Liberty Guard
  • Projects
  • About
  • Leadership
  • Podcast
  • Blog
    • From The Desk of Bob Barr
    • Liberty Updates
    • Media Appearances
    • All Articles
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Join
DONATE
Saturday, April 4, 2026
Liberty Guard
  • Projects
  • About
  • Leadership
  • Podcast
  • Blog
    • From The Desk of Bob Barr
    • Liberty Updates
    • Media Appearances
    • All Articles
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Join
DONATE
Liberty Guard
Liberty Guard
  • Projects
  • About
  • Leadership
  • Podcast
  • Blog
    • From The Desk of Bob Barr
    • Liberty Updates
    • Media Appearances
    • All Articles
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Join
Monthly Archives

September 2018

BlogFrom the Desk of Bob BarrLiberty Updates

Headlines May Scream ‘Russia,’ But the Real Story Is China

by Liberty Guard Author September 5, 2018
written by Liberty Guard Author

Headlines May Scream ‘Russia,’ But the Real Story Is China
Townhall.com

It is fair to say that most Americans’ concept of Russia today is based only loosely on reality; shaped largely by Hollywood, spy novels, and incessant hammering by the media against all things Russian.  While such accounts of what has become cast as America’s “Enemy No. 1” make for good headlines and as a basis for that most elusive of crimes — “collision” — it dangerously shifts attention from a far more clever and riskier adversary:  China.

While the craving for power and a dislike for Western values are shared by both Russia and China, the strategies employed by each for achieving global dominance are quite different. In a sense, the former plays checkers and the latter, chess.

Some of this at least, can be attributed to the state of each country’s economy.  While China’s has grown to become a very real competitor of the United States, Russia has been slipping down the economic ratings charts.  This state of affairs is reflected also in the two countries’ military policies.   As China pumps billions into its armed forces while engaging no active military campaigns, Russia’s military is enduring significant cuts even as it continues to burn cash in Syria, the Ukraine, and elsewhere.

Russia’s slim budget for gaining global influence has produced meager results, but its effectiveness has been amplified because it provides an easy vehicle by which Democrats and the media can attack President Trump.

An exclusive report from Buzzfeed last week exposed a Russian plot in the Baltics to gain influence from funding “independent” news sites, while forcing them to produce pro-Kremlin pieces; content bolstered by the purchase of fake clicks, likes, and comments from troll farms. The strategy appears similar to what was seen during the 2016 election cycle. Compare those efforts, if you will, of pumping out fake news promoted by fake followers, to the long-term strategy China is employing to gain power and influence at the expense of the United States.

In real estate, Chinese buyers have been the top foreign investors in U.S. markets for some years now, grabbing significant footholds in California, New York, and elsewhere. In commerce, the Chinese have invested $175 billion into U.S. business interests since 2005, heavily targeting the finance and technology industries. Equally worrisome is China’s infiltration of American colleges and universities, often in the guise of the Chinese government-funded Confucius Institutes, located on more than 100 campuses across the U.S.

The declared purpose of these Institutes is benign — to teach Chinese language courses and promote cultural awareness.  But the program’s far more important underlying goals are less about education than “improving [Chinese] soft power”; this according to the Chinese government itself, which barely tries to disguise the real purposes of the program.  As one official noted almost proudly, “Using the excuse of teaching Chinese language, everything looks reasonable and logical.”

The U.S. government by and large has viewed this and other efforts by China to infiltrate American universities, businesses and think tanks with little, if any, real concern; but some red flags finally now are being raised. A provision in the recently signed National Defense Authorization Act prohibits U.S. universities from using Pentagon resources in conjunction with the Confucius Institute; and will soon prohibit Pentagon programs operating on campuses with such institutes until schools obtain a waiver. “Confucius Institutes are a key way the [Beijing] regime infiltrates American higher education to silence criticism and sanitize education about China,” Senator Ted Cruz said of the legislation.

Cruz’s comments are well-founded, but too mild. The Chinese have a very real and long-standing interest in using American college students, specifically Chinese-Americans and international students, as an active arm of its propaganda effort and its national defense strategy to acquire American technology, along with improved access to businesses and government entities at all levels in our country.

While Russian operatives may troll the internet, trying to pump their reputation and start trouble using fake identities, the Chinese are using the well-established, long-term strategy employed so effectively by American liberals for decades — infiltrating colleges to mold the minds of impressionable young adults.   This strategy reflects what conservative leader David Keene has cautioned for years, that “you only know what you’re taught.”  China’s strategy, coupled with massive investments into U.S. business interests, illustrates clearly that the Chinese are playing the long game, and happy to let Russia paranoia dominate the media headlines.  Such an approach gives China greater cover to continue its work under the radar. Unfortunately, most Democrats and many Republicans are playing right into Beijing’s hands.

