Is the Pentagon spying on Americans?
By Lisa Myers, Douglas Pasternak, Rich Gardella and the NBC Investigative Unit
Updated: 7:51 p.m. ET Dec. 13, 2005
WASHINGTON - A year ago, at a Quaker Meeting House in Lake Worth, Fla., a small group of activists met to plan a protest of military recruiting at local high schools. What they didn't know was that their meeting had come to the attention of the U.S. military.
A secret 400-page Defense Department document obtained by NBC News lists the Lake Worth meeting as a “threat” and one of more than 1,500 “suspicious incidents” across the country over a recent 10-month period.
“This peaceful, educationally oriented group being a threat is incredible,” says Evy Grachow, a member of the Florida group called The Truth Project...
The DOD database obtained by NBC News includes nearly four dozen anti-war meetings or protests, including some that have taken place far from any military installation, post or recruitment center. One “incident” included in the database is a large anti-war protest at Hollywood and Vine in Los Angeles last March that included effigies of President Bush and anti-war protest banners. Another incident mentions a planned protest against military recruiters last December in Boston and a planned protest last April at McDonald’s National Salute to America’s Heroes — a military air and sea show in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.
The Fort Lauderdale protest was deemed not to be a credible threat and a column in the database concludes: “US group exercising constitutional rights.” Two-hundred and forty-three other incidents in the database were discounted because they had no connection to the Department of Defense — yet they all remained in the database.
The DOD has strict guidelines (.PDF link), adopted in December 1982, that limit the extent to which they can collect and retain information on U.S. citizens.
Still, the DOD database includes at least 20 references to U.S. citizens or U.S. persons. Other documents obtained by NBC News show that the Defense Department is clearly increasing its domestic monitoring activities. One DOD briefing document stamped “secret” concludes: “[W]e have noted increased communication and encouragement between protest groups using the [I]nternet,” but no “significant connection” between incidents, such as “reoccurring instigators at protests” or “vehicle descriptions.”
The increased monitoring disturbs some military observers.
“It means that they’re actually collecting information about who’s at those protests, the descriptions of vehicles at those protests,” says Arkin. “On the domestic level, this is unprecedented,” he says. “I think it's the beginning of enormous problems and enormous mischief for the military.”...
The military’s penchant for collecting domestic intelligence is disturbing — but familiar — to Christopher Pyle, a former Army intelligence officer.
“Some people never learn,” he says. During the Vietnam War, Pyle blew the whistle on the Defense Department for monitoring and infiltrating anti-war and civil rights protests when he published an article in the Washington Monthly in January 1970.
The public was outraged and a lengthy congressional investigation followed that revealed that the military had conducted investigations on at least 100,000 American citizens. Pyle got more than 100 military agents to testify that they had been ordered to spy on U.S. citizens — many of them anti-war protestors and civil rights advocates. In the wake of the investigations, Pyle helped Congress write a law placing new limits on military spying inside the U.S...
Two years ago, the Defense Department directed a little known agency, Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA, to establish and “maintain a domestic law enforcement database that includes information related to potential terrorist threats directed against the Department of Defense.” Then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz also established a new reporting mechanism known as a TALON or Threat and Local Observation Notice report. TALONs now provide “non-validated domestic threat information” from military units throughout the United States that are collected and retained in a CIFA database. The reports include details on potential surveillance of military bases, stolen vehicles, bomb threats and planned anti-war protests. In the program’s first year, the agency received more than 5,000 TALON reports. The database obtained by NBC News is generated by Counterintelligence Field Activity.
CIFA is becoming the superpower of data mining within the U.S. national security community. Its “operational and analytical records” include “reports of investigation, collection reports, statements of individuals, affidavits, correspondence, and other documentation pertaining to investigative or analytical efforts” by the DOD and other U.S. government agencies to identify terrorist and other threats. Since March 2004, CIFA has awarded at least $33 million in contracts to corporate giants Lockheed Martin, Unisys Corporation, Computer Sciences Corporation and Northrop Grumman to develop databases that comb through classified and unclassified government data, commercial information and Internet chatter to help sniff out terrorists, saboteurs and spies.
