Measure to Outlaw Flag Burning Advances in Senate
By Thomas Ferraro
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A proposed constitutional amendment to outlaw the burning of the American flag won the approval on Tuesday of a Senate Judiciary Committee split largely along party lines.

Raised by some Republicans as a mark of patriotism this election year, the measure passed on a 11-7 vote and was sent to the full Senate for final congressional approval. While the Senate has repeatedly rejected such measures in the past, both sides predict a razor-close vote this time.

The Judiciary Committee's vote came a week after a divided Senate blocked a White House-backed bid to amend the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage, another issue Democrats have accused Republicans of pushing merely to rally their conservative base for the November elections.

Backers said the proposal is needed to protect a symbol of American democracy. But foes warned the measure would infringe on First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech and expression.

The amendment was drafted in response to a 1989 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas law against flag desecration and a 1990 decision that ruled as unconstitutional a flag protection law passed by Congress. While flag burning had been frequently used as a symbol of protest against the Vietnam War, it has been rare in recent years.

"We're hopeful (of passage)," said committee chairman Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican who sponsored the measure with Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the only Democrat who voted for it.

FREE SPEECH
"I worry about what we are doing here," said Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the Judiciary Committee's ranking Democrat.

Leahy noted that President Bush's secretary of state, Colin Powell, a retired four-star general, came out against such a measure in 1999.

Leahy quoted Powell as saying: "I would not amend that great shield of democracy to hammer a few miscreants. The flag will still be flying proudly long after they have slunk away."

Proponents are hopeful a new wave of patriotism in response to the war in Iraq will help squeeze out needed votes, but foes say they are guardedly hopeful they can again block it.

In the past 15 years, a flag amendment has repeatedly sailed through the 435-member House only to fall a short in the 100-member Senate, including by four votes in 2000.

"It's desperately close," said Terri Ann Schroeder of the American Civil Liberties Union, which opposes the proposal. "But I'm fairly confident we're going to prevail. We'll win."

The proposed measure would specifically amend the Constitution to permit Congress to pass a law to protect the flag from desecration.

For a proposed constitutional amendment to become law it must be approved by two-thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives and then ratified by 38 of the 50 states.

Vice presidential candidate John Edwards, a North Carolina senator, joined six fellow Democrats on the Judiciary Committee in voting against the proposed amendment. He voted by proxy.

Fox News:
Flag-Burning Amendment Reaches Senate Again
Tuesday, July 20, WASHINGTON - A Senate panel approved a constitutional amendment Tuesday that would ban the burning of the American flag, but opponents of the measure say there's not enough support in the full, GOP-controlled Senate to push through a change to the Constitution.

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a one-line change to the Constitution - "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States" - on an 11-7 vote, which pushes the issue to the full Senate.

"The flag deserves constitutional protection, and legal scholars agree that this amendment is the only way to restore the law as it existed for most of our nation's history," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.

Even though some Democrats are joining with the majority Republicans to support the change in the closely-divided Senate, there won't be enough support to get the required 67 votes needed to approve a constitutional amendment, said Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who opposes the change.

Many opponents say such an amendment would limit free speech rights.
"Thankfully, they do not have the votes to pass it on the floor so this becomes something of a political exercise in an election year," Feingold said.

Senate panel OKs Hatch amendment
By Lee Davidson
Deseret Morning News
WASHINGTON - The stage is set for the final, deciding fight over Sen. Orrin Hatch's proposed constitutional amendment to ban desecration of the U.S. flag.
The Senate Judiciary Committee, which Hatch chairs, endorsed his amendment on an 11-7 vote Tuesday and sent it to the full Senate. Hatch earlier pushed it through that panel's Constitution subcommittee on a slim 5-4 vote. The House passed it 300-125 last year.
Ratification requires passing both houses by two-thirds majorities and then adoption by three-fourths of the state legislatures.
Hatch predicts a tough battle in the full Senate, but expressed high hopes for the elusive victory he has sought since 1989 when the Supreme Court ruled flag burning is a protected form of free speech.
"I think we really have an opportunity to get the 67 votes necessary to pass the constitutional amendment," Hatch said. "We have a number of new Democrats and Republicans in the Senate, and I believe the odds are that we may be able to get the votes necessary."