September 5, 2018 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob BarrLiberty Updates

Headlines May Scream ‘Russia,’ But the Real Story Is China

by Liberty Guard Author September 5, 2018
written by Liberty Guard Author

Townhall.com

It is fair to say that most Americans’ concept of Russia today is based only loosely on reality; shaped largely by Hollywood, spy novels, and incessant hammering by the media against all things Russian.  While such accounts of what has become cast as America’s “Enemy No. 1” make for good headlines and as a basis for that most elusive of crimes — “collision” — it dangerously shifts attention from a far more clever and riskier adversary:  China.

While the craving for power and a dislike for Western values are shared by both Russia and China, the strategies employed by each for achieving global dominance are quite different. In a sense, the former plays checkers and the latter, chess.

Some of this at least, can be attributed to the state of each country’s economy.  While China’s has grown to become a very real competitor of the United States, Russia has been slipping down the economic ratings charts.  This state of affairs is reflected also in the two countries’ military policies.   As China pumps billions into its armed forces while engaging no active military campaigns, Russia’s military is enduring significant cuts even as it continues to burn cash in Syria, the Ukraine, and elsewhere.

Russia’s slim budget for gaining global influence has produced meager results, but its effectiveness has been amplified because it provides an easy vehicle by which Democrats and the media can attack President Trump.

An exclusive report from Buzzfeed last week exposed a Russian plot in the Baltics to gain influence from funding “independent” news sites, while forcing them to produce pro-Kremlin pieces; content bolstered by the purchase of fake clicks, likes, and comments from troll farms. The strategy appears similar to what was seen during the 2016 election cycle. Compare those efforts, if you will, of pumping out fake news promoted by fake followers, to the long-term strategy China is employing to gain power and influence at the expense of the United States.

In real estate, Chinese buyers have been the top foreign investors in U.S. markets for some years now, grabbing significant footholds in California, New York, and elsewhere. In commerce, the Chinese have invested $175 billion into U.S. business interests since 2005, heavily targeting the finance and technology industries. Equally worrisome is China’s infiltration of American colleges and universities, often in the guise of the Chinese government-funded Confucius Institutes, located on more than 100 campuses across the U.S.

The declared purpose of these Institutes is benign — to teach Chinese language courses and promote cultural awareness.  But the program’s far more important underlying goals are less about education than “improving [Chinese] soft power”; this according to the Chinese government itself, which barely tries to disguise the real purposes of the program.  As one official noted almost proudly, “Using the excuse of teaching Chinese language, everything looks reasonable and logical.”

The U.S. government by and large has viewed this and other efforts by China to infiltrate American universities, businesses and think tanks with little, if any, real concern; but some red flags finally now are being raised. A provision in the recently signed National Defense Authorization Act prohibits U.S. universities from using Pentagon resources in conjunction with the Confucius Institute; and will soon prohibit Pentagon programs operating on campuses with such institutes until schools obtain a waiver. “Confucius Institutes are a key way the [Beijing] regime infiltrates American higher education to silence criticism and sanitize education about China,” Senator Ted Cruz said of the legislation.

Cruz’s comments are well-founded, but too mild. The Chinese have a very real and long-standing interest in using American college students, specifically Chinese-Americans and international students, as an active arm of its propaganda effort and its national defense strategy to acquire American technology, along with improved access to businesses and government entities at all levels in our country.

While Russian operatives may troll the internet, trying to pump their reputation and start trouble using fake identities, the Chinese are using the well-established, long-term strategy employed so effectively by American liberals for decades — infiltrating colleges to mold the minds of impressionable young adults.   This strategy reflects what conservative leader David Keene has cautioned for years, that “you only know what you’re taught.”  China’s strategy, coupled with massive investments into U.S. business interests, illustrates clearly that the Chinese are playing the long game, and happy to let Russia paranoia dominate the media headlines.  Such an approach gives China greater cover to continue its work under the radar. Unfortunately, most Democrats and many Republicans are playing right into Beijing’s hands.

September 5, 2018 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob BarrLiberty Updates

Full Body Scanners Coming to a Subway Near You

by Liberty Guard Author September 4, 2018
written by Liberty Guard Author

Full Body Scanners Coming to a Subway Near You

Breitbart

Nearly 30 years ago, a young Arnold Schwarzenegger, appearing in a sci-fi movie, Total Recall, walked through an entryway monitored in real-time by thuggish officials, as his skeletal form displayed a firearm hidden under his jacket.