One of the CIFA-funded database projects being developed by Northrop Grumman and dubbed “Person Search,” is designed “to provide comprehensive information about people of interest.” It will include the ability to search government as well as commercial databases. Another project, “The Insider Threat Initiative,” intends to “develop systems able to detect, mitigate and investigate insider threats,” as well as the ability to “identify and document normal and abnormal activities and ‘behaviors,’” according to the Computer Sciences Corp. contract. A separate CIFA contract with a small Virginia-based defense contractor seeks to develop methods “to track and monitor activities of suspect individuals.”...
I'm glad somebody reads my website!
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Monday, December 12, 2005
Weed on Mars
On Mars, plants would have to tolerate conditions that usually cause them a great deal of stress -- severe cold, drought, low air pressure, soils that they didn't evolve for. But plant physiologist Wendy Boss and microbiologist Amy Grunden of North Carolina State University believe they can develop plants that can live in these conditions. Their work is supported by the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts.
Stress management is key: Oddly, there are already Earth creatures that thrive in Mars-like conditions. They're not plants, though. They're some of Earth's earliest life forms--ancient microbes that live at the bottom of the ocean, or deep within Arctic ice. Boss and Grunden hope to produce Mars-friendly plants by borrowing genes from these extreme-loving microbes. And the first genes they're taking are those that will strengthen the plants' ability to deal with stress.
Ordinary plants already possess a way to detoxify superoxide, but the researchers believe that a microbe known as Pyrococcus furiosus uses one that may work better. P. furiosus lives in a superheated vent at the bottom of the ocean, but periodically it gets spewed out into cold sea water. So, unlike the detoxification pathways in plants, the ones in P. furiosus function over an astonishing 100+ degree Celsius range in temperature. That's a swing that could match what plants experience in a greenhouse on Mars.
The researchers have already introduced a P. furiosus gene into a small, fast-growing plant known as Arabidopsis. "We have our first little seedlings," says Boss. "We'll grow them up and collect seeds to produce a second and then a third generation." In about one and a half to two years, they hope to have plants that each have two copies of the new genes. At that point they'll be able to study how the genes perform: whether they produce functional enzymes, whether they do indeed help the plant survive, or whether they hurt it in some way, instead.
Eventually, they hope to pluck genes from other extremophile microbes -- genes that will enable the plants to withstand drought, cold, low air pressure, and so on.
The goal, of course, is not to develop plants that can merely survive Martian conditions. To be truly useful, the plants will need to thrive: to produce crops, to recycle wastes, and so on. "What you want in a greenhouse on Mars," says Boss, "is something that will grow and be robust in a marginal environment."
This isn't far out at all. This is research that (until recently) has been highly restricted in the United States. Because you don't want super robust, frost and stress resistant organisms floating around Earth's ecosystem.
Good bye Red Mars.
Can you say ecological imperialism?
Stress management is key: Oddly, there are already Earth creatures that thrive in Mars-like conditions. They're not plants, though. They're some of Earth's earliest life forms--ancient microbes that live at the bottom of the ocean, or deep within Arctic ice. Boss and Grunden hope to produce Mars-friendly plants by borrowing genes from these extreme-loving microbes. And the first genes they're taking are those that will strengthen the plants' ability to deal with stress.
Ordinary plants already possess a way to detoxify superoxide, but the researchers believe that a microbe known as Pyrococcus furiosus uses one that may work better. P. furiosus lives in a superheated vent at the bottom of the ocean, but periodically it gets spewed out into cold sea water. So, unlike the detoxification pathways in plants, the ones in P. furiosus function over an astonishing 100+ degree Celsius range in temperature. That's a swing that could match what plants experience in a greenhouse on Mars.
The researchers have already introduced a P. furiosus gene into a small, fast-growing plant known as Arabidopsis. "We have our first little seedlings," says Boss. "We'll grow them up and collect seeds to produce a second and then a third generation." In about one and a half to two years, they hope to have plants that each have two copies of the new genes. At that point they'll be able to study how the genes perform: whether they produce functional enzymes, whether they do indeed help the plant survive, or whether they hurt it in some way, instead.
Eventually, they hope to pluck genes from other extremophile microbes -- genes that will enable the plants to withstand drought, cold, low air pressure, and so on.
