, the technology ideas and, and implement them in, in the world, right? What percentage of people, there's like a handful of people who have really changed the dynamic of the technology of our world as we know it today, for literally everybody. And this could be one of those instances only, maybe it was put under wraps for quite a long time, because I have articles here from the sixties, okay? One of these articles. Let's go to this one first, which is dated 20 May, 1979. Death Ray weapons bid to outlink salt arm efforts. This conversation about direct energy weapons is not new. Nikolai Tesla had this idea way back in the thirties. It was discussed as a death ray weapon in 1979 in the literal, what was it? The Washington Times. Try and see who, uh, who actually published this article. Um, but no, here it is. This was the one that I was thinking of. Um, There's, there's article after article after article, and this is a sanitized version, and I, I pulled all of these articles from the ccia that discuss these direct energy weapons, so you can go to cia.gov, the reading room there and search direct energy weapons. I sifted through some of the articles there. This is what I found to be some of the most interesting. Alright, so the very first page of this one, right, released in 2013 about direct energy weapons from the C I A released again 2013. The very first page is denied, right? Still under wraps. They still will not release some of this information, right? So if you don't believe that these things are real, you need to wake up because the c i A has has had this on their website since 2013, right? Soviet's push for Beam Weapon is the name of the article. It says, U S S R developing charged particle device aimed at missile defense, exploring high energy lasers as satellite killer. It says, Soviet Union is developing a charged particle beam designed to destroy US intercontinental. In submarine, uh, ballistic missile, nuclear warheads development tests are being conducted at a facility at Soviet Central Asia. So all the way back in during the Cold War, they had these, these types of weapons that they were developing, right? This is nothing new, but yet they want to call you a conspiracy theorist for even discussing them, right? This article is named Soviet's Push for Beam Weapon. Another article is named Death Ray. Weapons Bid to Outlink Salt, warm, uh, salt Arms Efforts. Another one is, A literal letters back and forth between Soviet, uh, Soviet Union, um, discussions that were being had within people that were recently declassified. Another one of these articles is Soviets are developing their own star war system, right? But yet you are a conspiracy theory for even talking about directed energy weapons. And that one, that's the one I was referencing that was from the Washington Times. C i a Soviets are developing their own Star War system. So let's go in chronological order here, starting with the one from 19, let's see, 1960. Where was it? The one that was released in 2013. This is the very earliest one. A charged particle beam, uh, in projects, atomic part or. Sorry, this some, some of this is like typewriters type stuff, so it's not fully copied over. Um, a charged particle beam weapon focuses and projects atomic particles at the speed of light, which could be directed from ground-based sites into spaces to intercept and neutralize reentry vehicles. According to u s officials, both the U S S R and the US are investigating the concept of placing charged particle beams devices on spacecraft to intercept missile warheads in space. This method would avoid problems with propagating the beam through the earth's atmosphere. Because of a controversy within the US intelligence community, the details of Soviet directed energy weapons have not been made available to the president or the National Security Council. Recent events have persuaded a number of US analysis to that directed energy. Weapons are nearing prototype testing in the Soviet Union. They include detection of large amounts of gaseous hydrogen with trace of tritium in the. Upper atmosphere. The United States Air Force Block 6 47 Defense support system early warning satellite with scanning radiation detectors and infrared sensors have been used to determine that on seven occasions since November, 1975, tests that may have been related to development of a charge particle D beam device have been carried out in a facility in Semial tins, some Russian area ground testing of a small hydrogen fluoride high energy laser, and detection of preparations to launch the device on board of spacecraft. Some US officials believe the test of the anti-satellite laser may be related to recent Soviet activities on the demand. SST Space Station tested a new far more PO powerful fusion post magneta hydrodynamic generator to provide power for a charged particle beam system At. ASR in Kazakhstan near the Caspian Sea. The experiment took place late last year in an underground chamber in an area of natural salt formations in the desert near asr. Interesting. And now there's even some, uh, actual images that were on this, not copied over super well. Um, but it says, debate scene on charged particle work. So even back in the seventies, this was being discussed, right? It talks about the energy levels required, it talks about, uh, could be perfected. Project was abandoned at some 0.3 or theoretical blocks to this in-house research. Just reading you some of the headlines here and some of the underlying parts. It says through open sources, they learned that the Soviets had long since solved some of the problems that they ran into in tours Stinging. Hmm. And they give some diagrams, like this is, this goes pretty deep into this for, you know, it's like 8, 9, 10 pages long. Some of it redacted, the first and the last pages. Um, but again, I'll include all of this in the sub stack as well as, uh, the Instagram posts on this for you. So that was the very first one. The next article pops up and says, now this one is 26 pages, some of which are redacted. This was the National Intelligence Council in 1985. It was a letter from David Abshire, the Ambassador to Mission nato. It says, dear David, following up on a recent conversation in London, I have checked into where Washington stood in the preparation of unclassified fact she'd done Soviet efforts in the s t I field. You'll be glad to know that state, uh, that state is putting the finishing touches on such a paper, and I'm told you should have it fairly soon. In the meantime, I thought it would be, uh, you'd be interested in two unclassified articles done by agency analysts. Although these papers do not have any official STA status, they contain much excellent information that should prove valuable for use on background information. I very much enjoyed your presentation and was glad that we had a few minutes to chat. I had to stop in Brussels sometime this fall, and we look forward to seeing you at that time. And this goes into, the Soviet directed energy weapons. And it's 24 pages. 24 pages about this, about these lasers.   The key judgment says the Soviet Union is believed to have inter uh, to be interested in the development of directed energy weapons. For ballistic missile defense and anti-satellite applications, the Soviet Union has been engaged in research on the directed energy weapons technologies for as long as the United States, Soviet efforts are under the leadership of some of the finest scientific minds in the U s Ss r in directed energy technologies, the Soviets are in a, in a comparable or highly competitive position with respect to the United States, uh, the Soviets are believed to have progressed beyond the stage of pure or basic laboratory research, hostile Soviet reactions to the US Strategic Defense initiatives in lobbying against the S d I by high level support Soviet scientists. Hmm. Now just give you the outline. It says number two. Uh, page two is about laser weapons management resources, technology, advanced developments, particle beam weapons, which is differentiation, microwave weapons, Soviet responses to the s d I and bibliography. So one of the things that we've discussed before about this is the Havana Syndrome. Havana Syndrome was something that people believed was being targeted by the Soviet Union onto certain politicians of these types of weapons from the microwave weapons that are potentially being discussed within this document on page 13. See if we can pull that up for you here. But this is, this is nothing new. It's just the application that people are now waking up to, how this can be leveraged. So multiple articles. Since the seventies have been talking about this, and there's one, so one, one question I have was like, okay, can yes, these are real, can they be used to create fires? So I, I did a little bit of research on that. It's like, okay, of course it makes sense that if all they're doing is heating something up and they're, they're being utilized to, uh, further thermal uses and that's how they're d destroying these types of missiles and, and everything at a very, uh, very tactile or tactical and, uh, very accurate way. Could they be used in, in the same way that we're talking about here, right? Could, could they be used to start fires? I couldn't find much on that because it just seems so obvious. But I did find this from the US Department of Agriculture and it says laser ignition device in its application to forestry, fire and land management. It has a laser ignition device for controlled burning of forest logging slash have been developed and successfully tested the devo. The device which uses a kilowatt class carbon dioxide laser, operates at the distance from 50 to a 1500 meters, right? We're not talking about these directive wet energy weapons, but this is an example of how this has been used in the past to create controlled burnings. Acquisition and focus control are achieved by the use of a laser range fire finder and acquisition telescope. Additional uses of the device include back burning, selective undergrowth removal, safe ignition of oil spills. A truck mounted version will be operational by fall of 1987 and an airborne version by the summer of 1988. All right, so there's that to further discuss that. Now let's get into what the actual conspiracy theory is here. It's the same thing happened to us in Paradise, California. November 8th, 2018. Somebody said our homes were le uh, leveled to ash, but most of the trees were still standing. Houses, steel buildings turned to ash. Cars, trucks flipped inside or flipped upside down, but still the gas tanks were still intact. We were hit back in Paradise 11 eight of 2018 by directed energy weapons. Looks the same as paradise did. Maui looks to be the same cars burned out even the glass windows. Some of the cars in Maui had large holes in the hood of the cars and trucks. Looked like a direct energy attack to me, but trees next to the cars still had leaves on them. This, in my humble opinion, is another attack on their towns. Agenda 21, burn the people off the land and take everything away from them. The winds came up as soon as the fire started, just like in paradise and many mountain communities in Northern California. Prove me, I'm wrong. Learn what's happening. Our towns are under attack. None other than the new world order, taking everything away from us, burning our towns down. No early warning system in place tells me they wanted lots of casualties. Deaths, just like in paradise. We had no warning at all. They aren't playing. They're dead serious. Hmm. Right. And says the first day of every month somebody commented, they test the emergency sirens to make sure that they work. It's crazy that they didn't work in an actual emergency. And then somebody commented back from the C N N article that they said they didn't even try to activate the sirens. Hmm. So somebody says here that less than 1%, 1% of Hawaii wildfires are natural. They had four burnings all at once. It says they still have no official cause of the fire. The fear of a land grab amongst the locals is real. Most of the homes and lots were not properly documented, like most of La Haena, which was part of its charm. But we fear that land will not go back to locals, but instead, LA Hana will become w Kiki 2.0 and be developed like nowhere else on Maui. The way Lana was built could have never supported the government's idea of smart city, which they desperately want. Every official from the mayor, governor General, fema, red Cross, et cetera, has said the same thing. It looks like a bomb went off. It looks like a war. I conclude this. The lack of warning and the incompetence is alarming all on its own, but there is a bigger agenda here for Laina, Maui, Hawaii, and states, everywhere. Hmm. Very interesting. We live in buildings made with and full of accelerants. Well, that's pretty true. Very interesting. Uh, here we go on, it says, do direct energy weapons exist that can cause wildfires? Right. That's the question I've been asking myself. The question I've been asking myself through all of these wildfires is, can this be done in this way? Can it be a weapon? Do directed energy weapons exist that can cause wildfires? The answer is yes. Does the US government have the ability to use these resources? The answer is yes. Does the government have reasons to cause such events to create the appropriate circumstances for their narratives and to justify their policy changes? They say most certainly, yes. Can we prove that this event was caused by the government? No, we cannot. We do not have the tools or the knowledge to prove this. Now, we need to wait till there's more information, a whistleblower or some other thing. At the moment, all that we can do is ask questions. The media and the mainstream thinking will tell you that doing so is bad, but don't think there's anything wrong with that. We should always question authority, right? And that's, that's some of the most concerning parts about this, is like, this doesn't even, this doesn't even have to be like, if you wanna, let's, let's make this a more, let's make it a more palatable conversation. Maybe it is in the government. Maybe you look at Vanguard, maybe you look at State Street, maybe you look at BlackRock. Maybe it's them, right? Maybe the same people who were willing to release a virus into our country and to the world killing hundreds of thousands of people for profitability by enforcing mandatory vaccination, would also be willing to, I don't know, kill a thousand people and start a few fires to take over an entire island. Maybe they would do that for profitability. Maybe we should just be asking ourselves that question. Right. Is there, is there one of these corporations that you trust enough to know that they would not do this thing? I don't think that I trust them enough to, to believe that there's no way possible that they would do this. This seems very feasible to me from what we've learned about these companies and corporations and, and even our own government over the last I. Three, four years. Right. It seems very plausible that this was a possibility either by our government or by these corporations, which is, you know, truly in the oligarchy that we live in the same thing, right? Those corporations that I just mentioned own the politicians. So whatever they wanna do, they'll do through funding. That's just the way that our pay to play government works. Hmm. Alright, so let's get into the next conversation. Let's, let's lis, let's listen into the own words of our Secretary of Defense in 2020, where Mark Esper confirms that these weapons exist, confirmed that they will be weaponized to create fires just like this one. Here we go. Cyberspace conference. Thank you to the Air Force Association for hosting an important event that brings together the world's finest aerospace leaders and professionals. I. First and foremost, I'd like to wish a happy birthday to the United States Air Force for 73 years and counting you have provided. Our nation with force in particular has maintained uncontested air superiority for decades with persistent intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and precision airstrikes. Anytime, anywhere. However, our near peer rivals China and Russia seek to erode our longstanding dominance and air power through long range fires, anti axis, aerial denial systems, and other asymmetric capabilities designed to counter our strengths. Meanwhile, in space, Moscow and Beijing have turned a once peaceful arena into a war fighting domain. They have weaponized space through killer satellites, directed energy, weapons, and more in an effort to exploit our systems and chip away at our military advantage. Furthermore, our competitors and adversaries exploit cyberspace to undermine our security without confronting. Okay. If you didn't hear that, let me play it again for you, where he says that these companies could weaponize long range fires and killer satellites. Yet were conspiracy theories for bringing this up in a time where, I don't know, it appears that there was long range fires seek to erode our longstanding dominance in air power through long range fires, anti axis, aerial denial systems, and other asymmetric capabilities designed to counter our strengths. Meanwhile, in space, Moscow and Beijing have turned a once peaceful arena into a war fighting domain. They have weaponized space through killer satellites, directed energy, weapons, and more in an effort to exploit our systems and chip away at our military advantage. So these things have been happening for quite. Some time, right? Directed energy weapons, these killer satellites as he calls them this. Why do you think Trump implemented a space force? It wasn't for the, the comedic relief. It was because there is a real threat of countries and companies weaponizing satellites to create fires, to create, uh, explosions, to accurately target infrastructure, to accurately target, I don't know, real estate on an island that they want to take over by force in order to implement totalitarian smart cities. Maybe it's that maybe. Now what, when we look into the logistics of this and, and some of the, the things that might come up when we discuss the idea of those satellites is that in order for it to cause such a thermal, uh, reaction as we would see to start these fires simultaneously would be that the problem would be the atmosphere, the amount of, of energy that it would require to overcome the atmosphere when going from a satellite into the area that it's going to, to, to cause this fire. But why not extremely high altitude aircraft? Right? Maybe we can prove this through, uh, the, um, radar, uh, where it shows the, the aircraft that was flying over, right? Something like that may, I don't know. I don't know what it is, but it, it satellites seem unlikely. High altitude aircraft seems much more likely. 'cause then you don't have to deal with the atmosphere causing an eruption with the, the amount of energy that's being relayed. Uh, but here's. Now let's go into some other sources of this, talking about these directed energy weapons that a allegedly, according to the fact-checkers at Snopes do not exist of defense, spends about $1 billion annually developing directed energy weapons, such as high energy lasers and high powered microwaves. These weapons can disrupt or destroy their targets at the speed of light. For example, d o D has developed high energy lasers that have successfully shot down drones, but speed isn't their only advantage. They're also less expensive for use than traditional weapons like guns and missiles. Despite those potential advantages, d o D has had trouble getting these technologies out of the lab and into service. The Army has developed a detailed transition plan to support moving these weapons into the next stages of development. We recommended that the Navy and the Air Force develop similar plans that comes from the government accountability organization or office giving information on these very things that allegedly don't exist. Here's another video coming from Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin produces systems that do everything from detect the threats to identify the threats, determine whether it's a threat to the aircraft, and then employs the appropriate weapon, in this case, a laser weapon system. What we're hearing from our customers is that they need a layered, multi-domain defensive approach that can be integrated across platforms to neutralize these threats across all those domains. Imagine an aircraft equipped with a laser system with the capability to be able to neutralize a threat at the speed of a lightning strike. The precision of a surgical scalpel with the magazine to deal with a swarm and with the scalable effect. To be able to address that threat, providing an effect all the way the one end from simply deterring it for a short period of time, all the way up to completely neutralizing and defeating that threat. Now this video looks literally like something outta Star Wars. We were able to integrate our laser weapon system Athena into the classified C two network, and receive cues from the radar on the range in order to execute the full kill chain. I love how these people are just like Helios laser weapon system builds on 40 years of combat system, do lasers that, you know, maybe it could cause the takeover of the planet for everybody that I know and love and I'm really excited about it. And these lasers make things really hot and uh, it could. Kill everybody. So me and Stan at the office have been really working hard on this project for quite some time now, and we're really excited to roll it out. That's what's weird to me about all these things is like, what would it take from a societal humanistic perspective for people to just like throw up their hands and be like, you know what, maybe I shouldn't work at Lockheed Martin. Maybe I shouldn't work for the, you know, the, the, the literal military i