This 1990 theatrical episode is now coming to real-life – and the privacy implications are far from fictional.

Earlier this month, to much fanfare, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority announced the roll-out of a plan to begin deploying full-body scanners in the city’s subway system. Participating in the roll-out was no less a luminary than the head of the federal Transportation Security Administration (TSA), David Penkoske.

The TSA has long advocated for the use of scanners, not only at commercial airports, but at other travel hubs as well; and its presence at the Los Angeles unveiling as a partner in the project was no surprise. Also of no real surprise, at least to those familiar with the world of privacy-invasive security systems, was the announcement that the technology for the subway scanners was being provided by the British company Thruvision.

As has become the norm whenever the government hits the public with a new form of scan-based security, there were promises that the devices carry no risks to the individuals being scanned. Assurance also were made that the systems will not be overly intrusive. In some respects, such assurances come with a degree of truth. For example, because the devices to be installed rely on scanning waves emitted by the human body (as opposed to radiation emitted by the scanners currently in use at airports), they likely will not carry any risk to those passing through their field of scan. Also, at least as currently planned, the devices will not be deployed at chokepoints through which each subway passenger must pass, so lines probably would not be among the initial drawbacks.

However, anyone who follows the progression of government surveillance systems knows that the vector always travels in one direction – upward to more surveillance, not less. And, since the wavelength scanners unveiled in L.A. currently are capable only of revealing objects on the body of the person passing through the scan field, they would appear unable to pick up a mass hidden not on the individual’s body but in a briefcase or backpack. It only makes sense, then, that the technology will be rapidly enhanced in order to detect other potentially lethal objects being carried by, and not on, individual persons.

Alex Wiggins heads the Los Angeles transit authority, and in his remarks at the August 14th demonstration, he made a not-very-credible stab at assuring the public that once the scanning system was in place, the government surveillors would have no interest if they detected a weapon incapable of inflicting “mass casualties.” He explained that the scanners were “specifically” for the purpose of detecting such things as “explosive vests [and]. . . assault rifles.” Los Angeles is a city that clearly is no friend to persons who carry concealed weapons, and for an official to state that if law enforcement detects a person carrying a handgun onto a subway they will take no action in response, borders on laughable.

Although the city officials touted that being scanned before boarding a subway will be “voluntary,” the price for declining would be that you would not be able to board the train for which you had already paid the fare. As well, you almost certainly would be flagged immediately as a suspicious person because you declined to be scanned. Moreover, assurance that the scanning would be “voluntary” flies in the face of added remarks by the Los Angeles officials, one of who said “most people won’t even know they’re being scanned,” thereby rendering it immaterial whether you “volunteer” since you would not even know enough to make the choice.

During the news conference at the Los Angeles unveiling, there did not appear to have been any interest expressed by the media about who actually will own the information gathered by these and future scanning devices. Had there been such a question, it might have made the government officials as well as Thruvision a mite uncomfortable.

At the end of the day, however, it is likely that most people using ground-based mass transit – whether a subway in Los Angeles or a Greyhound bus in Manhattan – will accept such privacy-invasive scanning as will be deployed very shortly in major cities across the country. As one 22-year old student interviewed in Los Angeles opined, “it makes me feel safe.” And, in the post-911 world, “feeling safe” apparently is worth just about any price.

Bob Barr is president and CEO of the Law Enforcement Education Foundation (LEEF) and a member of the NRA Board of Directors. From 1995-2003, he represented Georgia’s Seventh Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

September 4, 2018 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob BarrLiberty Updates

Sole-Source Cronyism Alive and Well in Washington

by Liberty Guard Author September 4, 2018
written by Liberty Guard Author

Sole-Source Cronyism Alive and Well in Washington
Townhall.com

Were Hollywood to make a movie about the “Revolving Door” that long has connected government agencies to the consulting firms that populate the Beltway encircling the Nation’s Capital, a starring role would go to the international company Deloitte Consulting LLP. Few large consulting firms are able to match Deloitte’s roster of former top federal officials on its gargantuan payroll.  This is especially the case with regard to government agencies having responsibilities for national security matters; and therein lies the very real potential for abuse.

Not only does Deloitte count among its principals key former top officials from agencies including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP); but enjoys a reciprocal relationship with those agencies employing spouses and close associates of key Deloitte employees.