Hatch has come within three votes of passage twice. One Republican Hatch has never won over is Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah. He was one of four Republicans who voted against the amendment the last time the Senate considered it in 2000. Had Hatch won their support, it would have passed. The House has passed it five times.
Bennett told the Senate in 2000 that if Hatch's amendment ever passes, "The words will lie there. I don't think they will make much difference (to stop flag burners), but they will be there as a symbol of our willingness to overturn more than 200 years of tradition with respect to individual rights as outlined in the First Amendment."
Many Democrats on the Judiciary Committee expressed similar sentiments Tuesday.
"Whatever the political cost, I will defend the right of Americans to express their views about their government, however hateful or spiteful or disrespectful they may be, without fear of their government putting them in jail," said Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., ranking Democrat on the committee, said the amendment amounts to trying to teach a lesson, punishable by law, on how to treat the flag. "That may be necessary in Saddam Hussein's Iraq or in Stalin's Soviet Union or in Castro's Cuba but not in America," he said.
Hatch said, "I don't consider defecating or urinating on the flag as examples of (protected) First Amendment speech. I consider it conduct. I think the vast majority of Americans do as well."
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., added, "We don't say you can't speak against the flag. We say you can't desecrate the flag."
Feingold predicted Hatch lacks the votes to win in the full Senate, "so this is a political exercise in an election year." Leahy agreed, saying, "The Constitution is being misused for partisan purposes."
Hatch bristled at that charge. "I do particularly resent the comments that this is just a political exercise because there are a lot of sincere people who believe that a constitutional amendment is the only way to redeem this situation. And it is bipartisan."
Hatch's top cosponsor, for example, is Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.
Of note, Sen. John Edwards, the Democratic vice presidential nominee and a committee member, did not attend the meeting Tuesday, but Leahy cast his vote by proxy against the amendment.

Letters to the Editor
Boys State participant thanks Legion

To the editor:

(An open letter to Commander Robert Brook and Legionnaires)

I recently attended the New Hampshire Boys State program this past week. I would like to thank Commander Robert Brook and the American Legion Frank E. Booma Post 6 for the opportunity to become a "Boys Stater.

I greatly appreciate their sponsorship. I highly enjoyed my time at Boys State and believe it was an excellent experience for me. Learning about the government and the way things are run in our great country was enlightening and interesting in many aspects. If I could have a chance to do it over again, I gladly would.

Thank you very much for making this program available to young men such as myself.

Ben Schopick
Portsmouth
Soldiers receive a dream delivery
MIRIAM GOTTFRIED; The News Tribune
Thousands of Washington National Guard soldiers in Iraq will have a soft place to lay their heads thanks to a donation delivered Tuesday to Camp Murray.

Jan Sass, director of a Tri-Cities-based organization called U.S. Troop Care Package, said a photograph sent by a soldier inspired her to start making the 12-inch square pillows. Now the group is sending 2,500 of them.

"We got a picture of a soldier sleeping on his helmet," she said. "Since I'm a mom, I said, 'We've got to get some pillows over there.'"

Though the pillows took up a lot of box space, it was the 3,000 books, more than 100 boxes of food and many more boxes of hygiene items, videotapes and puzzles that accounted for most of the weight of Tuesday's 4,000-pound delivery.

"It's fantastic to be able to know that the folks back home are reaching out," said Col. Phillip Glise, deputy commander for the 81st Brigade Combat Team, who oversees services and programs to aid the families of deployed soldiers. "It's always heartwarming to have someone say, 'You got mail.'"

U.S. Troop Care Package sends weekly shipments to troops and hospital patients in Iraq, as well as to the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C. The group has sent more than 5,000 care packages since forming in March 2003, when U.S. troops went into Iraq.

Most shipments are sent from the Tri-Cities headquarters, but this donation is being distributed by the Washington National Guard Family Program directly to its own troops.

"In the end, I don't think it matters what they get," Sass said. "It's just important that they know we're supporting them at home."

