In the midst of war, the safety of our servicemen and women must not be taken for granted. But for operations in Afghanistan, 26,000 thousand military contractors are relied upon, most of whom are local Afghanis. Unlike our uniformed troops these civilians have not sworn to protect our nation, so it is imperative that contracting companies ensure the qualifications of each individual hired to serve in crucial positions such as security guards for military outposts. Unfortunately, a new report reveals that some hires have included Taliban commanders, warlords and Iranian spies.

The Senate Armed Services Committee released a report yesterday cataloguing the “systemic failures” and lack of oversight in the contracting system in Afghanistan. ABC News describes how some companies tried to fulfill their contracts:

“In some cases, companies were awarded contracts though they had no ability to provide the services needed. In those cases, companies then quickly hired local nationals without proper vetting or security checks. The chaotic system left US facilities and personnel vulnerable to attack. The report found that some Afghan security guards simply walked off their posts at remote forward operating bases.

“In two specific cases, the report charges that ArmorGroup and a contracting company EODT, hired private security guards who worked for Taliban-connected warlords. According to the report, a US military official initially recommended that ArmorGroup hire the warlord to help provide guards to fulfill a contract. After US military officials at a Western Afghanistan airbase discovered that Afghan security guards were passing sensitive security and troop information to the Taliban, the guards were fired. Within days, the fired guards were hired by a second contractor to supply security at a second US facility just a few miles north, the report claims. EODT, the report alleges, had two Afghans on their payroll who were known to US military intelligence as Iranian agents.”

The Armed Services’ report raises two primary concerns: One, we are holding the American taxpayer liable to pay for these contracts when, in turn, the money is flowing to the Taliban commanders, warlords, and spies who were hired. And two, our troops’ lives are put at serious risk when those hired to protect their bases are working alongside our enemy. They are individuals whose allegiance is to a dangerous and anti-democratic ideal. They wish to see our mission thwarted and fail.

Our soldiers and our nation deserves better. If we are to finish our mission in Afghanistan successfully, these security contracts must be reviewed and every single individual tasked with protecting American lives must be properly vetted immediately.

(Originally Posted at 9:50 am ET)

Last time Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was at the White House, he did not receive a warm reception to say the least. Today, however, Netanyahu is back in Washington and President Obama has a great opportunity to mend troubled relations between the longtime allies.

The press is encouraging a photo to be taken of the two leaders together, but I also would like to encourage the President to take a public stand in defense of Israel and their right to defend themselves. It is my sincere hope Obama does not pressure Netanyahu to cede eastern land to Palestine in today’s meeting. Likewise, I do not want to see a push for an apology for the May 31 flotilla incident that took a deadly turn. Rather, Israel has a right to settle on its own land and to defend itself from those looking to do harm.  Going forward, Israel must be supported by the United States for the long-term safety and security of both nations.

President Obama, second chances do not come along often; please take advantage of this opportunity and restore relations with our longtime friend and ally.

Update:

President Obama certainly did his best this morning to make it appear like the relationship between his Administration and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has always been on solid ground. In fact, he went as far as to say that his commitment to Israel is "unwavering". Personally, I think "unwavering" is a bit strong. After all, it was President Obama who said in an address to the United Nations in September of 2009 that "America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements."

This is in line with what Fox News reported in April of this year about America's role on the U.N. Security Council regarding Israel:

"The Obama administration is reportedly signaling another major shift in policy towards one of its staunchest allies, Israel, and this shift could change the way it votes at the Security Council. The change would mean an end to the US' use of its veto power in the United Nations Security Council when certain anti-Israel resolutions are introduced for a vote.

"Reports surfaced a couple of weeks ago, that a senior US diplomat met with Qatar's foreign minister in Paris. They discussed the possibility that the US was giving serious consideration to not using its veto if a vote on Israeli settlements was to come up. It has been the policy of successive administrations to veto virtually all anti-Israel resolutions at the Security Council."

That doesn't sound like an "unwavering" commitment to me.

Should we be sending $400 million in "aid" to Gaza, an area controlled by the terrorist organization Hamas?

Israel has come under attack yet again from several world leaders who are calling the actions taken yesterday by their military "criminal" and "inhuman."  The AP reports that Israeli commandos stopped six flotillas headed towards Gaza to make sure that their cargo did not contain weapons. The first five ships abided by the checks peacefully, but on the sixth ship, Israeli commandoes were met with strong resistance.