Brian Green is a non-resident Senior Associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies Missile Defense Project. Prior to his current position, he was the founder and principal at Impact Strategies, a national security consulting firm, and served as Executive Director of Aerojet Rocketdyne's Washington Operations Office, with planning and execution responsibilities for the company's defense business development and government affairs in the DC area. Prior to his work at Aerojet, he was the Director of Strategic Force Assessments at Systems Planning and Analysis, Inc.In his government service, he served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategic Capabilities in the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Policy, with oversight and policy development responsibilities for US nuclear forces, missile defense, military space, information operations, and arms control. He also served as the staff lead for the Strategic Forces subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and the lead for strategic programs on the House Armed Services Committee, in which he had legislative and oversight responsibilities for nuclear, missile defense, and military space programs. Prior to those assignments, he served on the staff of the Air Force Association, the Aerospace Education Foundation, and the Heritage Foundation.EPISODE NOTES:Follow NucleCast on Twitter at @NucleCastEmail comments and story suggestions to NucleCast@anwadeter.orgSubscribe to NucleCast podcastRate the show

Show SummaryOn this episode of Behind the Mission, we feature a conversation with Army Veteran Phyllis Wilson, President of the Women in Military Service for America Memorial Foundation. We talk about the important contributions of women in the U.S. Military and the Military Women's Memorial in Arlington, Virginia About Today's Guest Phyllis Wilson served 37 years in the Army as a Military Intelligence (MI) Voice Intercept Operator. She has served around the globe – visiting more than 35 countries – in Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, and North America.She has been mobilized numerous times to shoulder the duties of defense of the nation and has deployed to Iraq several times as an Intelligence Analyst with Special Operations.Chief Warrant Officer Five Phyllis J. Wilson served as the most senior Warrant Officer in the entire United States Army Reserve, and a key member of the Executive Team managing an organization of more than 200,000 personnel with an annual operating budget of more than $8 Billion.She was a Senior Military Fellow with the Chief of Staff of the Army's Strategic Studies Group focused on Global issues 2050 and beyond.Phyllis is a Registered Nurse and holds two Master's degrees, two Bachelor of Science degrees, and a certificate in Non-Profit Management from Duke University. She attended the Defense Language Institute for both German and Spanish. She is a graduate of the Program in Advanced Security Studies at the George C. Marshall Center and School in Garmisch, Germany. She has received numerous military decorations and awards ranging from the Legion of Merit to the Army Parachutist Badge. She has been inducted into the Army Women's Foundation Hall of Fame and the U.S. Veterans Hall of Fame.She is President of the Women in Military Service for America Memorial Foundation – the only major national memorial honoring the 3 million women who have defended America from the Revolutionary War to today. The Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, has appointed her to the Reserve Forces Policy Board. She is a member of the Board of Directors for Policy Vets and the Association of the United States Army (AUSA). She is also a Senior Fellow at AUSA. Phyllis serves as an Army Reserve Ambassador for Maryland which is afforded the rights, privileges, and protocol status equivalent to that of a 2-Star General Officer.Phyllis is a member of The American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Military Order of the World Wars, Association of the United States Army, Association of the United States Navy, Women Marines Association, Reserve Organization of America, Military Women Across the Nation, Army Women Veterans Association, Military Officers Association of America, Disabled American Veterans, Air Force Association, U.S. Army Warrant Officers Association, the Mayflower Society, the Daughters of the American Revolution, National Defense Industrial Association, and Women In Defense.In March 2020, Phyllis was named a Power Player of the Week on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace. View the video Here.She has eight children. Four of her sons are in the military and all are combat veterans. She has fifteen grandchildren and one on the way – October 2023!Links Mentioned In This EpisodeMilitary Women's Memorial Web SitePsychArmor Resource of the WeekThis week's PsychArmor resource of the week is the PsychArmor course, Women Who Serve. This course is an overview of the contributions women have made to our military forces. This course is intended for those who want to better understand women's role in our military.  You can see find this episode here: https://learn.psycharmor.org/courses/women-who-serveThis Episode Sponsored By: This episode is sponsored by PsychArmor, the premier education and learning ecosystem specializing in military culture content. PsychArmor offers an online e-learning laboratory with custom training options for organizations. Contact Us and Join Us on Social Media Email PsychArmorPsychArmor on TwitterPsychArmor on FacebookPsychArmor on YouTubePsychArmor on LinkedInPsychArmor on InstagramTheme MusicOur theme music Don't Kill the Messenger was written and performed by Navy Veteran Jerry Maniscalco, in cooperation with Operation Encore, a non profit committed to supporting singer/songwriter and musicians across the military and Veteran communities.Producer and Host Duane France is a retired Army Noncommissioned Officer, combat veteran, and clinical mental health counselor for service members, veterans, and their families.  You can find more about the work that he is doing at www.veteranmentalhealth.com  