While there are extensive federal regulations designed to ensure transparency and avoidance of conflicts of interest between government and private industry — primarily the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) – these have proved clearly inadequate to address such potentialities.

This has become obvious in the large number of sole-source contracts regularly if not routinely negotiated between consulting firms such as Deloitte and federal government agencies with national security responsibilities.  Sole-source contracts, known also as “no-bid” contracts, can mean multi-year and hundred-million dollar income streams for Deloitte and other companies similarly situated. And while procedures laid out in FAR (which have been in place since Ronald Reagan’s first term) are supposed to ensure that sole-source contracts are the exception to the rule of competitively-bid contracts, the “exceptions” seem to have become the norm. This phenomenon has an especially pernicious effect on America’s small businesses, which are supposed to benefit from the open competition FAR and Small Business Administration (SBA) rules appear to mandate but often fail to deliver.

Frequent use of no-bid contracting is hardly a problem unique to the Trump Administration; nor is he the first to decry the practice and to promise to “drain the swamp” in Washington.  Every U.S. president since Jimmy Carter in the late 1970s promised to bring a new and higher degree of transparency to government contracting.Not surprising, no-bid contracting increased during the Obama years, and the practice continues.  For example, the SBA Inspector General recently reported that just under 90% of sole-source contracts set aside for women-owned businesses had been awarded improperly. Included among the improperly-awarded, no-bid contracts were some dealing with national defense matters.

Such problematic and disturbing goings on in government contracting are the sort that were to be avoided by the statutorily-mandated FAR requirements. The FAR requirements for “other than full and open competition,” would appear to place serious and difficult hurdles to limit the awarding of no-bid contracts.  In practice, however, the seven detailed “exceptions” have proven easy to circumvent for those who travel the revolving door superhighway between federal agencies and Beltway consulting firms like Deloitte.

In 2014 alone, DHS awarded 399 no-bid contracts worth in excess of $300 million.  While there exist numerous and qualified small businesses that would be in line to compete for such contracts, it has become standard for the large Beltway firms, including Deloitte near the front of the line, to reap the awards of such contracts by shoehorning themselves into one of the FAR exceptions. The Beltway Big Boys are adept also at circumventing SBA requirements designed to provide small businesses the opportunity to compete.

Family relationships between Deloitte and agencies like CBP and DHS, and the ping-ponging of former members of the Senior Executive Service as well as Senate-confirmed positions, between private industry and government and back again, has made a mockery of FAR’s requirements.

Deloitte, of course, is hardly the only company that takes advantage of maintaining and nurturing such relationships.  The Sentinel Company, which counts among its rainmakers a former CBP Commissioner, practices the game admirably.  Just one recent example of such cozy relationships between government and the close fraternity of major outside consulting firms, is the case of Kevin McAleenan, the current head of CBP who has close ties with the Sentinel Company, a somewhat clone of Deloitte Consulting.  Shortly after his appointment as Acting Commissioner of CBP, that agency awarded Deloitte a no-bid contract for $32.2 million for IT Business Support Services based on an “urgency” exception to competitive bidding. Deloitte’s foot in the door on that deal netted it a follow-on contract worth up to $69.2 million as – you guessed it – a sole-source exception.

These examples represent the tip of the proverbial iceberg of questionable sole-source contracts awarded to large Beltway-oriented consulting firms, populated by former officials with the very same agencies that continue to award them sweetheart deals; all paid for by US. taxpayers and without being bothered with open competition in the marketplace.

Former Senator John McCain was a vocal critic of such practices as these.  His voice will be sorely missed.

September 4, 2018 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
BlogFrom the Desk of Bob BarrLiberty Updates

Full Body Scanners Coming to a Subway Near You

by Liberty Guard Author September 1, 2018
written by Liberty Guard Author

Breitbart

Nearly 30 years ago, a young Arnold Schwarzenegger, appearing in a sci-fi movie, Total Recall, walked through an entryway monitored in real-time by thuggish officials, as his skeletal form displayed a firearm hidden under his jacket.

This 1990 theatrical episode is now coming to real-life — and the privacy implications are far from fictional.

Earlier this month, to much fanfare, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority announced the roll-out of a plan to begin deploying full-body scanners in the city’s subway system. Participating in the roll-out was no less a luminary than the head of the federal Transportation Security Administration (TSA), David Penkoske.

The TSA has long advocated for the use of scanners, not only at commercial airports, but at other travel hubs as well; and its presence at the Los Angeles unveiling as a partner in the project was no surprise. Also of no real surprise, at least to those familiar with the world of privacy-invasive security systems, was the announcement that the technology for the subway scanners was being provided by the British company Thruvision.