The goal, of course, is not to develop plants that can merely survive Martian conditions. To be truly useful, the plants will need to thrive: to produce crops, to recycle wastes, and so on. "What you want in a greenhouse on Mars," says Boss, "is something that will grow and be robust in a marginal environment."
This isn't far out at all. This is research that (until recently) has been highly restricted in the United States. Because you don't want super robust, frost and stress resistant organisms floating around Earth's ecosystem.
Good bye Red Mars.
Can you say ecological imperialism?
Mercenary Competition for Cyberspace Cadets
Even though DARPA first developed the World Wide Web, it's really hard for the most sophisticated military in the world to Dominate cyberspace when Dear Leader's Darth Rumsfeld is auctioning it off.
Cyberspace is an information medium. Adulterate the quality of the information, and you adulterate the entire medium for Intelligence purposes. If you don't think we haven't already been there and done that in Iraq, you haven't been paying attention.
Before Lincoln, there was Ketchum.
Before that, is a long tradition of lying when it suits the purposes of Faith.
If the United States Military really wishes to establish Dominance in Cyberspace, it's going to have quick subcontracting its' Special Ops to its' Competition.
Cyberspace is an information medium. Adulterate the quality of the information, and you adulterate the entire medium for Intelligence purposes. If you don't think we haven't already been there and done that in Iraq, you haven't been paying attention.
Before Lincoln, there was Ketchum.
Before that, is a long tradition of lying when it suits the purposes of Faith.
If the United States Military really wishes to establish Dominance in Cyberspace, it's going to have quick subcontracting its' Special Ops to its' Competition.
Sunday, December 11, 2005
Mission Statement from the Virtual Airmen
Via Defense Tech:
the Air Force has assigned itself another hi-tech job, according to its new mission statement:
"The mission of the United States Air Force is to deliver sovereign options for the defense of the United States of America and its global interests -- to fly and fight in Air, Space, and Cyberspace...
"As Airmen, it is our calling to dominate Air, Space, and Cyberspace. If we can decisively and consistently control these commons, then we will deter countless conflicts. If our enemies underestimate our resolve; then we will fly, fight, and destroy them.
"We have quite a few of our Airmen dedicated to cyberspace ... from security awareness, making sure the networks can't be penetrated, as well as figuring out countermeasures," Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne told Air Force Print News. "The Air Force is a natural leader in the cyber world and we thought it would be best to recognize that talent."
Recognize it, or else.
the Air Force has assigned itself another hi-tech job, according to its new mission statement:
"The mission of the United States Air Force is to deliver sovereign options for the defense of the United States of America and its global interests -- to fly and fight in Air, Space, and Cyberspace...
"As Airmen, it is our calling to dominate Air, Space, and Cyberspace. If we can decisively and consistently control these commons, then we will deter countless conflicts. If our enemies underestimate our resolve; then we will fly, fight, and destroy them.
"We have quite a few of our Airmen dedicated to cyberspace ... from security awareness, making sure the networks can't be penetrated, as well as figuring out countermeasures," Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne told Air Force Print News. "The Air Force is a natural leader in the cyber world and we thought it would be best to recognize that talent."
Recognize it, or else.
Secret Laws and Just a Piece of Paper
This is exactly the kind of stuff that no one believes when you tell them.
Atrios links to The Washington Monthly which links to:
The Bush administration...claims that the ID requirement is necessary for security but has refused to identify any actual regulation requiring it.
A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals seemed skeptical of the Bush administration's defense of secret laws and regulations but stopped short of suggesting that such a rule would be necessarily unconstitutional.
"How do we know there's an order?" Judge Thomas Nelson asked. "Because you said there was?"
....The Justice Department has said it could identify the secret law under seal, which would be available to the 9th Circuit but not necessarily Gilmore's lawyers. But any public description would not be permitted, the department said.
Congratulations.
You are now ruled by laws you lack the authority to be made aware of or defend yourself against.
It's official. Via The Sideshow, Dear Leader sez:
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"
Atrios links to The Washington Monthly which links to:
The Bush administration...claims that the ID requirement is necessary for security but has refused to identify any actual regulation requiring it.
A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals seemed skeptical of the Bush administration's defense of secret laws and regulations but stopped short of suggesting that such a rule would be necessarily unconstitutional.