[00:00:00] Jerry White: Risk has to be uncertain categories. There's legal risk, there's financial risk, and then there's what I call uncontrolled risk of things you don't expect that the government may impose. What if they decide for our property at Glen Erie that it no longer is going be tax exempt? Or what if the state were to do that sort of thing? Those are risks over which we have no control. The risk on leveraged investments, I think, is quite important. For instance, you may propose to a larger organization a $3 million project, but the money is not in the bank. And you have four donors who said they'll fund it, but will they, and if they do, what voice should they have in it? That's a huge thing.  Money given with strings attached is really quite risky. +++++++++++++++++++++ [00:01:02] Tommy Thomas: In this episode, we will conclude the conversation that we began with Jerry White in Episode 85. If you didn't hear that episode, Jerry White is the President Emeritus of The Navigators International. Prior to that he enjoyed a distinguished career in the United States Air Force, retiring as a two-star general. One of the reasons I wanted Jerry to be a guest is because of the depth of his nonprofit board service.  Among the boards he has served include  World Vision,  The Navigators.  Christian Leadership Alliance.  The Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability. The Lausanne Committee on World Evangelization.  The Air Force Association.  Let's pick up the conversation where we were beginning to discuss board governance.  Let's shift over to board service. How did your first board show up? [00:01:56] Jerry White: My first board that I served on was a small organization and besides a church board, every board is different. When I got into leading boards, like the Christian Leadership Alliance and being on boards like World Vision and leading The Navigator board the biggest thing is who you have on the board.  And that they understand what their role is on the board.  And my view is that they're not operational. They don't make operational decisions, and they give the CEO a clear path to glide on. And hold that person accountable. And on the board service, I found it extremely important to have people of varied backgrounds and competencies so that we weren't all monolithic and the board could not be a rubber stamp board, whatever the leader wants. Yeah, that's fine. Just go ahead and do it. But to take on true, what I call policy governance, and to realize that you aren't running it, but you're holding the CEO accountable for what they say they're going to do. And once in a while you have to intervene.  [00:03:14] Tommy Thomas: You mentioned having the right people on the board.  What is the secret sauce? [00:03:20] Jerry White: One secret sauce is you don't bring them on just because they've got money. That's probably the worst criteria you can have if people do not share the vision of that organization on whose board they serve. You don't want them on there. And if they happen to have wealth and are generous people, that's fine, but we don't own them. They have to be people who give more broadly. And before we bring someone on the board we have to first make sure for me, in the Christian world, to make sure that there are people of spiritual maturity. Not just people with a high reputation or lead a big church or are well known. I would not care if none of the people on my board were well known as long as they were people of high integrity and then have had some experience. We're always pushing for getting a younger generation of board members, but there's a limit to that. You have to be sure that they're really qualified as they come in. And then the next thing that I feel is extremely important is you train. You train them how to be a board member and what's expected of them as a board member. In a few weeks, I'll be going to Kenya with The Navigators and we'll be gathering the board chairman from all over the world for a time of interaction and sharing. That's a trickier one, by the way, when you become a board chair, is how to become a board chair, particularly in our developing world where things aren't quite westernized as much. Yeah. And what should a board really do? Because people have different experiences. It's different from a second board, a secondary board who has financial responsibility and is held accountable for the quantitative results of the organization. That's a whole different picture, a different kind of board. [00:05:40] Tommy Thomas:  Let's go to the board chair. Give me some words and phrases that would describe the best board chair you've ever seen or served under.  [00:05:48] Jerry White: I'll tell you, there are two board chairs that I think of. One was a man by the name of Clay Brown. He wasn't the board chair, because I was chairman at the time. But he was certainly the key senior statesman on our board. He was measured. He was wise. He had a strong business background, and he had a passion for what we did. Our current Board Chair for The Navigators is doing an absolutely remarkable job and he leads several companies but has really given himself to being Chairman of The Navigator US board. The other thing is that the Board Chairman cannot be a jack of all trades. In other words, they can't be chairman of five different boards at once. Because I don't think anybody who has another job has that kind of time. But in knowing that they bear a particular responsibility within that organization to draw together the board, the executive team or the executive committee, and to really help lead them and keep them in their track and their track being on the policy governance side. And so the board chairs, and when I've done a board, I hope I've done this, is to really be prepared. You do not do this on the backhand, walking into a board meeting and 10 minutes ahead of time asking the CEO – what's the agenda? [00:07:25] Tommy Thomas:  Speaking about that working relationship, I know that's critical. Think back on your experience. How often does the Board Chair need to meet with his or her CEO? [00:07:35] Jerry White: First of all, they need to be friends, but I remember as a board member of a particular organization I wanted to be friends with the CEO and very much was. Then I became Board Chair and I said to him, our relationship is going to be a little different. I am your friend, but also, I'm accountable for the direction of the organization. And therefore, I'm going to be asking things of you that maybe I would not do if I was just a good buddy walking alongside and wanting to affirm you. So I think you need to be friends, but you'll also need to know that you have the responsibility for the policy direction of the organization and for the health and wellbeing of the CEO.  [00:08:27] Tommy Thomas: Go to that board meeting for a minute. What's been your best experience and who sets the agenda for the Board Meeting? [00:08:32] Jerry White:  For me, the Executive Committee needs to set the agenda. It needs to be proposed by the CEO because he knows the action items. And you've got certain performer things you've got to do on accountability of finances and income and disbursements and so forth and certain things on personnel. But I would want the CEO to come up with a list of what needs to be addressed, work with that CEO and perhaps the CFO to create an agenda with the Executive Committee that actually says how is this going to serve the work? And what are the decisions?  And I have three ways of assessing an agenda for the Board Meeting. What is information? We don't have to make any decision on it.  What is counsel? The CEO or somebody wants counsel on a particular item.  What decision needs to be made? So, every topic in the board meeting, I like to write along the side, the margin, inform counsel, decide. [00:09:48] Tommy Thomas: From a functional point of view, they wouldn't necessarily be in any order. They just as they come up, they're one of those three.  [00:09:58] Jerry White: No, it'd be one of the three. Your board meeting is usually divided into segments.  The CEO Report The Field Ministry Report The CFO Report Then there's a legal report. There may be certain personnel decisions that need to be affirmed. And by the way, that could be another way you would put it to affirm a decision. That's a little weak. And so you would structure your meeting not according to what you're going to decide, but according to what topics need to be addressed in the 24 hours you have together. And by the way, to really require that homework be done on the part of the staff making the decisions that “read-aheads” are there. And the right people come to make reports inside the meetings.  ++++++++++++++++++++   [00:10:51] Tommy Thomas: When somebody joins your board what does onboarding look like? [00:10:55] Jerry White: The onboarding looks for several organizations I've been working for two to three years with before they come on board, talking with them about it, seeing their interest,  getting a biography, bringing it to what I would call the nomination committee of the board. And the good boards that I work with have a roster of people that they're talking to that's very confidential and some of them never come on the board. And then as they are approaching it, you may even ask someone to actually sit in on a board meeting. And to see whether or not it meets their expectations. That isn't always possible. But in one board that I'm on, we have some junior members on it. This is on a board where we have younger leaders who come and serve for two years, and they don't stay on the board, just to give them experience. But then when you're onboarding, every board annually at least, there needs to be, in my mind, an orientation for the board where you go over the history of the board, you go over things. So they're not just in a befuddled mystery at terminology and history. It's like being in a family joke and nobody knows what the story was behind it. They have things that are ongoing and they have no clue. We need to bring them up to speed, both emotionally, historically, and personally. And it doesn't need to be long. It's for maybe half a day. And I've done this in a secular organization too, insisting that no one come on the board who doesn't have some orientation, both as to what a board does and what a board has done. [00:12:55] Tommy Thomas: Do you do a meeting evaluation or how do you keep your meetings fresh?  [00:13:00] Jerry White: Most boards do have a little evaluation afterward that they fill out. It's often, Tommy, their perfunctory and there of some limited value, the value mainly being that you asked, but I think the Chairman and the CEO, when they see things happening in the board, that afterwards they need to interact with them and saying, what do you think about it? How do you feel that board meeting went? And now that you've been in on X number of board meetings, say to tell me what you think and how can we help you be a better board member? Committee assignments are pretty important. Also, when I went on one board, it took me, Tommy, it took me two years to really figure out what was going on. And I served nine years and it was such a complex organization that it was really hard and took a lot of work to try and understand the dynamics behind this organization  [00:14:08] Tommy Thomas: Let me ask you to respond to this quote. “You need a director on the board who will be a pleasant irritant. Someone who will force people to think a little differently.  That's what a good board does.”  [00:14:21] Jerry White: In one board that I'm on, we appoint someone at every board meeting to be what we call a responsible skeptic. And that person is designated ahead of time. And that person, their job in that board meeting is to be a bit skeptical. Now, I think you have to be a little careful about always having a person who's always skeptical. I don't think I want a board member who every time something comes up, they raise their eyebrow, and you wonder what they're thinking. I think everybody ought to be a little skeptical at some time. And the main thing is if they don't understand something they need to ask. In other words, they need to do it. I was in a board meeting recently where a particular decision was in the process. And two of us on the board, I was an emeritus to the board, and the other was on the board. And I could tell there was a bit of discomfort. And so the chair asked that other person, they hadn't said anything, what do you think? And came up with a pretty good counter. Now I haven't got real good hearing, so I couldn't hear what he said. And then the board chair said, Jerry, what do you think? And I was like a deer caught in the headlights. And I said I couldn't hear what he said. And I said, we said exactly the same thing. And what was moving down the road to be a crafted decision was put aside and not done. I'm very wary of creating board actions on the spot, a statement or whatever it may be. The best way is to say, would somebody take this and come up in three or four hours, take a coffee break and craft us a statement on what we're trying to do. So I do believe that the chair needs to be able to look in the eyeball all around the way and see if there are some questions or if someone has been particularly silent, I think you need to say what do you think?  ++++++++++++++++   [00:16:34] Tommy Thomas: How do you draw that quiet board member out?  Some people just don't speak up unless they have something to say, which is probably a good thing. But how do you draw the quiet person out?  [00:16:46] Jerry White: I just say, Jack, what do you think about that? I say be very direct. I say, you've been listening to this discussion. Do you have anything to say? I don't want to force him to have to say something, but I say, this may be the expertise of the person that I'm asking. And I'll say Joan, your expertise is in this area, I know you've been through this before. What are we not hearing? What questions do you have? And that gives them freedom to speak out. And the other thing is I don't think people should speak out, particularly declaratively. That is, I believe this, and you got to do this. And I don't like that because that puts themselves on the table. But people learn to be able to share in a non-confrontive fashion. [00:17:44] Tommy Thomas: Let's go to financial accountability. You and I are old enough to remember the Enron scandal, and then if you've been paying any attention to the last two or three days, you've seen the Silicon Valley Bank go under.  In both of those things, there was board culpability. Neither were nonprofit, but they will both board culpability.  How do you get your boards to make sure you're addressing the financial aspect, a judiciary responsibility of the board?  [00:18:10] Jerry White:  It's a CEO's responsibility to make sure that the right questions are answered.  And it's got to be more than just an audit.  We want a clean audit. And you don't want to have to go to the bottom notes and say, here's something we should correct, but we need to guide the board through the financial realities of what we're doing. But at the end of it, I think you need to have a risk analysis that says, okay, where are we vulnerable? For instance, in our litigious society today, we have a lot of risk, and I think of ministries that have Christian camps and all the sexual liabilities and all of that. They are at risk all the time when you're working with minors and then I think people need to ask questions of the CFO and the auditor, where do you see us being at risk? What would happen if, what if happened? You have a September 11 or you have a Covid pandemic. And you have to say, our whole income stream is going to be jeopardized. And then I think you need to look and say, where are our major vulnerabilities for both expenditure as well as income? Now that's, it's very different in a Christian organization than it is a secular organization like an Enron or the banks or whatever it is. The fault there goes so that people don't ask questions, or that the actual realities have been hidden from it and just saying, oh, it'll be okay.  ++++++++++++++++++= [00:19:56] Tommy Thomas: From your perspective, how does the board get involved in strategic planning?  [00:20:02] Jerry White: Boy, that is a good question, Tommy. The question is, who does the strategic planning? Okay. Let's say that we're in a very small developing organization amid developing, and a large organization, they're very different and the very smallest organizations, the board may be highly engaged in the strategic plan because it's such a small organization and they're so fragile. As a general rule of thumb, the board may do strategic thinking, but strategic planning has to be on the part of the CEO and his or her staff. And the plan needs to be brought to the board for their interaction. And then approval. And that's particularly true with a large organization. The board can't do strategic planning. They can do some strategic planning for the board. That is, how should we develop our board? What expertise do we need? But as far as a ministry for most organizations, as large as the navigators or crew or some others, they aren't gonna know the details of what's going on out in the field or how they have to pretty well react and respond to the strategic planning initiatives that they may come up with. How many staff, what countries are we doing to go into? What are we not going to do? What are we gonna stop doing etc. So the board certainly needs to approve the strategic plan. Chances are, even when they do that, They won't know it very well. I'm just sorry that, when you're not, when you don't have to carry out a strategic plan, it's hard to really know it. [00:22:00] Tommy Thomas: The ones that created it, that have been involved in hammering it out, they're the ones that know it. [00:22:06] Jerry White: That's right. And then you have to, with every strategic plan, you have to set, have a set of outcomes and a set of risks, and then you have to say, how much is it going to cost to implement this? [00:22:22] Tommy Thomas: I think the risk thing, that could almost be a podcast in and of itself. I interviewed Dr. Sandra Gray, the President Emeritus at Asbury University and she was a former banker before she got into higher ed. And her thought was that nonprofit boards probably don't pay enough attention to the risk of the organization. [00:22:40] Jerry White: I think there's no question on that, especially risk has to be uncertain categories.  There's legal risk, there's financial risk, and then there's what I call uncontrolled risk of things you don't expect that the government may impose. What if they decide for our property at Glen Erie that it no longer is going to be tax exempt? Or what if the state were to do that sort of thing? Those are risks over which we have no control and the risk on leveraged investments, I think is quite important. For instance, you may propose to a larger organization a $3 million project, but the money is not in the bank. And you have four donors who said they'll fund it, but will they, and if they do, what voice should they have in it?  That's a huge thing. Money given with strings on it is really quite risky.  [00:23:46] Tommy Thomas: Hadn't thought of that. [00:23:46] Jerry White: And I've served on the board of the ECFA and they're very good at this. In terms of helping people think through risk and failure and financial accountability.  [00:24:01] Tommy Thomas: Let's look at the CEO evaluation.  I know you've been involved in a number of those, and you've been evaluated as a CEO. What are some takeaways? [00:24:10] Jerry White: You must be evaluated. Now we have a number of kinds of evaluations. You have a 360 evaluation, and some people are very skilled at that. It's very threatening to some CEOs, but it's necessary. I feel that there needs to be an evaluation within the organization, I had one. I had someone who evaluated me every year and they had the freedom, and they did call my wife, call my kids, talked to my coworkers, my peers, talked to those who worked for me, gave a free reign to ask certain questions. The questions need to be carefully thought through. They can't be so invasive. But the evaluation is of several levels. One is certain on a moral personal level. I do not think a committee can do that. Every CEO needs to have the kind of people in their lives who will blow the whistle on them if they say anything wrong. And the small Executive Committee needs to be aware of how that could happen. The second in terms of an evaluation is performance against set out goals. The third is relational. How's their team going? What do they think? What are the issues? And to give the feedback to the CEO and I think to give it privately and then in the board, and we do this to give a summary analysis, but the board should not be privy to the detailed questions. It's a really touchy process. And the evaluation needs to be, not be a pass fail, but Loren Sanny taught me it should be a progress review. How are you making progress toward the things that you have said you want to do? [00:26:15] Tommy Thomas: Let me close with a question that I ask often, particularly to people that have been on boards a long time as you have. How has board service changed over the last decade?  [00:26:25] Jerry White: I'm not sure about the last decade, but certainly over the last two decades the area of risk and financial accountability has increased tremendously. The litigiousness of our society has made a tremendous impact on how a board functions. So those two things, the financial accountability and the potential lawsuits and things of that nature. Tommy, I don't know that I can make a generalist statement about how boards have changed, but I can say that through the last 20 to 30 years, the boards have become more important and more vital to our organization's future than they were a number of years ago. Many years ago, even in The Navigators, the board was a cheering section for Dawson Trotman and Lawrence Annie.  Go get 'em and thanks for letting us know what's going on. To a point where we had to be accountable for the finances. 911 changed everything, by the way, particularly for anyone operating internationally. When you're sending money across international boundaries, you have a whole different level of accountability financially imposed by the government. And I'm speaking only from the viewpoint of the United States, and you get into all these other countries with all different kinds of demands and requirements and corruption and what have you. The boards have become far more important to the organization's health. And I think the public has a right to know who's on your board. And when I look at an organization as I've done even the last few days, and I look through who the board members are, it isn't that I need to know them, but that they're there as real people with real names that if one needed to, you could connect with them. ++++++++++++++++++++++ I hope you enjoyed this conversation with Jerry White. If you're ever at a conference where Jerry is speaking or leading a breakout session, make sure you attend those sessions. We all have so much to learn from Jerry White. Our guest next week is Paul Mauer. Paul is the president of Montreat College.  When Paul was selected to be the President of Montreat, the college wasn't very far from closing its doors. What has happened at Montreat over the past nine years is nothing short of miraculous.  [00:29:06] Paul Maurer: I started my first presidency 13 or 14 years ago, and I remember going to the president's conferences and coming back after two or three of those, and I said to my cabinet, here's my takeaway, change or die. And then I was out of the presidency for a couple years. I began to go back to those meetings again. When I came to Montreat nine years ago, I came back to my cabinet, I said, they've inserted the words fast change, faster, die. We've taken on the mindset of a startup. So, we consider ourselves a 107-year-old startup. We're not a turnaround. We're not maintainers.  We're not traditionalists. We try to employ the principles of a startup, meaning we're creating something new. And so, I think in the next five to ten years, we're going to see a pretty dramatic change in the number of colleges and universities in the United States. The enrollment cliff is real. The declining birth rates are real. And it's going to have a really major impact on the number of schools that close.   Links and Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas The Navigators Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability Christian Leadership Alliance   Connect Tommy Thomas - tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Tommy's LinkedIn Profile Jerry White's LinkedIn Profile  