The AP Reports:

"A soldier identified only as a sergeant told reporters at a military briefing that the activists on board 'were armed with knives, scissors, pepper spray and guns.' He said he was armed only with a paintball rifle. 'It was a civilian paintball gun that any 12-year-old can play with,' he said. 'I saw my friends on the deck spitting blood.'

"Israel intercepted the six ships carrying some 10,000 tons of aid for the isolated seaside territory, which has been blockaded by Israel for three years, with Egypt's cooperation. The Israeli government had urged the flotilla not to try to breach the blockade before the ships set sail from waters off Cyprus on Sunday and offered to take some aid in for them.

"Israel has allowed ships through five times, but has blocked them from entering Gaza waters since a three-week military offensive against Gaza's Hamas rulers in January 2009."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed "regret" for the loss of life of ten activists on board, but said the soldiers "had to defend themselves, defend their lives, or they would have been killed."

While the world decries the actions of Israel, I think it's imperative that the United States stand strong with their ally. I support Israel's position to stop and inspect peace missions headed to Gaza for national security purposes and the U.S. should reiterate our support for Israel and stand by them throughout the peace process in the Middle East.

Today on this annual Holocaust Memorial Day, we pause to remember all those tragically lost in the Holocaust. In this horrible blemish on our world’s history, millions were persecuted and put to death. We also must take time to remember the survivors of the Holocaust who are forever affected by the nightmare of those events. Their strength to carry on and expose the atrocities of the Holocaust is to be commended.

This Holocaust Memorial Day marks the 65th anniversary of the liberation of the largest Nazi concentration camp, Auschwitz. On January 27, 1945 the Soviet Army entered the camp, near the prewar German-Polish border, and freed the remaining prisoners. According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum it is estimated at least 1.1 million people were murdered at Auschwitz alone, with a total of 1.3 million people deported there between 1940 and 1945.

We must let today serve as a reminder of what evil dictators can do when they go unchecked. We also must remain aware of what is being said against our nation and against our allies around the world. Never again can a tyrant or dictator be allowed to seek the destruction of human life like was witnessed in the Holocaust.

This morning I came across a great piece by Ron Christie on the Hill's Pundits Blog commenting on President Obama's speech this past Tuesday to the graduates of the New Economic School in Moscow.

As Mr. Christie notes, President Obama provides quite the revisionist take on the Cold War and how communism met its ultimate demise.

According to the President:

"And then, within a few short years, the world as it was ceased to be. Now, make no mistake: This change did not come from any one nation. The Cold War reached a conclusion because of the actions of many nations over many years, and because the people of Russia and Eastern Europe stood up and decided that its end would be peaceful."

Sounds great, but too bad it didn't happen that way. First off, communism's reign was not a short and sanguine one, and its end did not come arbitrarily. As Mr. Christie notes:

"The ignorance of American and world history, evinced in just two short sentences, is shockingly revealing. First, Mr. President, I daresay the people of Russia and Eastern Europe hardly decided to stand up and decide that the Cold War's conclusion would be peaceful. You might ask the citizens of Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Belarus, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria to name a few countries if their polite request for the Soviet Empire to withdraw from their borders was met with a peaceful response."

Second, there was one nation that can be credited above others for the fall of communism, and that's the United States:

"The United States held the Russians at bay while supporting the Solidarity movement led by Lech Walesa in Poland and others who dared to rise up against the Soviet Union in their quest for freedom and democracy."

I don't understand why the President can not give our nation the credit it's due when he travels abroad. There's nothing to be embarrassed about, Mr. President; we live in the greatest country in the world.
 

Last week, I was surprised to hear Congressman Tim Walz (MN-1) come out in favor of holding Guantanamo Bay terrorist-detainees at facilities in Minnesota.

Congressman Walz agrees with President Obama that Guantanamo Bay should be closed and he’s willing to house the detainees right here on Minnesota soil.  The President has been unable to get other nations of the world to take them, but apparently Minnesota’s First District will step up to the plate.

Congressman John Kline (MN-2) and I introduced legislation that would keep any detainees from coming to Minnesota – anywhere in Minnesota. I am also a co-sponsor of H.R. 1012, which would prohibit the use of federal funds to transfer these terrorists to anywhere in the U.S.

It is simply irresponsible to shut down a facility that houses dangerous terrorists and transfer them to our neighborhoods. To transfer terrorists anywhere near Minnesota residents – or any American citizen for that matter, is a risk we cannot afford to take.