As has become the norm whenever the government hits the public with a new form of scan-based security, there were promises that the devices carry no risks to the individuals being scanned. Assurance also were made that the systems will not be overly intrusive. In some respects, such assurances come with a degree of truth. For example, because the devices to be installed rely on scanning waves emitted by the human body (as opposed to radiation emitted by the scanners currently in use at airports), they likely will not carry any risk to those passing through their field of scan. Also, at least as currently planned, the devices will not be deployed at chokepoints through which each subway passenger must pass, so lines probably would not be among the initial drawbacks.

However, anyone who follows the progression of government surveillance systems knows that the vector always travels in one direction – upward to more surveillance, not less. And, since the wavelength scanners unveiled in L.A. currently are capable only of revealing objects on the body of the person passing through the scan field, they would appear unable to pick up a mass hidden not on the individual’s body but in a briefcase or backpack. It only makes sense, then, that the technology will be rapidly enhanced in order to detect other potentially lethal objects being carried by, and not on, individual persons.

Alex Wiggins heads the Los Angeles transit authority, and in his remarks at the August 14th demonstration, he made a not-very-credible stab at assuring the public that once the scanning system was in place, the government surveillors would have no interest if they detected a weapon incapable of inflicting “mass casualties.” He explained that the scanners were “specifically” for the purpose of detecting such things as “explosive vests [and]. . . assault rifles.” Los Angeles is a city that clearly is no friend to persons who carry concealed weapons, and for an official to state that if law enforcement detects a person carrying a handgun onto a subway they will take no action in response, borders on laughable.

Although the city officials touted that being scanned before boarding a subway will be “voluntary,” the price for declining would be that you would not be able to board the train for which you had already paid the fare. As well, you almost certainly would be flagged immediately as a suspicious person because you declined to be scanned. Moreover, assurance that the scanning would be “voluntary” flies in the face of added remarks by the Los Angeles officials, one of who said “most people won’t even know they’re being scanned,” thereby rendering it immaterial whether you “volunteer” since you would not even know enough to make the choice.

During the news conference at the Los Angeles unveiling, there did not appear to have been any interest expressed by the media about who actually will own the information gathered by these and future scanning devices. Had there been such a question, it might have made the government officials as well as Thruvision a mite uncomfortable.

At the end of the day, however, it is likely that most people using ground-based mass transit — whether a subway in Los Angeles or a Greyhound bus in Manhattan — will accept such privacy-invasive scanning as will be deployed very shortly in major cities across the country. As one 22-year old student interviewed in Los Angeles opined, “it makes me feel safe.” And, in the post-911 world, “feeling safe” apparently is worth just about any price.

Bob Barr is president and CEO of the Law Enforcement Education Foundation (LEEF) and a member of the NRA Board of Directors. From 1995-2003, he represented Georgia’s Seventh Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

 

September 1, 2018 0 comment
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Keep in touch

Facebook Twitter Instagram Youtube Telegram

Search Archives

Recent Posts

  • An Evening With Dave Keene – Cigar, Bourbon, and Great Stories

    March 16, 2026
  • In Another Win For Consumers, Trump Ending Biden’s War On Bulk Pricing

    February 13, 2026
  • A European, Socialized Pharmaceutical Marketplace Should Have No Place in America

    May 9, 2025
  • Bob joins NTD News

    March 27, 2025
  • Government Over-Regulation Is Handing China The Energy Future

    March 19, 2025

About Us

  • Liberty Guard
    PO Box 70006
    Marietta, GA 30007
  • Email: [email protected]

From The Desk of Bob Barr

Government Over-Regulation Is Handing China The Energy Future
The Climate Control Movement In Europe Is Alive and Still Kicking
The Regulatory State Continues to Target Fantasy Sports

Latest Videos

I Don’t Know What I’m Doing
The Motivation Behind The Mandate
Human intelligence crashes and burns

Get Liberty Guard Email Updates




©2025 Liberty Guard, Inc. All rights reserved.

Designed and Developed by Media Bridge LLC

Facebook Twitter Instagram Youtube Telegram
  • Refund and Data Policies
  • State Disclosures
  • Join
Liberty Guard
  • Projects
  • About
  • Leadership
  • Podcast
  • Blog
    • From The Desk of Bob Barr
    • Liberty Updates
    • Media Appearances
    • All Articles
  • Videos
  • Contact
  • Join