[00:00:00] Lisa Cummins: I think the question I would ask is what is your employee turnover? And because I have found nonprofits come and go, employee turnover helps me understand what your commitment is to, what your ability is to lead, and what your consistency is with your values.  Because if you're not consistent, employees won't stay long. ++++++++++++++++++++= Tommy Thomas: Today, we're continuing the conversation that we began last week with Lisa Trevino Cummins. Lisa spent the first 12 plus years of her career with Bank of America where she expanded the bank's community development initiative to become one of the first national corporations to partner with faith-based organizations in underserved neighborhoods. From Bank of America, Lisa was called to help launch the White House Community and Faith-Based Initiative. In 2003, she started Urban Strategies where she continues her work to make resources more available to underserved communities.  Since founding Urban Strategies, Lisa has been a catalyst of several initiatives that resulted in almost $40 million of new programming focused in low-income communities.  Let's pick up the conversation when I was asking her about the early days of Urban Strategies.  [00:01:23] Tommy Thomas: You're probably not the first founder I've interviewed but you'd be one of the first.  What was the genesis of Urban Strategies?  [00:01:29] Lisa Cummins: Yeah, I mentioned that I worked for 12 years with Bank of America and about the last five years of that, and again, I had this parallel path of working in the bank and being fairly successful in that. And then the second parallel path to that was working in the church. And really that's where my heart was about year seven or eight into this journey of the bank. I started questioning why those two paths were divergent. Why, if I'm talking about if I'm working in the bank to address communities in need and why is that different? Why is my church life not connected there? I read a book called The Jesus I Never Knew by Philip Yancey.   And that really helped highlight the passages in the scripture that, even though I've read the Bible three or four times, I really never saw those passages in Matthew about serving those in need, about loving your neighbor, about justice, about God's heart for the poor. When he talks to the Israelites and judges has some judgment on the Israelites because of how they treated the marginalized. So, I had this, what I call a “holy agitation” and where my spirit was struggling with this, and about that time the Lord, it was the Lord. But the bank asked me to move to St. Louis to help start the community development group I had in Texas, to help start that in a bank that we had purchased in the Midwest. So, I had five states reporting to me. Developing from the ground up. It was a hard move because I was really on the fast track in San Antonio politically and socially. So I ended up moving to the Midwest and it was a hard transition. We didn't know anyone there. That community was not familiar with the culture that I came from. Spaghetti sauce substituted for hot sauce at the time, and that's hard for a Texan. And during that time we ended up at a church that was not part of my tradition. I was from a Pentecostal background. This church was a PCA church. And long story short,  We saw, in action, the answer to that question and that holy agitation I was wrestling with because this congregation was very intentional about reconciling people to God and reconciling people to one another. And so, you had a congregation before multiculturalism became popular. They were really living that out and very intentional about it. And that became a pivotal point for me in terms of recognizing the role, the opportunity, the obligation that the faith community had to serving its neighbors, to loving its neighbors. And one thing led to the other. My pastor in Texas, I had brought him to the Midwest, said, you got to see what I'm talking about. And so he said, he came 24 hours. He said, Lisa, my world's been turned upside down and I'm going to meet with the governor next week. Can I tell him about this? I'm like, sure, you can tell whoever you want to. It happened to be Governor George W. Bush. And so, when they met it wasn't long after that I got a call from the governor's office and said, hey, we want to understand what you're doing and what you're working on because that's something we want to do in Texas.  And so, the governor became president and then they asked, we want help.  We want to develop this faith-based initiative nationally. Can you come to the White House and help us do that? I had three kids under three. The twin boys that were six months and my daughter, who was two and a half and my husband.  We moved to DC and ended up working there for a couple years.  [00:05:23] Tommy Thomas: So, when you finally spun off and went out on your own what was that first year like? [00:05:27] Lisa Cummins: The first year was, when you work in the government, it's illegal to set up your business for when you're going to be, for when or relationships or anything, or when you're going to exit.  I exited because I felt that my calling was to work with the church to love its neighbors.  I had come to the end of what I could do with that internal to the government. And I saw the need and opportunities on the outside of the government to still further move along that calling. And so, I left the government, and I remember driving. I was like, I'm going to do this. I don't know how, I don't know where, but this is the work I have to continue. And so, I let folks know that was happening. And I got a couple of small contracts. I remember that first check, I don't know, it was $10,000 or something. And I was so proud of that because I am entrepreneurial and just that sense of being able to build something and then get paid for it was pretty cool. But it was a time of learning. It was a time of flexibility. It was a time of really trying to find my way. I remember there's a fellow named Gordon Loux, I don't know if you know him. He always said, Lisa, the challenge you're going to have is figuring out where you're going to focus. And he's right.  We do all kinds of work, but the common thread has been low income or it's not low income. The common thread has been working with Latino populations. Why? Because that's what I know best. And working with the church. And today we do that in all 50 states. We do that in Puerto Rico, we do that in Central America and do in all kinds of arenas. I'm sorry, I think I diverted from your original question. I remember Tommy, I will say one vivid recollection I have, it was about August, September of that first year of 2002. This is our 20th anniversary at Urban Strategies. And I remember being really frustrated because I saw the need was so significant in communities and I didn't have any resources. I remember a woman saying, Lisa, I don't think we need federal funds because God owns the cattle on a thousand hills. I'm like, I agree that God owns the cattle on a thousand hills, but where those resources are, they're not being released to the communities I work in. So where I do have access is federal funding. And I was wrestling with that idea and wrestling with God about why is it so hard to get resources? And I never got an answer on why, but I got the comfort of understanding that if I'm doing God's work, God's going to provide. And so, I was able to let that go. Let that go. And God has.  [00:08:22] Tommy Thomas: So, what counsel would you give an up-and-coming wannabe founder?  [00:08:29] Lisa Cummins: I go back to what that pastor told me 20 something years ago, to make sure it's what you're called to do. The work that is called to do. Two is not make your ownership the goal but make your goal that calling.   That calling can be pursued in a number of different ways. It can be in partnership, it could be like, I was in banking, I was very much an entrepreneur in banking even though I was part of this structured company of 60,000 employees. But I was running my own thing. So, I think it's really important to not think, not to lead with the form or the structure, but lead with the calling and purpose. And I think the form of structure then will come and will be made known. You'll understand what that is. If in fact that means setting up your own organization, I would say keep your costs low. I'm still at the office where, this call is from my home. So, I was doing remote work 20 years ago, before it became popular. Our headquarters folks asked us today, where is your headquarters? I'm here in Arlington and this has been my office for the last 20 years, but we don't have a headquarters because we're based all over the country. I didn't make those big expenses early on and so it gave me some freedom to not have to worry about how I was going to pay for those things. And it allowed me to focus in on again, what my purpose in calling had been.  ++++++++++++++++++++++=   [00:10:00] Tommy Thomas: Another question first. And you may have answered this all along the way, but can you think of a time when you felt like you had found your professional voice that you know, that you were comfortable in your skin? [00:10:13] Lisa Cummins: Yeah. Tommy, that's an interesting question. I think it depends on who is listening to that voice. I think being raised in a community where you're the first or you're the only one has caused me to be hesitant about my voice. Even among people who are well-meaning and I know are great folks, the differences in our upbringing, in our culture, in our understanding and our experiences would cause me to be comfortable in a second seat. Because for me to be comfortable, behind someone in leadership or behind someone that's front stage. I think there's some real benefit to that. Because I think that comes with having a sense of humility that requires me to really focus on what is it that matters to me. Is it that I'm at the front with a microphone or is it that this gets done right? And so, I think there's been a lot of that. Having said that, over time it's funny when people say wow, you're an expert at this. I'm like, I don't feel like it's just because I've lived longer, it's just because I have a few more gray hairs. That I've been able to speak on things. And so, I think in the last 10 years, I think I actually have become more comfortable in my voice. I have, and in some ways that's a sad reality because I think I had a lot to contribute prior to 10 years ago. And having said that, I think that I am not as concerned anymore about what others think, nor as concerned about what others might think. And there's a term that our culture uses today that's called gaslighting. And as I understand it, gaslighting is causing people to believe that it's their failure. That has resulted in x, y, z consequences rather than the person that's doing the gaslighting. And I think in some ways I've allowed myself to be in that place of being the individual, the part of a community that is at fault or is less than or it comes short and hasn't recognized the value that I bring to the table. I think Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book about David and Goliath that's along those lines about, everyone saw David as the minuscule person who's going to be tossed and defeated, etc. But David's experiences brought him some things that really allow, besides the divine, besides God being part of that story. But it allowed David to bring some understanding of resilience, of working under pressure of working with, few less resources, etc. That's what my community has brought to the table, and I think I've, over the last 10 years, I've owned that more than I had in the past.  [00:13:21] Tommy Thomas: Earlier in the conversation you were talking about transparency and maybe you said you might've got hurt a little bit there. This is a quote from Joyce Meyer that I'd like for you to respond to. She writes about what she calls the Judas Kiss Test - The test of being portrayed by friends that we have loved, respected, and trusted. Most people in positions of leadership for any length of time are likely to experience this.  [00:13:48] Lisa Cummins: Unfortunately, if I've experienced that more times than I'd like to, that I'd like to admit, and hopefully I haven't been the perpetrator of that for anyone else. I think when power and greed come to the picture things change and I think all of us are susceptible to that. And I think that I've had some very difficult situations that have been driven at, in hindsight by those two things. And I think for me, the key is what I need, I am always checking myself to make sure that I'm on the right side of that story. And if I'm not to make amends and to identify what there is that I can, that I need to adjust on my end. But yeah, there's been things, and I think any business owner, any leader,you're susceptible to folks who maybe at one time, they were the best of, they were the trusted confidant, but something changed in their environment. Something changed, and those that influenced them, something changed in their circumstances that caused them then to make this Judas kiss. Ironically, we're talking about it this week. But yeah, those are very hurtful and that's probably been the most difficult part of my career is those circumstances and, if I didn't care about folks it wouldn't matter. But the ones that hurt the most are the ones that were people you care about the most. That's where it's going to hurt the most. And it's just part of where we are, part of humanity. And so I try to learn from that. I try to also appreciate, a friend of mine said, Lisa, don't ever trust me without accountability,and she's my most trusted friend. But she said that to me because she loved me, and she knows that all of us have shortcomings. And I think accountability is key. And another friend told me, a banker that's been my friend now for the last 25 years, she's our CFO. She says check what is it, trust and verify. And so I'm learning to do that better. Trust and verify.  +++++++++++++++++   [00:16:04] Tommy Thomas: Let's switch over to board service. Because obviously you report to a board, you serve on several boards. And I just would appreciate some of your input here. So, when did your first board show up?    [00:16:16] Lisa Cummins: So actually Tommy, I'm an LLC so, technically, I don't have a board. Having said that, we do have a couple of projects that require a board. So, we've set up a board for those projects. And I don't have a board, not primarily, just because when I started the organization that was establishing a 501(c) 3 and all the process that goes with that just wouldn't happen fast enough for the kinds of things I was doing. Having said that, I do have people who I trust. And so I hold myself accountable to our CFO, to our employees. I hold myself accountable to, and then I have some outside friends that have been on the journey with me for decades who I hold myself accountable to. So having said that I do serve, I have served on a number of boards. And so, I think there are different kinds of boards. Some are boards where it's as a good friend said, nose in, hands out, and then other boards where it's like, we need you all in. So, it depends on where the organization is. Their life cycle, the maturity of the board organization, the kind of resources they have, etc, that determine then what kind of board you're going to have and what kind of board members that you need.  [00:17:36] Tommy Thomas: You've served on the World Vision Board. That's a big one, obviously.  Maybe you can highlight some differences about the big board like that versus some of the smaller boards you've served on. [00:17:47] Lisa Cummins: Yeah, so I think World Vision, it was a nine-year term, three, three-year terms. It was a great experience. I think I learned a lot and hopefully I was able to contribute from my experience and knowledge with equal value. I think that World Vision is a very large organization, and so the best way to serve them is by asking those tough strategic questions. And by those questions that really are looking at more systems and strategy policy versus. Another board here in my community that I've been part of where I was signing time cards and helping make calls on fundraising and those sorts of things. So, they're very different. I have served on a public board which is Texas Teacher Retirement System. It was only for about a year and a half because I had to withdraw since I was moving to DC, that board was very interesting. It's politically appointed members of the board. And I remember learning that I was approved to serve on that board. It was, at the time it was a 60 billion fund. I don't know what it is today. Probably double that if not more. But I remember I got a call from a gentleman, again, I hadn't been to a board meeting, just got word. And he says, hello, Lisa. This is Bo in his West Texas accent. Welcome to the board. What side are you on? Oh, I said I don't know, the teacher side. And it was a board where there were some issues that there would be sideline meetings on who's going to, who's going to join with who. And alliances met. That was crazy. And I was appointed by Governor Bush. And so, it's interesting and even serving in the Republican administration, I've never been a partisan person. I try to vote and do what I feel like is best according to my biblical perspective, and so folks assume I go this way on one item and another way on another item, and I don't do that. And so I think that on that, even on that board, whether it was talking about how you're going to invest funds, or you're going to, how much are you going to put in versus how much you're going to put in funds. There was political haggling going on. I've just tried to stay true to what my values are, and that's what I bring. I can't bring anything else. And so if that doesn't work, then that's probably not a good place for me.  ++++++++++++++++++   [00:20:35] Tommy Thomas: I've started asking in the last month or so, my Shark Tank question. If you were on a nonprofit version of a Shark Tank, what questions would you need answered before you opened your checkbook?  [00:20:48] Lisa Cummins: I was ready to tell you what my investment opportunity was. I have that one, I have a few of those ready.  I think the question I would ask is what is your employee turnover? Because I have found nonprofits come and go and employee turnover helps me understand what your commitment is to, what your ability is to lead, what your consistency is with your values. Because if you're not consistent, employees won't stay long. Maybe you can explain them once or twice, but if you have an ongoing record of employees that are leaving, then there's a problem there. The other thing I would ask is a lot of nonprofits talk about partners. Let's say, describe the continuum of partnership with these organizations. When you say your partner is this because you dropped off a leaflet at their door sometimes, that's okay. Depends on what the goal is or is this talking about someone who you know their name, right? You know their name and you know their story and so you're trying to get at it in a deeper way. Those kinds of things. Yeah, I think those are a couple of questions I would ask. I would also ask how well, and this is important, not just for, some people will say, this is a political thing and it's not. How well does your organization reflect the communities you're serving? Because if it doesn't, that means that there's probably a sense of a pejorative type of approach that is not going to be that way. What could be, and it'll result in less results than what could be. Does that make sense?  [00:22:43] Tommy Thomas: Yes. If a nonprofit calls you and they're looking for a little consulting and you're going to put together a dashboard of things that you would be looking at a glance to check on their health what would that dashboard look like. [00:22:56] Lisa Cummins:   Yeah, so I think it's who are you partnering with and what are the depths of those partners? Do you know how to partner, can you partner too? What is your employee retention rate? I think the third would be your 30, 60, 90-day accounts payables and 30, 60, 90-day receivables. What does that look like? And accounts payables are very concerning. Obviously if you're 60 days behind in paying, you're like, what's going on here? And how long has this been the case? And so that relates to some of the financials. I would look at the composition of leadership and experiences that they bring. I think I would also look at if, and I get calls all the time, organizations wanting to start something. What have I asked? In looking for resources, I ask, what have you already done with the resources that you have? And so if you're in organizations, I want to start them. I want to work to serve my neighborhood and work with kids. Kids need something. I said okay, what's the name of the school principal in your neighborhood? And they don't know that then that's a sign to me that they haven't done their homework. They haven't done enough work, they haven't been driven enough to do this even without resources. Because I think if you are driven and called, you're going to figure out a way to do it. It may not be all that you want to do, and it may not be, but it says that you're going to do something with the time and the health that you have.  [00:24:27] Tommy Thomas: What do you wish a younger version of yourself had known and acted upon?  [00:24:33] Lisa Cummins: I think my younger self, it would've been good to know that my voice matters and that difference doesn't mean that one is inferior to the other. And that hard work matters, but it's not the only thing that matters. There's a scripture that talks about you can toil all day, but it'd be off or not. And I think that's important. So hard work matters, but the goal, the purpose, the reason that you're doing things you know that you've got to keep that forefront.  ++++++++++++++++++++++++ In Episode 85, we began a conversation with Jerry White that we will conclude next week. If you didn't hear that episode, Jerry is the President Emeritus of The Navigators International. Prior to that, he enjoyed a distinguished career in the United States Air Force - retiring as a two-star general.  One of the reasons I wanted Jerry to be a guest is because of the depth of his nonprofit board service. Among the boards on which he has served are World Vision, The Navigators, Christian Leadership Alliance, Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, The Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization and the Air Force Association.  [00:26:06] Jerry White: In one board that I'm on, we appoint someone every board meeting to be what we call a responsible skeptic. And that person is designated ahead of time. their job in that board meeting is to be a bit skeptical. Now, I think you have to be a little careful about always having a person who's always skeptical. I don't think I want a board member who every time something comes up, they raise their eyebrow, and you wonder what they're thinking. I think everybody ought to be a little skeptical at some time. And the main thing is if they don't understand something they need to ask.   Links and Resources JobfitMatters Website Next Gen Nonprofit Leadership with Tommy Thomas Urban Strategies   Connect Tommy Thomas - tthomas@jobfitmatters.com Tommy's LinkedIn Profile Lisa Trevino Cummin's LinkedIn Profile  