Sass and fellow volunteers brought 1,000 pillows to Camp Murray and McChord Air Force Base in February to distribute to 81st soldiers as they left for Iraq.

Sgt. 1st Class Kevin Johnson, who was among those receiving Sass's donation Tuesday, got his own pillow when he was in Iraq early this year. He said soldiers usually don't ship pillows with them, and though they can buy them in Iraq, many end up sleeping without one for the first month or so.

Receiving any kind of care package, Johnson added, is a morale booster.
"Mail call is a high point in most soldiers' day," he said. "It's a really nice feeling to know people are thinking about you."

The Washington National Guard Family Program aims to ensure that all 3,600 deployed troops get at least one care package, said program assistant Chris Kunzelman. She added that outside donations help defray steep postage costs for families who can't afford to send many care packages.

Obtaining donations is just the first step, Sass said. Packing, sewing and distributing the items require hundreds of volunteers and a lot of money for postage - $10 for a regular care package, nearly $20 for a hospital-bound version.

Sass said finding enough volunteers has never been a problem.
"I've never seen anything like it," she said. "The American Legion heard we needed to make all these pillows, and they donated us a room. When I walked in, that room was full of people, many of whom I had never seen before."

Sass said she has no relatives in the military, but she doesn't lack for motivation.
"I just love my country," she said. "We have people who come into our shop and leave crying. It's so inspiring."
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
American Legion honors fallen soldier
Editor's note: Tom Journeay, a veteran newsman and member of the Katy VFW and Katy American Legion, captured the emotion of July 17, 2004 ceremony during which the Legion post was named in honor of Lt. Jonathan Rozier, a Katy native who was killed in Iraq last year.
By Tom Journeay
Special to the Times

Jonathan D. Rozier American Legion Post 164

Saturday morning this patriot's name was placed alongside a very select few who have been singled out by having an American Legion post named after them.

A charter dedication ceremony was carefully staged.
Legionnaires - most with row after row of battle ribbons on their chests -- stood rigidly at attention.

Veterans of the landings on the Normandy beaches, the Battle of the Bulge, Anzio, Guadalcanal, Okinawa - veterans who wore the gold wings of a Navy fighter pilot, or the insignia of the paratroops, the Special Forces - all had important roles in formalizing the new Legion post name.

Some wore white gloves, had sidearms, provided the required protocol to escort Old Glory and a new post banner to and from the lectern.

And, among these old soldiers, quite often one could spot a tear or two on a weather-beaten cheek.
Particularly as Barbara Rozier spoke briefly of her pride in her son, Jonathan. And, when she accepted a flag that had flown over the Capitol from 28th District State Rep.Glen Hegar. And when Mayor Doyle Calendar proclaimed, "This is Jonathan D. Rozier day in Katy."

The Dept. of Texas Vice Commander C. W. Sparks also played a starring role in the pageant-like ceremony. He presented the new charter and the dark blue and gold American Legion banner to Post Commander George J. Berg. A standing ovation came as Berg and immediate past commander Mark Kuhn unfurled the banner revealing for the first time the new post name.

Jonathan was a Texas A&M University Aggie, Class of 2001. The commander and deputy commander of the Texas A & M Corps of Cadets were present. Representing TAMU and General John Van Alastine, Commandant of the Corps, was LTC Michael E. Caudle '69, US Army (Ret)

Col. Caudle commented that the post's decision to memorialize Rozier in this manner "is one of the highest tributes that could have been paid to him and to his survivors."

The Secretary of Defense was represented at the charter presentation by Col. William H. Parry, Garrison Commander at Fort Hood, Tex., who spoke about the pride commanders have in the valor shown by soldiers and officers who daily put themselves at risk to accomplish their mission.

Lt. Rozier was a recipient of the Bronze Star for valor.

He died July 19, 2003 in Baghdad after his unit; B Company, 2nd Battalion, 70th Armor Regiment, 1st Armored Division; was attacked by small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades.

After the Kingsland Baptist Church Choir had sung "God Bless America", the post chaplain had given the benediction, and the white-gloved color guards had retired the colors, there was one more activity.