This edition features stories on the Air Force Association's Air and Space conference, the Air Force's 2010 Information Technology conference in Montgomery, Ala., the Defense Department's procurement offices and defense contractors becoming more efficient, the Air Force ban on all intoxicating substances other than the lawful use of alcohol and tobacco products. This includes a recent ban on the recreational drugs Salvia and Spice.

The National Defense Security Briefing Series is a program of quarterly discussions on issues and areas of the world where US vital national interests are at stake in the 21st Century. The series is jointly sponsored by the Dallas Chapters of the Navy League, the Air & Space Forces Association, the Association of the US Army, the Military Order of the World Wars, and the Jewish War Veterans. While we all support our individual programs and charities, this program is designed to bring us together in support of the issues we share in common. Heritage Ranch hosts the series that attracts a broad audience of people from all over North Texas. In this episode Super Dave Quinn is joined by 3 key members of the National Defense Security Briefing Series. Ted Puchacz, Former Machine Accountant Intelligence, Navy.  (Ted lives in Heritage Ranch) Board Member ted@ndbsinc.org Military Background Ted is a veteran of the Cold War, Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam, and SHAPE War Headquarters. He retired from the Navy as a MA2, Intelligence, after 6.5 years of active service. He worked on the development of intelligence during the Cuban Missile Crisis, development and deployment of the IOIC database on NAVY carriers as well as serving at SHAPE, Panda Division, developing systems for both NATO & US Eucom. During his time in service, Ted has worked with a variety of US & NATO intelligence services.  Charles Daniels, Former Lieutenant, U.S. Navy President charles@ndbsinc.org Chuck served in the United States Navy from 1978 to 1984, as a Surface Warfare Officer in the Pacific on destroyers and as a Liaison Officer between Commander Naval Surface Forces Pacific (COMNAVSURFPAC) and the First Division of the United States Marine Corp (FIRSTMARDIV) Camp Pendleton. After leaving the U.S. Navy, Chuck began a 30-year career working for Texas Instruments Defense Equipment Group and Raytheon. Throughout his entire post-military career, he supported Top Secret U.S. Navy technology research programs as well as intelligence development programs. He has been a Manufacturing Engineer, had roles in business development, finance and contracts. When Chuck retired from Raytheon, he was managing approximately $1B in defense contracts.   Charles became the Commander of the Dallas Chapter of MOWW in July of 2020 and led the Dallas Chapter to the “Best Large Chapter” award by June 2021. He has been awarded the MOWW Silver Patrick Henry Award, the MOWW Gold Patrick Henry Award, the Chapter Commander Emeritus Award, the MOWW National Citation and the U.S. House of Representatives Certificate of Congressional Recognition Award. John Campbell, Lieutenant General, U.S. Air Force, Retired Vice President john@ndbsinc.org John retired from the Air Force in 2003 as a Lieutenant General. His 32-year military career included operational and staff assignments all over the world. He commanded two fighter wings and has 3,600 flying hours in the T-38, F-15 and F-16 aircraft. In his last tours in Washington, he served as the Deputy Director for Operations, Joint Staff; the Deputy Director of the Defense Information Systems Agency/Commander, Joint Task Force-Computer Network Defense; and as the Associate Director of Central Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency. After retiring from the Air Force John worked for Applied Research Associates in Arlington, VA and in 2006 joined Iridium Communications, Inc. McLean VA as the Executive Vice President for Government Programs, managing Iridium's core government communications services as well as numerous classified programs serving DoD and other US Government customers. He currently serves as Chairman of Iridium Communications' Government Advisory Board and represents Iridium at the working level on the President's National Security Telecommunications Advisory Board. General Campbell is a member of the National Security Advisory Council of the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, Washington DC; and is a senior advisor to the President of the University of Maryland Global Campus and the Cyber Center for Education and Innovation, Fort Meade, Maryland. John is a member of the advisory board of Untrafficked, a national organization dedicated to combatting child sex trafficking. Currently he is a member of the Board of Directors of the Veterans Center of North Texas and serves as President of the Dallas Chapter of the Air Force Association.

By Ed Salo Robert Haddick joins Sea Control to discuss his book Fire on the Water: China, America, and the future of the Pacific. The second edition of the book has recently been published by the Naval Institute Press. Robert Haddick is a visiting senior fellow at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, Air Force Association. He is a former U.S. Marine Corps … Continue reading Sea Control- 404 An Updated Perspective on China with Robert Haddick →

Photo: No known restrictions on publication. 1995 Ukraine - ICBM -SILO Dismantlement Project - Inspection team visit to unidentified ICBM  launch site @Batchelorshow #BestOf2021: PRC warheads on ICBMs in silos that constitute  a Counterforce Doctrine: PRC digs nukes silo & What is to be done? Peter Huessy, director of Strategic Deterrent Studies of the Mitchell Institute of the Air Force Association. @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill https://www.rollcall.com/2021/07/27/bidens-nuclear-arms-budget-minimally-sufficient-officials-say/

Peter Huessy, President/Founder, GeoStrategic Consulting Firm, the conditions of the uprising in China, their involvement with Russia, and the way China controls the Chinese people in the U.S. The Chinese have developed what is referred to as Chinese "Police Stations" around the world including right here in the U.S. to control the Chinese people here who speak out against the China government controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).  Also covered are the national security concerns due to the purchase of agricultural lands and resources by the Chinese throughout the U.S., many of which are near strategic military bases.  Peter offers 3 things he thinks we should do to take control of the Chinese threats to our national security.   Previously he was the Senior Defense Consultant at the National Defense University Foundation, National Security Fellow at the AFPC, and Senior Defense Consultant at the Air Force Association. He has hosted over 1000 Congressional seminars on Capitol Hill dealing with matters including missile defense, strategic nuclear modernization, strategic airlift, strategic bombers, space, proliferation, and arms control. He has also served since 1981 as Chief Consultant to a group of associated contractors in the nuclear deterrence business, has visited dozens of U.S. military bases to consult and lecture on strategic issues, and has been the Chief Consultant to the Missile Defense Information Group, which he established in 1992.  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Intense events can wreak havoc in our brains and bodies. Many people's bodies have shifted to PTSD to cope with the high stress they experienced. This week, we hear from Dr. Steve West on his journey from life changing events, to struggling with PTSD, and now working with an amazing team to live life to the fullest. If you or someone you know is struggling with PTSD, we see you. We hear you. And we are cheering you on. You are so valued and we want you to discover freedom to the greatest degree possible. If you're in the Keller, TX or Dallas/Fort Worth area and are interested in therapy, connect with our counselors at Crawford Clinics by visiting our website at drshannancrawford.com. If you're in any other state or area, we encourage you to reach out to AACC.net or CAPS.net to find practices and therapists in your area. The Bronze Scar Book - https://amzn.to/3SFNOTA 0:00 Welcome 0:23 Introduction to Dr. Steve West 1:38 Serving Joint Chiefs of Staff 3:00 Experience with Military Trauma 6:25 Bronze Star Honor 7:26 Bronze Scar Book 9:26 Discovering Potential PTSD within Self 13:00 “I talked to a psychiatrist” 15:00 Symptoms Indicating I had PTSD 17:00 Reflecting on the Signs 19:35 Diagnosis + Mindset 21:20 “What's helped you overcome shame?”   More about Dr. Steve West: Dr. West has a Master's degree in psychology and counseling and a second master's degree program in marriage and family therapy at the University of Nebraska. He is The United States Air Force Chaplaincy subject matter expert on family therapy, has over forty years' experience in military chaplaincy, as a police officer, urgency medical technician, pastor, and a hospital chaplain. Dr. West has almost five decades of counseling experience and is a college and university speaker on trauma. He is also a sought after podcast and radio interview guest. His military service spanned 41 years, during which he served two Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He was also chaplain for the White House Communications Agency during the Clinton administration and honored with the Air Force Association's Annual Chaplain Corps Award in 2008. Subscribe to the "Unlock U with Dr. Shannan Crawford" Podcast About Dr. Shannan Crawford: As CEO of Dr. Crawford & Associates in Keller, Texas, Dr. Shannan Crawford continues a family tradition of successful business owners and uses her skills and knowledge to help not only her patients in their personal lives through individual, couples, and family counseling, she also empowers entrepreneurs with her unique strategies to enhance the effectiveness of their leadership. She innovated the Restoring-Self-Cohesion model, which assists leaders in navigating common obstacles including self-sabotage, procrastination, self-limiting behaviors, and lack of work-life balance found in themselves and in those they lead. Dr. Crawford is also a national and international speaker, is an adjunct professor at The King's University in Texas, hosts her own popular podcast, “Unlock U with Dr. Shannan Crawford,” and is an author working on a fictional trilogy. She has served on the boards of philanthropic organizations such as 4Word and Kingdom Business Leaders, as well as lead groups that foster faith, community, and service. She earned her Masters and Doctorate degrees in Clinical Psychology from Regent University in Virginia Beach, VA. A California native, Crawford now lives in Keller, Texas. Follow Dr. Shannan Crawford: Website: https://drshannancrawford.com/  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drshannancrawford/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DrShannanCrawford1/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drshannancrawford/ 

Intense events can wreak havoc in our brains and bodies. Many people's bodies have shifted to PTSD to cope with the high stress they experienced. This week, we hear from Dr. Steve West on his journey from life changing events, to struggling with PTSD, and now working with an amazing team to live life to the fullest. If you or someone you know is struggling with PTSD, we see you. We hear you. And we are cheering you on. You are so valued and we want you to discover freedom to the greatest degree possible. If you're in the Keller, TX or Dallas/Fort Worth area and are interested in therapy, connect with our counselors at Crawford Clinics by visiting our website at drshannancrawford.com. If you're in any other state or area, we encourage you to reach out to AACC.net or CAPS.net to find practices and therapists in your area. The Bronze Scar Book - https://amzn.to/3SFNOTA 0:00 Welcome 0:23 Introduction to Dr. Steve West 1:38 Serving Joint Chiefs of Staff 3:00 Experience with Military Trauma 6:25 Bronze Star Honor 7:26 Bronze Scar Book 9:26 Discovering Potential PTSD within Self 13:00 “I talked to a psychiatrist” 15:00 Symptoms Indicating I had PTSD 17:00 Reflecting on the Signs 19:35 Diagnosis + Mindset 21:20 “What's helped you overcome shame?”   More about Dr. Steve West: Dr. West has a Master's degree in psychology and counseling and a second master's degree program in marriage and family therapy at the University of Nebraska. He is The United States Air Force Chaplaincy subject matter expert on family therapy, has over forty years' experience in military chaplaincy, as a police officer, urgency medical technician, pastor, and a hospital chaplain. Dr. West has almost five decades of counseling experience and is a college and university speaker on trauma. He is also a sought after podcast and radio interview guest. His military service spanned 41 years, during which he served two Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He was also chaplain for the White House Communications Agency during the Clinton administration and honored with the Air Force Association's Annual Chaplain Corps Award in 2008. Subscribe to the "Unlock U with Dr. Shannan Crawford" Podcast About Dr. Shannan Crawford: As CEO of Dr. Crawford & Associates in Keller, Texas, Dr. Shannan Crawford continues a family tradition of successful business owners and uses her skills and knowledge to help not only her patients in their personal lives through individual, couples, and family counseling, she also empowers entrepreneurs with her unique strategies to enhance the effectiveness of their leadership. She innovated the Restoring-Self-Cohesion model, which assists leaders in navigating common obstacles including self-sabotage, procrastination, self-limiting behaviors, and lack of work-life balance found in themselves and in those they lead. Dr. Crawford is also a national and international speaker, is an adjunct professor at The King's University in Texas, hosts her own popular podcast, “Unlock U with Dr. Shannan Crawford,” and is an author working on a fictional trilogy. She has served on the boards of philanthropic organizations such as 4Word and Kingdom Business Leaders, as well as lead groups that foster faith, community, and service. She earned her Masters and Doctorate degrees in Clinical Psychology from Regent University in Virginia Beach, VA. A California native, Crawford now lives in Keller, Texas. Follow Dr. Shannan Crawford: Website: https://drshannancrawford.com/  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/drshannancrawford/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DrShannanCrawford1/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drshannancrawford/ 

General Goldfein retired from the U.S. Air Force in October 2020 after a distinguished 37-year career, culminating as the country's highest-ranking air force officer. As Chief of Staff, General Goldfein was responsible for over 693,000 men and women serving around the world, managing an annual operating budget of over $168 billion and the readiness of all U.S. air and space power. Over the course of his career, General Goldfein held a wide range of command, operational and joint staff assignments, including Director of the Joint Staff for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Air Component Commander for U.S. Central Command. As a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Goldfein served as a senior military adviser to the President, National Security Council, and Secretary of Defense and senior representative of the U.S. Air Force with allies and coalition partners around the world. General Goldfein is a Senior Fellow at Johns Hopkins Applied Research Laboratory, Senior Mentor for new general and flag officers at the National Defense University and on the Board of the Air Force Association. Conversation time-stamps 0:00 - Malcom Gladwell / 2:22 - “In every challenge, an opportunity” / 5:00 - The secret to a 40 year marriage / 7:50 - The Order of The Sword / 12:10 - “Am I worthy?” / 14:20 - How CMSgt Wright became CMSAF #18 Wright / 16:10 - Relationships you NEED to invest in if you're a leader / 17:48 - The power of Diamond 1 / 19:18 - Behind Enemy Lines (BEL) / 25:20 - (BEL) The most worrisome moment / 29:05 - (BEL) What was on his mind the most / 31:50 - (BEL) “Start finding me boys” / 34:00 - Most memorable moment as CSAF #21 / 39:05 - The value of our Military Spouses / 41:43 - Q1 from Manny Pineiro “How do you make time count?” / 43:49 - Q2 “Proudest moment as CSAF” / 46:39 - Why I love JD so much

On this episode of the DefAero Report Daily Podcast, sponsored by Bell, Dr. Patrick Cronin, the Asia-Pacific Security chair at the Hudson Institute, discusses erroneous social media speculation over the weekend that Chinese leader Xi Jinping was deposed in a coup and what can be learned from the episode; Sam Bendett of the Center for Naval Analyses and the Center for a New American Security with an update on Russia's war on Ukraine and whether Vladimir Putin's manpower mobilization, annexation of Donbas and Luhansk and nuclear threats will change the conflict as well as countering Iranian drones now in Russian service; and Byron Callan of the independent Washington research firm Capital Alpha Partners with takeaways from last week's Air Force Association conference, CSIS' industrial base event, Wharton's Palo Alto gathering, how the Russo-Ukrainian war may change defense demand and the week ahead with Defense & Aerospace Report Editor Vago Muradian.

On this episode of the Business Podcast, sponsored by Bell, our guests are “Rocket Ron” Epstein, PhD, of Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Richard Aboulafia of AeroDynamic Advisory and Sash Tusa of Agency Partners. Topics:  — US and European defense and aerospace equities as world markets react to rising interest and yield rates as signs of impending recession — Impact of rising dollar as pound and euro fall, and British government rolls out new budget that includes tax cuts — Takeaways from Airbus' capital markets day as CEO Guillaume Faury discusses inflation, supply chains, jetliner production rates, market share versus Boeing, sustainable aviation, importance of defense and corporate governance — Move by Chinese air carrier Xiamen Airlines with an all-Boeing fleet to cancel order for 27 Boeing 737 Max jets in favor of 40 Airbus A320 aircraft — Securities and Exchange Commission fines Boeing $200 million and former CEO Dennis Muilenburg $1 million over statements in wake of two 737 Max crashes that killed 346 — Update on Russia's war on Ukraine as Vladimir Putin mobilizes reserves and renews nuclear threats — Analysis of newsflow from the Air Force Association's Air Space Cyber conference including the Next-Generation Air Dominance program, the Collaborative Combat Aircraft, the B-21 bomber, the new partnership between L3Harris and Embraer on the KC-390 program — Outlook for the Russo-Ukrainian war as Moscow mobilizes reserves as winter approaches — Truss government launches defense review as British military performs flawlessly during funeral ceremonies for late Queen Elizabeth

On this episode of the Business Podcast, sponsored by Bell, our guests are “Rocket Ron” Epstein, PhD, of Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Richard Aboulafia of AeroDynamic Advisory and Sash Tusa of Agency Partners. Topics: — Performance of defense and aerospace equities during “brutal” week on Wall Street driven by recession fears after Federal Reserve suggests higher rates and FedEx posts 22 percent drop — UK and European efforts to control energy prices as EC President Ursula von der Leyen warns of tougher times ahead — Right-wing political successes in Italy and Sweden and whether they undermine EU cohesion — Ukraine makes more battlefield gains against Russian forces as Vladimir Putin rebuked by Xi Jinping who makes clear the limits on the partnership between the countries and Narendra Modi calls for peace — US-China decoupling accelerate as Beijing sanctions Raytheon Technologies CEO Greg Hayes and Ted Colbert, president and CEO of Boeing Defense, Space & Security — Statement by Hayes that Boeing's narrow-body airliner market share is likely to drop to 40 percent by 2025 — Look head to Airbus Capital Markets day next week — The US Air Force's Adaptive Engine Technology Program and whether the F-35 Lightning II fighter will get a new power plane to improve range and performance — What to expect at the Air Force Association's 2022 Air Space Cyber conference and trade show that celebrates the 75th anniversary of the US Air Force

We are joined by U.S. Air Force Colonel (Ret) Jon "Press" Wheeler, who we first featured in Episode #21.Colonel Wheeler is a highly decorated fighter pilot who flew the F-16 Falcon, and he was one of the initial cadre of pilots selected to fly the F-35 in the United States Air Force (USAF). Colonel Wheeler served as the Wing Commander of the 33rd Fighter Wing based at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, which was the first to train pilots for the F-35, so needless to say, he is a highly regarded subject matter expert.The release of this episode is timed between the Tailhook Association Hook '22 Symposium, and the upcoming Air Force Association 2022 Air, Space & Cyber Conference. This is important because our discussion will describe some of the differences between 4th and 5th Generation aircraft, and will specifically speak to some of the capabilities of the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter. We'll talk about the unique training challenges that come with operating 5th Generation fighters -- these issues face the U.S. Navy, the USAF, and all allied nations who have selected the F-35, let alone future next generation aircraft.You'll hear why it is important that Allied forces upgrade their training systems to best leverage the capabilities of 5th Generation aircraft, and why decision makers must understand the incredible value of blended training environments which incorporate Synthetic Inject To Live (SITL) and Live, Virtual and Constructive (LVC) elements so warfighters get the most realistic and efficient training possible to effectively employ the incredible capabilities of new and next generation aircraft.This is an important topic, so we hope you find this episode informative.Our thanks to Colonel Wheeler for sharing his insight with us.Go Bold!

Today's show is a conversation with Jonna Doolittle, the granddaughter of James H. Doolittle – who shares great insights into the American military general and aviation pioneer. It was great to get the family insights from Jonna, and as always, the historical context.  Doolittle won air races, was a test pilot, completing the first outside loop, something most people thought was impossible. In WWI he was active with the Signal Corps' Aviation Section, but never saw combat. In WWII, Doolittle was chosen by Hap Arnold – the subject of our next episode, so stay tuned - to lead the planning of the first aerial raid on the Japanese mainland and retaliation for Pearl Harbor. Key Takeaways: Jimmy Doolittle was highly educated, as a mechanic, engineer, and pilot, which set up his career as an aviation pioneer Doolittle's innovation with blind flying and landing paved the way for landing in bad weather Doolittle helped organize the Air Force Association and was elected its first president Doolittle lobbied successfully to make the Air Force its own branch of the military Use the code SEASON1 for 20% off your Wings Membership! Become A MemberSupport Behind the Wings by making a financial contribution to Wings Over the Rockies Air & Space Museum's Annual Fund! wingsmuseum.org/giveReferences: GENERAL JAMES HAROLD DOOLITTLE > Air Force > Biography Display (af.mil) I Could Never Be So Lucky Again by James H. Doolittle (goodreads.com) Become A Member | Wings Over the Rockies Air & Space Museum (wingsmuseum.org)

This week we have an incredible and inspiring story from someone who struggled throughout high school to hanging out with the President of the United States. This week the Shadows Podcast has the honor of welcoming retired 44-year United States Air Force General, former Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and author of Dark Horse, Larry Spencer, to the show. During this episode, Larry talks to us about his upbringing in the Southeast District of Columbia. He tells us about his father's legacy and an injury that occurred while serving. Why did he decide to join the Air Force in the early 70s? What were some of the struggles he dealt with when it came to discrimination early in his career? What did it mean to him to be a Commander? What was the one moment that stands out the most when he thinks of leadership? He also talks about his time interacting with the Presidents of the United States while serving in the White House Military Office. What was his time like as the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force? He also discusses the Air Force Association (https://www.afa.org/), the two Air Force awards named in his honor (Air Force Innovation and the Special Acts and Services Awards.), and his books; The Green Eyeshades of War: An Examination of Financial Management during War and Dark Horse. Both can be purchased at https://www.generallarryspencer.com/published-books. This powerful episode is available on any podcast platform and www.theshadowspodcast.com. Next week the Shadows Podcast returns with episode 90: The Chronicles of Allen Levi Simmons. He's a former Marine, host of the Purpose Pod, and author of Can I Speak? Stay tuned for the premiere of season 2 of Rising From The Shadows: Behind the Mask on Monday, August 1, 2022. --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/shadows-podcast/support

Peter Hussy Geostrategic and Expert on China. Peter Huessy is Director of Strategic Deterrent Studies at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and President of his own defense consulting firm, GeoStrategic Analysis. His 40 years' experience has also included serving at the National Defense University Foundation, the AFPC and the Air Force Association. He specializes in developing and implementing public policy campaigns to secure support for important national security objectives. Peter Huessy is Director of Strategic Deterrent Studies at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and President of his own defense consulting firm, GeoStrategic Analysis.    See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Photo:  "Ban the Bomb" march from Caernarfon to Bangor #Ukraine: Ban the Bomb and Putin's nuclear weapon threats. Peter Huessy, @hobeyoco, @HudsonInstitute. director of Strategic Deterrent Studies of the Mitchell Institute of the Air Force Association @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill

Photo:  A Russian missile rocket booster stage lies in the bedroom of a home in Gori (2008) [the republic of Georgia] #Ukraine:  Deploying tactical nukes to the fleet. Peter Huessy @hobeyoco, @HudsonInstitute. https://www.wsj.com/articles/handing-vladimir-putin-the-nuclear-advantage-joe-biden-pentagon-sea-launched-nuclear-cruise-missile-russia-11650487990 Peter Huessy, @hobeyoco, @HudsonInstitute. director of Strategic Deterrent Studies of the Mitchell Institute of the Air Force Association

Photo:  Iskander transporter-erector-launchers emerge for exercises.  Screen grab from video. #Ukraine:  Putin threatens tactical nukes. Peter Huessy  @hobeyoco, @HudsonInstitute. https://www.wsj.com/articles/handing-vladimir-putin-the-nuclear-advantage-joe-biden-pentagon-sea-launched-nuclear-cruise-missile-russia-11650487990 Peter Huessy, @hobeyoco, @HudsonInstitute. director of Strategic Deterrent Studies of the Mitchell Institute of the Air Force Association

Photo:  American MGR-3 Little John missile, measuring 4.4. meters long with a diameter of 32 cm and a weight of 350 kg. Capable of firing a W45 warhead (10 kiloton yield) a distance of 19 km #Ukraine: Deterrence and Russia's tactical nuclear weapons arsenal. Peter Huessy, @hobeyoco, @HudsonInstitute. director of Strategic Deterrent Studies of the Mitchell Institute of the Air Force Association. @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill

In this episode: Rick's professional background and experiences with Boeing,  Minuteman, and Peacekeeper, and the strategies Rick used while working intensely complex campaigns. Then, building relationships with customers, his big wins with Boeing, advice to individuals considering BD as a career, and his experiences in the Air Force Association.  Start winning with LSI today by reaching out to social@lsiwins.com!Follow LSI on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter for more exciting updates! A Big Thank You To Our Sponsors!Want to rub shoulders with Utah's state elected officials, business owners and leaders, and company executives? Join us at the @OneUtahSummit on May 10, 2022 at the Grand America Hotel! 