An informal gathering by the stage. Barbara and David Rozier. Several friends and relatives of Jonathan's. They gathered around two young sergeants first class, Hitchcock and Swanson, who traveled here from Fort Riley, Kan. They all listened so carefully. Sometimes, a tear or two. Often times a chuckle.

They were hearing first hand about Jonathan from the pair who was in his company and with him in Iraq.
washingtonpost.com
Public Less Fearful Of Terrorist Attack
Trend Worries Preparedness Officials
By John Mintz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 21, 2004; Page A12
The percentage of Americans who have created an emergency plan for a terrorist attack has dropped in the past year, along with the proportion of Americans who believe that terrorists may strike near their home or workplace, according to two new studies released yesterday .

Civil preparedness experts said these and other trends are going in precisely the wrong direction, with U.S. authorities warning that al Qaeda is determined to strike the United States this summer or fall. The findings were announced at a conference yesterday at George Washington University.

"We need to narrow the universe of the unprepared, of those we need to worry about in a catastrophic situation, and it is not going to be easy," Red Cross President Marsha Evans said in a speech yesterday outlining her group's survey on emergency preparedness. "Every one of those unprepared Americans is a potential barrier to the effectiveness of our response to any disaster."

The Red Cross survey, conducted last month by Wirthlin Worldwide, found that the percentage of Americans who have created a family emergency plan on where to meet after a terror strike has dropped from 40 percent in August 2003 to 32 percent today.

The percentage of people who expressed concern that terrorists might strike near their home or workplace has declined more dramatically, from 71 percent right after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to about half today, according to a separate poll, also released yesterday, by the nonprofit Council for Excellence in Government.

Preparedness specialists believe that the number of people readying themselves for the aftermath of a terrorist attack has dropped as time has passed since the Sept. 11 strike without another attack on the United States.

Evans said the Red Cross survey found that unprepared Americans fall into five categories: "head scratchers" who don't know where to find preparedness advice; "head in the sand" types who believe preparation is unimportant; "head in the clouds" people who mistakenly believe they are ready; the "headset crowd" that is too busy and can't find time to do it; and people who "simply haven't thought about preparedness."

U.S. officials and counterterrorism specialists say encouraging Americans to stockpile supplies for an attack, prepare themselves emotionally and take action to ready their families is vital to both self-protection and bouncing back from any strike that does occur.

The Red Cross poll also found that the percentage of people who had assembled home emergency kits remained stable between 2003 and this year, at 42 percent. But only one in 10 families has taken all three steps considered crucial for preparation: creating emergency kits and family plans for reuniting after a disaster, as well as getting training in first aid, the Red Cross study said.

The Department of Homeland Security stumbled in its first attempt at a civil-preparedness campaign in February 2003, when they recommended that Americans purchase duct tape and plastic sheeting to protect their homes against chemical attack. The agency drew the ridicule of late-night comedians and generated public confusion. Nine days later the department announced a more thought-out "Ready Campaign" using radio ads to urge citizen preparedness.

Some public relations experts said stepped-up marketing efforts for such citizen involvement could ingrain terror preparedness into the popular consciousness just as the ad campaigns to buckle seat belts in the 1980s had children reminding their parents to secure their safety restraints. Those ads are credited with increasing seat-belt use from 10 percent in 1981 to 79 percent in 2003.

Terrorism experts say there are a number of national security reasons to keep the threat of terrorism in the public mind: People could report suspicious activity and help prevent an attack; after an attack, they will know what steps to take to protect themselves and get out of the way of rescuers; and in the weeks afterward they can help deny terrorists a sense of victory by getting U.S. society and the economy running again.

Preparedness experts cite Britain and Israel, both with decades of experience countering terrorism, as nations with citizens who are well informed about the dangers and possess a sense of social cohesion that has allowed a rapid return to normality after an attack.

Frank Cilluffo, a former counterterrorism official in the Bush White House who now runs George Washington University's homeland security program, said Americans need help from the government and public health groups in defining possible terrorist scenarios.

Patricia McGinnis, president of the Council for Excellence in Government, said the data "makes you wonder if the American people are fickle, disingenuous or in denial."

"We are probably a little of each, and that presents a very complex social marketing and communications challenge," she added.