Recorded live at the Air Force Association's Aerospace Warfare Symposium #AWS22 in Orlando, FL, watch this MercuryNOW vodcast with Tad Ihns, director of business development, as he discusses the high-performance mission computers, encryption technologies, and open scalable solutions Mercury is bringing to aircraft and the pilots who fly them.

On this episode of the DefAero Report Daily Podcast, sponsored by Bell, our interviews with Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. CQ Brown Jr. and Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond from the Air Force Association's 2022 Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando. Our coverage is sponsored by Leonardo DRS.

Today's Story: Intertwined But Separate

On this episode of the DefAero Report Daily Podcast, sponsored by Bell,  we interview Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall at the Air Force Association's 2022 Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando. Our coverage is sponsored by Leonardo DRS.

With 44 years of service under his belt, Air Force Veteran, four-star general and former Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force Larry Spencer decided that he earned a well-deserved break and retired on a Friday in 2015. But that very following Monday, he went right back to work, promoting aerospace education in his new role as president of the Air Force Association.Did Spencer regret going straight back into work after retiring and does he recommend it to others? You might be surprised by his answer and what he recommends Veterans do instead.While Spencer commanded at all levels of the military and was the second-highest military member of the Air Force, he claimed that his favorite experience remains his first command post as a squadron commander. It might be a low-level command job, but Spencer explains why he found it to be the most rewarding of all his leadership experiences.Spencer also specializes in financial management and is a well-respected comptroller in the Air Force community. He wrote extensively on how money is used during times of war. In his latest book, The Green Eyeshades of War, he analyzes the complex policies, negotiations and procedures that are involved in financing a war.In recognition of his service to the nation, the Air Force created the General Larry O. Spencer Innovation Award in 2015. This award honors Airmen who made significant contributions to saving Air Force financial and manpower resources through innovation.Today, he is on the board of directors for Whirlpool Corporation and president of the Armed Forces Benefit Association and 5Star Life Insurance Company. He has lived a rich life thus far and shares much of his experiences and wisdom on this episode of Borne the Battle.Borne the Battle Veteran of the Week:Army Veteran Alwyn C. Cashe Additional Links: In addition to writing The Green Eyeshades of War, Spencer also wrote on his upbringing and the journey that he took to reach the heights he did in his book Dark Horse. VA, HUD and community partners conduct annual homeless census. VA funding available to create technology helping eligible service members and Veterans adapt their homes.

Guest: Peter Huessy, Geopolitical Strategist  Peter Huessy is Director of Strategic Deterrent Studies at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and President of his own defense consulting firm, GeoStrategic Analysis. His 40 years' experience has also included serving at the National Defense University Foundation, the AFPC and the Air Force Association. He specializes in developing and implementing public policy campaigns to secure support for important national security objectives. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Photo:  "Nuke Free Bay" graffiti. Fort Cronkhite, Wolf Ridge fire control stations, 1991. PRC promotes no-nuke without transparency.  Peter Huessy, @hobeyoco, @HudsonInstitute. https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/04/world/p5-nations-nuclear-pledge-intl-hnk/index.html Peter Huessy, @hobeyoco, @HudsonInstitute. director of Strategic Deterrent Studies of the Mitchell Institute of the Air Force Association

Dr. Born is a retired Brigadier General with 30 years of service in the United States Air Force. Prior to coming to Harvard she served two terms as the Dean of the Faculty at the United States Air Force Academy where she was also the Professor and Head of the Leadership Department. Previously, Dana served as an Exchange Officer with the Royal Australian Air Force, Assistant Director for the Secretary of Defense, Deputy Chief of the Personnel Issues Team for the Air Force, Aide and Speech Writer to the Secretary of the Air Force, and Squadron Commander for 11th Mission Support Squadron in Operation Enduring Freedom.A graduate with distinction of the United States Air Force Academy, Dr. Born received Penn State University's Alumni Fellow Award and Distinguished Alumni Award. Born is the recipient of the Air Force's Zuckert Award for Outstanding Management Achievement, Air Force Association's Vandenberg Award for outstanding contributions to Aerospace education, Air Force's Distinguished Service Medal, and Legion of Merit and Defense Meritorious Service Medal. She has also been honored with the Harvard Kennedy School Annual Dean's Teaching Awards as well as the Harvard Kennedy School of Government Innovation in Teaching Award. Dr. Born is a Distinguished Moral Leadership Fellow.

Today on the Mission: Readiness Podcast, Major General (Ret.) Doug Raaberg, USAF and National Director Ben Goodman dive into General Raaberg's first-hand experience eating in a West Virginia middle school cafeteria. General Raaberg illustrates what that farm-to-school lunch looked like and the vital role schools play in providing nutritious meals to kids. General Raaberg also highlights his work as the Executive Vice President at the Air Force Association – featuring their innovative program, CyberPatriot – as well as his world record for the fastest nonstop flight around the globe with his B-1B bomber crew, which included Congressman Chris Stewart of Utah's Second Congressional District. To learn more about the Air Force Association's work, go to afa.org and follow them on Twitter at @AirForceAssoc.

Photo:  "He's driving me nuts - I'm on the verge of blowing my top" Ed. Valtman '62 (Herblock) Editorial cartoon drawing shows two hairy, muscular, anthropomorphic atomic bombs labeled "U.S. A-Tests" and "Soviet Intransigence" sitting at a table on which is a ringing alarm clock and a paper waiting to be signed that is labeled "A-Test Inspection Treaty." The U.S. atomic bomb is about to blow his top waiting for the Soviet atomic bomb to sign the treaty; the Soviet Union refused to accept on-site inspections of its nuclear weapons program, which caused a delay in the signing of a nuclear test-ban treaty. The nuclear arms race slips back into the shadows.  Peter Huessy. @GordonGChang, Gatestone, Newsweek, The Hill https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2021-10-06/us-state-department-discloses-number-of-nuclear-weapons-in-stockpile Peter Huessy, director of Strategic Deterrent Studies of the Mitchell Institute of the Air Force Association.

Cybersecurity is so hot companies can't hire fast enough. What's the blocker? Experience. But how can recent grads and those in school get it? CTF expert Akshay Rohatgi explains how to get involved.One of the most common questions we get is: how can I get experience if I can't get that first job? Even entry-level cyber roles often require 1-3 years of experience. Early stage cyber experts can practice and hone their skills by participating in bug bounty programs, open-source projects, and internships. Another great way to get experience and build your network are Capture the Flag (or CTF) competitions.Conversation highlights:What a capture the flag contest isThe difference between Jeopardy v. Attack/Defense competitionsWhat to expect during an eventHow much experience you need to join oneLearn about the Air Force Association's CyberPatriot National Youth Cyber Education ProgramThe craziest thing that happened to Akshay during competitionHow you can get involved________________________________GuestAkshay RohatgiOn LinkedIn | https://www.linkedin.com/in/akshay-rohatgi-1564521b2/On Twitter | ________________________________HostsLimor KessemOn ITSPmagazine  

Aviation Week editors discuss hot topics from the Air Force Association's annual meeting including China's massive buildup in nuclear capability, a change in acquisition approach at the Pentagon and the next competition for aerial refueling tankers.

About the lecture: When we accept certain narratives on which national security policy rests, and those narratives are incorrect, we get ourselves into serious trouble. One is reminded about a debate in the British parliament between Winston Churchill and Mr. Chamberlain, with the latter arguing that rearming Britain to take on Germany would probably result in a diminution of free trade with Nazi Germany. To which Winston Churchill said, “shouldn't that be the idea?” The United States in 1969-70 adopted detente and peaceful coexistence as descriptors of American security policy. At the end of World War II, we adopted the idea of containment of the USSR. We also adopted “Vietnam” to conjure up a quagmire to describe the feared end result of the use of American military force. Today, we have adopted “peaceful rise“ as the way to describe the growing military and economic strength of China; we have long held out the idea that a successful foreign policy in the Middle East had to go through the “peace process”; and successful response to 9-11 required the USA to win the “global war on terror or GWOT”. This lecture will examine how such narratives were developed and what political forces such narratives served. This lecture will also explore each of these narratives and what dead ends they led us to reach, or are still leading us, and compare them to President Reagan's “peace through strength” strategy. We will also discuss the current administration's policy with respect to China, the Middle East, and Russia/NATO. Reagan's peace through strength is often described —wrongly—as no more than simple bullying—a narrative we will also address. Part of this discussion will include my own part in these foreign policy fights over the 1975-2020 period. About the speaker: Mr. Peter Huessy is President of his own defense consulting firm, GeoStrategic Analysis, founded in 1981, and since 2016, Director of Strategic Deterrent Studies at the Mitchell Institute on Aerospace Studies. He was the senior defense consultant at the National Defense University Foundation for 22 years. He was the National Security Fellow at the AFPC, and Senior Defense Consultant at the Air Force Association from 2011 Mr. Huessy has served as an expert defense and national security analyst for over 45 years, helping his clients cover congressional activities while monitoring budget and policy developments on terrorism, counter-terrorism, immigration, state-sponsored terrorism, missile defense, weapons of mass destruction, especially US-Israeli joint defense efforts, nuclear deterrence, arms control, proliferation, as well as tactical and strategic air, airlift, space, and nuclear matters and such state and non-state actors as North Korea, China, Iran, Syria, Venezuela and Hezbollah, Hamas and Al Qaeda. This also includes monitoring activities of think tanks, non-governmental organizations, and other US government departments, as well as projecting future actions of Congress in this area. His specialty is developing and implementing public policy campaigns to secure support for important national security objectives.

About the lecture: Since 1972, the nuclear disarmament community —led by major self-described arms control organizations— hasn't supported any serious nuclear arms control ideas. They've supported dangerous ideas such as the nuclear freeze, opposed American strategic nuclear and missile defense modernization efforts, and denounced the most revolutionary and beneficial agreements such as INF, Start 1, and 2. Nearly 50 years after the SALT 1 nuclear agreement, it has become increasingly difficult to secure genuine and verifiable nuclear agreements such as Start 1 and INF. The United States has entered into nuclear deals with Iran, North Korea, and Russia that do little to improve America's security. In many respects, the global zero campaign has significantly distorted the debate on nuclear security issues. America's enemies are increasingly expanding their nuclear arsenals and adopting strategies of using nuclear weapons for coercive and hegemonic objectives. A growing narrative among the media, academia, and some politicians is that nuclear arms control is on the ropes. That's true, but the reason is not the Trump administration, it is the fault of the US disarmament community and global zero advocates that have effectively killed arms control and repeatedly pushed the USA into bad nuclear deals. About the speaker: Mr. Peter Huessy is President of his own defense consulting firm, GeoStrategic Analysis, founded in 1981, and since 2016, Director of Strategic Deterrent Studies at the Mitchell Institute on Aerospace Studies. He was the senior defense consultant at the National Defense University Foundation for 22 years. He was the National Security Fellow at the AFPC, and Senior Defense Consultant at the Air Force Association from 2011 Mr. Huessy has served as an expert defense and national security analyst for over 45 years, helping his clients cover congressional activities while monitoring budget and policy developments on terrorism, counter-terrorism, immigration, state-sponsored terrorism, missile defense, weapons of mass destruction, especially US-Israeli joint defense efforts, nuclear deterrence, arms control, proliferation, as well as tactical and strategic air, airlift, space and nuclear matters and such state and non-state actors as North Korea, China, Iran, Syria, Venezuela and Hezbollah, Hamas and Al Qaeda. This also includes monitoring activities of think tanks, non-governmental organizations, and other US government departments, as well as projecting future actions of Congress in this area. His specialty is developing and implementing public policy campaigns to secure support for important national security objectives. He is on the Board of the InSeries Theater in Washington; EMPACT, the organization devoted to protecting the US from EMP threats; and MTA, the Maryland Taxpayers Association. He authored legislation calling for the divestment of US pensions from any company doing business with Iran and testified before a number of state legislatures on this subject and on counter-terror policy, including whether or not drivers licenses should be made available to those illegally in the US. He is also a member of Secure American Energy, an organization devoted to breaking the back of OPEC and providing the US with American sources of energy. He has lectured around the world and across the USA on nuclear terrorism, nuclear deterrence, missile defense, homeland security, counter-terrorism policy, and strategic threats to the US and its allies.