The council poll, conducted by the Hart-Teeter firm, found that 47 percent of Americans say the country is safer today than it was on Sept. 11, 2001. Only 38 percent said that a year after the attacks.

In October 2002, 55 percent of the public said another major terror attack was "very likely," while today only 34 percent say that, the council poll found.

But some people want to avoid being overloaded with terror warnings. While 45 percent in the latest council poll wanted all available information about potential threats, 52 percent said, "I only want to know about the most serious threats because there is only so much I can do personally to prepare."

Rumsfeld's Army secretary pick irks senators

By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Senior senators are unhappy with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's decision to bypass an ex-Senate aide and Army veteran for the post of Army secretary and instead pick a corporate figure.
The senators have backed acting-Army Secretary Les Brownlee for the prestigious post. Mr. Brownlee is a former Senate committee director, decorated Vietnam War veteran and retired colonel who has run the Army since May 2003. That month, Mr. Rumsfeld fired Army Secretary Thomas White, who, like Mr. Brownlee, is an ex-Army officer and Vietnam War hero.

Mr. Rumsfeld saw Mr. White as too close to the service's uniform side, which has resisted the defense secretary's style of transformation.
Mr. Rumsfeld and the White House have decided to skip over Mr. Brownlee and nominate Francis J. Harvey, 60, a longtime corporate figure in the defense industry who lives in Silicon Valley.
Congressional aides said several senators are miffed at the decision, specifically mentioning Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John W. Warner, Virginia Republican, for whom Mr. Brownlee worked as staff director; and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, Alaska Republican.
Congressional sources said Mr. Stevens had talked to Mr. Rumsfeld before the decision was made and endorsed Mr. Brownlee for the job. Mr. Stevens felt snubbed by Mr. Rumsfeld, the sources said.
"Senior members of the Senate called Rumsfeld and told him that they endorsed Les Brownlee. They are disappointed," a congressional aide said.
Stevens spokeswoman Courtney Schikora said, "Senator Stevens has had a significant relationship with Les Brownlee and has the utmost confidence in him, and did have conversations with Secretary Rumsfeld about him and did express his positive sentiment about Les Brownlee in those conversations."
Asked about the reactions of the senators, Rumsfeld spokesman Larry Di Rita said, "I think everybody here is well aware that Secretary Brownlee is well regarded on the Hill ... When you look at the amount of time left in the congressional session, there are only a handful of options available and people are examining those options to get someone in the position as soon as possible."
Mr. Rumsfeld is said to be wary of selecting another ex-soldier because of his experience with Mr. White.
Mr. Rumsfeld also has a history of hiring corporate figures who he thinks will run the services like an efficient business operation. His Navy secretary, Gordon England, came from General Dynamics Corp. His Air Force secretary, James Roche, was a Northrop Grumman Corp. executive.
Some congressional aides are beginning to see this requirement as an unfair "litmus test."
"This is the very thing I thought Republicans didn't stand for," said a senior congressional aide.
Mr. Brownlee's backers point out that he had proved he can do the job during a 14-month stint as acting secretary. And, as a holder of a Silver Star and Purple Heart, he has the war record to lead a service that is doing the bulk of the fighting in the war on terrorism.
The White House has not yet formally nominated Mr. Harvey to the Senate. But administration officials say he is the choice. The White House had nominated Mr. Harvey in December to be the next assistant secretary of defense for network and information integration.
But his and other civilian appointments have languished in the Senate, because of a dispute between Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, and the administration over a deal to lease refueling jets from Boeing Co.
Pentagon officials said Mr. Rumsfeld picked Mr. Harvey to bring long-term stability to a post that has gone vacant for months. Mr. Rumsfeld originally nominated Mr. Roche, but withdrew the name after it got held up in the Senate logjam.
The Pentagon thinking is that because Mr. Harvey already has been approved by the Senate Armed Services Committee for the assistant secretary job, he should win quick confirmation for the Army post.
Yet, that scenario seems in doubt, as some aides say Mr. Harvey may receive more scrutiny from the committee, a process that could put a vote off until after the presidential election.
Many Elite Soldiers Leave for Better Pay
By PAULINE JELINEK
WASHINGTON (AP) - Just when the U.S. military needs them most, senior Green Berets, Navy SEALs and other elite forces are leaving for higher-paying jobs.

After getting years of training and experience in the military, they leave for other government jobs or for what defense officials said Tuesday has been an explosion in outside contractor work.

"What makes them so valuable to us makes them highly marketable on the outside," said Chief Master Sgt. Robert V. Martens Jr., senior adviser at the U.S. Special Operations Command, which also oversees equipping and training elite Army Rangers and Air Force special operations commandos.

Better salaries, retirement benefits and educational opportunities are among incentives that might help stem the problem, defense officials said as they met with lawmakers to discuss ways to keep forces who have become so crucial to the war on terror.

A soldier, sailor or airman gets $60,000 per year at 18 years of service - a figure that includes housing allowance and some types of special duty pay. Troops who go to work for civilian contractors can make up to $200,000 a year, one official has said.

The military command that oversees the covert forces "is the nation's single best weapon in the global war on terror," said Rep. Jim Saxton, R-N.J. Saxton opened Tuesday's session before his House Armed Services Committee terrorism subcommittee, saying he fears the military is losing such troops faster than they can be replaced for a counter-terror war that "has no foreseeable end point."

Officials from the command based in Tampa, Fla., didn't give specific numbers but said the Army, Navy and Air Force are all seeing an increasing trend in which senior people are retiring at their 20-year mark, though they could remain on active duty for several more years.

Force Master Chief Clell Breining, senior adviser at the Naval Special Warfare Command, said there has been a decline in people staying beyond the 10- to 14-year mark since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

"We are not looking to retain every single person to their 30-year tenure, but we are looking to retain a key experience base to lead our younger, less experienced troops out into the field into combat," Martens said.

It can take four years just to train a special operations soldier and another few years of field experience before he or she is top-notch.

Martens said troops are taking "the skills that we have trained them with" and starting second careers in the civilian sector or moving into other government agencies.

The special operations command has been working with the services and the office of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to identify incentives to keep senior people, Martens said. Worse retention problems can be averted, he said.

To some extent the government has helped create the growing market outside its doors. Both the Defense Department and the CIA have hired private contractors to cover their own manpower shortages, especially in skills such as linguistics and prisoner interrogation.

The military has contracted out some chores to save troops for soldiering duties. There are some 20,000 private security guards watching over U.S. officials, convoys and private workers in Iraq - some under government contract and some hired by private companies.

The CIA often uses independent contractors who are hired for short-term assignments. While they sometimes are recruited by and work through a private company, they can also be contracted directly by the agency.

Some of the private companies have been started and are led by retired generals, other military officers and former CIA employees.

Overall spending on federal contracts increased about 42 percent from 2000 to 2003 - from $205 billion to $291 billion - according to a report issued in May by Rep. Henry Waxman of California, the senior Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee. The Army, Air Force and Navy accounted for 55 percent of all federal contract spending in 2003, he said.

The work of the military's special operations forces has greatly expanded in recent years, with them playing a central role in efforts to hunt down, capture or kill terrorists and help train other nation's forces in the counter-terror fight.

Special operations forces played a crucial part in helping local Afghan forces topple the Taliban regime in Afghanistan in 2001 and have figured prominently in the war in Iraq.

Since the war on terror started, the Pentagon has gotten extra money to fund additional equipment for special operations as well as to train more forces.

There are currently under 50,000 such troops, including reservists, and there are plans to increase the total by a few thousand over the next several years.

Floresville American Legion seeking addresses of troops
The Floresville American Legion Post 38 is seeking the names and addresses of Wilson County servicemen and women who are currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Legion members will write these individuals, expressing our appreciation, prayers, and support for their service on behalf of the country, as veterans clearly remember the boost in morale that came from hearing their names announced at mail call.

Americans recently observed Memorial Day and more recently, the birthday of this country. As we acknowledged those earlier patriots who've made the our very existence and freedom to observe those special days possible, we should also remember the patriots of today - the men and women who are the leading edge of American policy and a force for good around the world.