This event is part of the China Series sponsored by The Institute of World Politics. About the lecture: The Chinese seek to supplant the US as the world's top military and economic power. As Tom Reed noted in his book The Nuclear Express, China is a major proliferator of nuclear weapons technology—to Pakistan, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Iraq. Its own nuclear arsenal is projected to double this decade according to DIA intelligence reports. China rejects even discussing arms control nor does it provide any information about its nuclear arsenal, although it does assert it has adopted a no first use nuclear policy. DIA also believes the PRC has recently tested nuclear weapons, contrary to China's pledges under the NNPT and CBT. The presentation will explore these issues as well as the use of nuclear weapons—particularly the threat of their use—to contest the US and its allies in the Pacific. Especially ROK, ROC, and Japan. About the speaker: Mr. Peter Huessy is President of his own defense consulting firm, GeoStrategic Analysis, founded in 1981, and since 2016, Director of Strategic Deterrent Studies at the Mitchell Institute on Aerospace Studies. He was the senior defense consultant at the National Defense University Foundation for 22 years. He was the National Security Fellow at the AFPC, and Senior Defense Consultant at the Air Force Association from 2011 Mr. Huessy has served as an expert defense and national security analyst for over 45 years, helping his clients cover congressional activities while monitoring budget and policy developments on terrorism, counter-terrorism, immigration, state-sponsored terrorism, missile defense, weapons of mass destruction, especially US-Israeli joint defense efforts, nuclear deterrence, arms control, proliferation, as well as tactical and strategic air, airlift, space and nuclear matters and such state and non-state actors as North Korea, China, Iran, Syria, Venezuela and Hezbollah, Hamas and Al Qaeda. This also includes monitoring activities of think tanks, non-governmental organizations, and other US government departments, as well as projecting future actions of Congress in this area. His specialty is developing and implementing public policy campaigns to secure support for important national security objectives. He is on the Board of the InSeries Theater in Washington; EMPACT, the organization devoted to protecting the US from EMP threats; and MTA, the Maryland Taxpayers Association. He authored legislation calling for the divestment of US pensions from any company doing business with Iran and testified before a number of state legislatures on this subject and on counter-terror policy, including whether or not drivers licenses should be made available to those illegally in the US. He is also a member of Secure American Energy, an organization devoted to breaking the back of OPEC and providing the US with American sources of energy. He has lectured around the world and across the USA on nuclear terrorism, nuclear deterrence, missile defense, homeland security, counter-terrorism policy, and strategic threats to the US and its allies including (1) leading a great power competition and nuclear workshop at the Louisiana Tech Research Institute in cooperation with USAF Global Strike Command, (2) speaking on China's security threats to the US at the annual strategic conference in Omaha, Nebraska hosted by Strategic Command, (3) speaking annually at the Exchange Monitor Nuclear Summit, (4) lecturing at the Prague Security Institute in the Czech Republic, (5) teaching at Yonsei University in Seoul, ROK, (6) speaking to the Israeli MOD missile defense experts, (7) reviewing terrorist threats to the US for the California Public Policy Foundation, and (8) annually being a guest lecturer at the Naval Academy on the subject of the history of American nuclear deterrent policy.

Spark Tank is an annual competition put on by AFWERX where Airmen "pitch" innovative ideas to top Air Force leadership and a panel of industry experts. This episode we sit-down with six of the Airmen who pitched their ideas at the Air Force Association's Air Warfare Symposium in Orlando, FL, in February 2020. These Airmen are solving Air Force problems using solutions like: robotic process automation, portable magnetic aircraft covers, C-17 loading aids, low cost threat emitter replicators, weapons loading smart checklists, and battery cell extraction tools. Check out the conversation with these innovators and visit the links in the show notes which include an article with details and videos of each of the Airmen's ideas. Understanding the problems our Airmen face provides us with better insight as to the most appropriate acquisition solution and strategy will meet warfighter needs. This is directly in-line with leadership's expectations to be Mission Focused Business Leaders. If you are an Air Force Military or Civilian with an innovative idea, check out AFWERX's Ideation Platform site in the show notes to share your idea and find avenues for support and funding. Acronyms AOR – Area of Responsibility Links AFWERX Public Affairs article with Spark Tank Finalist videos: https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2053169/air-force-announces-spark-tank-2020-selectees/ AFWERX Ideation Platform Site: https://www.afwerx.af.mil/ideation.html If you would like to share feedback on the podcast, please submit via thecontractingexperience@gmail.com.

On this episode of Grow Kinder, we talk with General Craig McKinley, commissioner of the Aspen Institute National Commission on Social, Emotional, and Academic Development and former president of the Air Force Association. A four-star general with a record of youth advocacy, McKinley discusses how he became involved in social-emotional development, SEL's role in the military, and A Nation at Hope, the Institute's latest report on how a growing movement dedicated to the social, emotional, and academic well-being of children is changing lives across the nation. Learn more about the Aspen Institute's work at aspeninstitute.org and A Nation at Hope at nationathope.org.

We are happy to re-cast a wonderful conversation we had with former NASA Astronaut, Col. Rick Searfoss back in 2016.  He joined us to talk about rockets, The Space Shuttle, and being an astronaut! Col. Rick Searfoss From his NASA Bio: PERSONAL DATA: Born June 5, 1956, in Mount Clemens, Michigan, but considers Portsmouth, New Hampshire, to be his hometown. Married; three children. He enjoys running, soccer, radio-controlled model aircraft, Scouting, backpacking, and classical music. EDUCATION: Graduated from Portsmouth Senior High School, Portsmouth, New Hampshire in 1974; received a bachelor of science degree in aeronautical engineering from the USAF Academy in 1978, and a master of science degree in aeronautics from the California Institute of Technology on a National Science Foundation Fellowship in 1979. USAF Squadron Officer School, Air Command and Staff College, and Air War College. ORGANIZATIONS: Association of Space Explorers, National Eagle Scout Association, Air Force Association, Academy of Model Aeronautics. SPECIAL HONORS: Awarded the Harmon, Fairchild, Price and Tober Awards (top overall, academic, engineering, and aeronautical engineering graduate), United States Air Force Academy Class of 1978. Air Force Aero Propulsion Laboratory Excellence in Turbine Engine Design award. USAF Squadron Officer's School Commandant's Trophy as top graduate. Distinguished graduate, USAF Fighter Weapons School. Named the Tactical Air Command F-111 Instructor Pilot of the Year, 1985. Selected for Outstanding Young Men of America, 1987. Recipient of the Air Force Commendation Medal, Air Force Meritorious Service Medal, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Defense Superior Service Medal, NASA Spaceflight Medal (3), NASA Exceptional Service Medal, NASA Outstanding Leadership Medal, and Air Force Distinguished Flying Cross. EXPERIENCE: Searfoss graduated in 1980 from Undergraduate Pilot Training at Williams Air Force Base, Arizona. From 1981-1984, he flew the F-111F operationally at RAF Lakenheath, England, followed by a tour at Mountain Home AFB, Idaho, where he was an F-111A instructor pilot and weapons officer until 1987. In 1988 he attended the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School, Patuxent River, Maryland, as a USAF exchange officer. He was a flight instructor at the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School at Edwards AFB, California, when selected for the astronaut program. He has logged over 5,000 hours flying time in 56 different types of aircraft and over 939 hours in space. He also holds FAA Airline Transport Pilot, glider, and flight instructor ratings. NASA EXPERIENCE: Selected by NASA in January 1990, Searfoss became an astronaut in July 1991. Initially assigned to the Astronaut Office Mission Support Branch, Searfoss was part of a team responsible for crew ingress/strap-in prior to launch and crew egress after landing. He was subsequently assigned to flight software verification in the Shuttle Avionics Integration Laboratory (SAIL). Additionally, he served as the Astronaut Office representative for both flight crew procedures and Shuttle computer software development. He also served as the Astronaut Office Vehicle System and Operations Branch Chief, leading a team of several astronauts and support engineers working on Shuttle and International Space Station systems development, rendezvous and landing/rollout operations, and advanced projects initiatives. A veteran of three space flights, Searfoss has logged over 39 days in space. He served as pilot on STS-58 (October 18 to November 1, 1993) and STS-76 (March 22-31, 1996), and was the mission commander on STS-90 (April 17, to May 3, 1998). Searfoss retired from the Air Force and left NASA in 1998. For the next few years he worked in private industry and, more recently, was a research test pilot at NASAs Dryden Flight Research Center. In February 2003, Searfoss left Dryden to pursue private business interests.

We are happy to re-cast a wonderful conversation we had with former NASA Astronaut, Col. Rick Searfoss back in 2016.  He joined us to talk about rockets, The Space Shuttle, and being an astronaut! Col. Rick Searfoss[/caption] From his NASA Bio: PERSONAL DATA: Born June 5, 1956, in Mount Clemens, Michigan, but considers Portsmouth, New Hampshire, to be his hometown. Married; three children. He enjoys running, soccer, radio-controlled model aircraft, Scouting, backpacking, and classical music. EDUCATION: Graduated from Portsmouth Senior High School, Portsmouth, New Hampshire in 1974; received a bachelor of science degree in aeronautical engineering from the USAF Academy in 1978, and a master of science degree in aeronautics from the California Institute of Technology on a National Science Foundation Fellowship in 1979. USAF Squadron Officer School, Air Command and Staff College, and Air War College. ORGANIZATIONS: Association of Space Explorers, National Eagle Scout Association, Air Force Association, Academy of Model Aeronautics. SPECIAL HONORS: Awarded the Harmon, Fairchild, Price and Tober Awards (top overall, academic, engineering, and aeronautical engineering graduate), United States Air Force Academy Class of 1978. Air Force Aero Propulsion Laboratory Excellence in Turbine Engine Design award. USAF Squadron Officer's School Commandant's Trophy as top graduate. Distinguished graduate, USAF Fighter Weapons School. Named the Tactical Air Command F-111 Instructor Pilot of the Year, 1985. Selected for Outstanding Young Men of America, 1987. Recipient of the Air Force Commendation Medal, Air Force Meritorious Service Medal, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Defense Superior Service Medal, NASA Spaceflight Medal (3), NASA Exceptional Service Medal, NASA Outstanding Leadership Medal, and Air Force Distinguished Flying Cross. EXPERIENCE: Searfoss graduated in 1980 from Undergraduate Pilot Training at Williams Air Force Base, Arizona. From 1981-1984, he flew the F-111F operationally at RAF Lakenheath, England, followed by a tour at Mountain Home AFB, Idaho, where he was an F-111A instructor pilot and weapons officer until 1987. In 1988 he attended the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School, Patuxent River, Maryland, as a USAF exchange officer. He was a flight instructor at the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School at Edwards AFB, California, when selected for the astronaut program. He has logged over 5,000 hours flying time in 56 different types of aircraft and over 939 hours in space. He also holds FAA Airline Transport Pilot, glider, and flight instructor ratings. NASA EXPERIENCE: Selected by NASA in January 1990, Searfoss became an astronaut in July 1991. Initially assigned to the Astronaut Office Mission Support Branch, Searfoss was part of a team responsible for crew ingress/strap-in prior to launch and crew egress after landing. He was subsequently assigned to flight software verification in the Shuttle Avionics Integration Laboratory (SAIL). Additionally, he served as the Astronaut Office representative for both flight crew procedures and Shuttle computer software development. He also served as the Astronaut Office Vehicle System and Operations Branch Chief, leading a team of several astronauts and support engineers working on Shuttle and International Space Station systems development, rendezvous and landing/rollout operations, and advanced projects initiatives. A veteran of three space flights, Searfoss has logged over 39 days in space. He served as pilot on STS-58 (October 18 to November 1, 1993) and STS-76 (March 22-31, 1996), and was the mission commander on STS-90 (April 17, to May 3, 1998). Searfoss retired from the Air Force and left NASA in 1998. For the next few years he worked in private industry and, more recently, was a research test pilot at NASAs Dryden Flight Research Center. In February 2003, Searfoss left Dryden to pursue private business interests. SPACE FLIGHT EXPERIENCE: Searfoss served as STS-58 pilot on the seven-person life science research mission aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia, launching from the Kennedy Space Center on October 18, 1993, and landing at Edwards Air Force Base on November 1, 1993. The crew performed neurovestibular, cardiovascular, cardiopulmonary, metabolic, and musculoskeletal medical experiments on themselves and 48 rats, expanding our knowledge of human and animal physiology both on earth and in space flight. In addition, the crew performed 16 engineering tests aboard the Orbiter Columbia and 20 Extended Duration Orbiter Medical Project experiments. The mission was accomplished in 225 orbits of the Earth. Launching March 22, 1996, Searfoss flew his second mission as pilot of STS-76 aboard the Space Shuttle Atlantis. During this 9-day mission the STS-76 crew performed the third docking of an American spacecraft with the Russian space station Mir. In support of a joint U.S./Russian program, the crew transported to Mir nearly two tons of water, food, supplies, and scientific equipment, as well as U.S. Astronaut Shannon Lucid to begin her six-month stay in space. STS-76 included the first ever spacewalk on a combined Space Shuttle-Space Station complex. The flight crew also conducted scientific investigations, including European Space Agency sponsored biology experiments, the Kidsat earth observations project, and several engineering flight tests. Completed in 145 orbits, STS-76 landed at Edwards Air Force Base, California, on March 31, 1996. Searfoss commanded a seven person crew on the STS-90 Neurolab mission which launched on April 17, 1998. During the 16-day Spacelab flight the crew served as both experiment subjects and operators for 26 individual life science experiments focusing on the effects of microgravity on the brain and nervous system. STS-90 was the last and most complex of the twenty-five Spacelab missions NASA has flown. Neurolab's scientific results will have broad applicability both in preparing for future long duration human space missions and in clinical applications on Earth. Completed in 256 orbits, STS-90 landed at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, on May 3, 1998. FEBRUARY 2003