American poet Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote "The true test of a civilization is not the census, nor the size of cities, nor the crops - no, but the kind of man the country turns out." Today, thousands of those men and women are serving in uniform around the world - many in harms way. We should appreciate them, and remember to tell them so.

If you have a family member in Iraq or Afghanistan or en route there, and would like to have American Legion members write them, supply us with their names and addresses. You may drop the information in the mail slot located at the left front of the Legion building on Fourth Street across from the downtown library, or call Otto Hierholzer at 830-393-2650, Phil Thurman at 216-2225, or Calvin Mays at 216-7742.
__________________________

Special Ops Workload 'Difficult, but Manageable'
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, July 20, 2004 - Special operations forces are deployed worldwide, but changes have made the operations tempo for those forces "difficult, but manageable," officials said before Congress today.

Army Col. Kenneth J. Cull, the personnel chief at U.S. Special Operations Command, told the House Armed Services Terrorism, Unconventional Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee how the command is working on the optempo problem.

Cull said the special operations forces are deployed throughout the world on a scale not done before. The forces are the poster child for low-density, high- demand forces, meaning there are few forces and a lot of need for the specialties. The Army has the greatest number of special operations forces, followed by the Air Force and Navy. U.S. Special Operations Command, based at MacDill Air Force Base, Fla., is in overall command of these forces.

Special operations forces are particularly well-suited for the global war on terror. They are a precious resource - it takes on average two years to train special operators to their entry-level standard, officials said.

In many cases, the troops have spent long years understanding the languages and cultures of the areas they specialize in, but that time has reduced to relieve the operation tempo on the forces. The Army's 5th Special Forces Group, based at Fort Campbell, Ky., specializes in the U.S. Central Command area. They were among the first on the ground in Afghanistan.

"Traditionally we orient our Green Berets to a specific area of the world," Cull said. "Today, however, with approximately 75 percent of our deployment going to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army Special Operations Command has found it prudent to sustain that force by using other Special Forces groups, including two excellent National Guard units in the U.S. Central Command (area)."

He said commanders lose some valuable cultural and linguistic expertise. But the Army gains through "the accumulation of vast operational experience for the designated units as well as the requisite opportunity to recuperate the 5th Special Forces Group" normally assigned to this region.

The overall capability will grow slightly in the future. "The current plan is to add about 2,700 personnel to the force over the next five to seven years," Cull said.

He said the command is working with services to add a limited number of active duty units to the Special Operations Command "to supplement our most stressed specialties," including civil affairs and psychological operations units. This will also include aviation units and trainers at the special operations schoolhouses.

Cull said another effort is to ensure the right mix of active and reserve forces in U.S. Special Operations Command. Currently the reserve components make up one-third of the command. In some specialties - such as civil affairs and psychological operations - almost all of the capability is in the reserves. Right now, there is no recruiting or retention problem with these units, officials said.

Cull said the command will look at ways to give reserve service members more predictability, and that the command possibly will redirect a portion of the reserve component's capability to the active component.

The command also has focused its special operations capabilities. Officials said deployments are limited to areas where special ops capabilities truly are needed, and not just to demonstrate American military presence. By doing this, the command has been able to decrease the percentage of special operations forces deployed by 13 percent over the past year, Cull said.

National Guard and Reserve Mobilized as of July 21, 2004
This week the Army, Air Force and Navy announced a decrease in the number of reservists on active duty in support of the partial mobilization. The Marine Corps each announced an increase. The net collective result is 2,861 fewer reservists on active duty than last week.

At any given time, services may mobilize some units and individuals while demobilizing others, making it possible for these figures to either increase or decrease. Total number currently on active duty in support of the partial mobilization for the Army National Guard and Army Reserve is 126,856; Naval Reserve 2,763; Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve, 11,509; Marine Corps Reserve, 10,929; and the Coast Guard Reserve, 1,542. This brings the total National Guard and Reserve on active duty to 153,599 including both units and individual augmentees.

A cumulative roster of all National Guard and Reserve who are currently on active duty can be found at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jul2004/d20040721.pdf </news/Jul2004/d20040721.pdf>