"How do we know there's an order?" Judge Thomas Nelson asked. "Because you said there was?"
....The Justice Department has said it could identify the secret law under seal, which would be available to the 9th Circuit but not necessarily Gilmore's lawyers. But any public description would not be permitted, the department said.
Congratulations.
You are now ruled by laws you lack the authority to be made aware of or defend yourself against.
It's official. Via The Sideshow, Dear Leader sez:
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"
Friday, December 09, 2005
A Terra'ist Fatwah to Cheneyburton-Arbusto
...With a "serious disciplined effort" to develop energy-saving technology, he said, "we could meet and surpass the Kyoto targets in a way that would strengthen and not weaken our economies."
Clinton, a champion of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing emissions-controls agreement opposed by the Bush administration, spoke in the final hours of a two-week UN climate conference at which Washington has come under heavy criticism for its stand.
Most delegations appeared ready Friday to leave an unwilling United States behind and open a new round of negotiations on future cutbacks in the emissions blamed for global warming.
"There's no longer any serious doubt that climate change is real, accelerating and caused by human activities," said Clinton, whose address was interrupted repeatedly by enthusiastic applause. "We are uncertain about how deep and the time of arrival of the consequences, but we are quite clear they will not be good."
Canadian officials said the US delegation was displeased with the last-minute scheduling of the Clinton speech.
I'll bet they were.
For one thing, nobody at Cheneyburton knows how to make money off of alternative energy sources. Although they're out there, and no, I'm not talking biodiesel from palm oil or electricity from nuclear power.
For another thing, if there's no future energy crunch, you can kiss the neo feudal agenda of the TheoCons and Bu$hCo good-bye.
Clinton, a champion of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing emissions-controls agreement opposed by the Bush administration, spoke in the final hours of a two-week UN climate conference at which Washington has come under heavy criticism for its stand.
Most delegations appeared ready Friday to leave an unwilling United States behind and open a new round of negotiations on future cutbacks in the emissions blamed for global warming.
"There's no longer any serious doubt that climate change is real, accelerating and caused by human activities," said Clinton, whose address was interrupted repeatedly by enthusiastic applause. "We are uncertain about how deep and the time of arrival of the consequences, but we are quite clear they will not be good."
Canadian officials said the US delegation was displeased with the last-minute scheduling of the Clinton speech.
I'll bet they were.
For one thing, nobody at Cheneyburton knows how to make money off of alternative energy sources. Although they're out there, and no, I'm not talking biodiesel from palm oil or electricity from nuclear power.
For another thing, if there's no future energy crunch, you can kiss the neo feudal agenda of the TheoCons and Bu$hCo good-bye.
Here's One Man You Won't See Asking Dear Leader Some Questions
Via Atrios:
Mike Wallace and his hard-hitting brand of journalism have been synonymous with ''60 Minutes" since CBS introduced the program in 1968. Now 87 years old, Wallace, who has interviewed everyone from Malcolm X to Johnny Carson, has written his second memoir. Wallace was in Brookline, his hometown, recently to talk about ''Between You and Me." He managed to squeeze in trips to his old house on Osborne Road and to his elementary school, Edward Devotion, before answering a few questions.
Q. President George W. Bush has declined to be interviewed by you. What would you ask him if you had the chance?
A. What in the world prepared you to be the commander in chief of the largest superpower in the world? In your background, Mr. President, you apparently were incurious. You didn't want to travel. You knew very little about the military. . . . The governor of Texas doesn't have the kind of power that some governors have. . . . Why do you think they nominated you? . . . Do you think that has anything to do with the fact that the country is so [expletive] up?...
Q. Of all the people you have interviewed, whom do you admire most?
A. Martin Luther King. . . . Despite the gratitude he felt for what Lyndon Johnson did about relations between the races, Martin had the guts during the Vietnam War to say this is the wrong war, the wrong time, the wrong place.
There once were Giants that walked the earth, and you could see them on the tube.
Now all you get is the Lyin', the Witch, and her Wardrobe.
Mike Wallace and his hard-hitting brand of journalism have been synonymous with ''60 Minutes" since CBS introduced the program in 1968. Now 87 years old, Wallace, who has interviewed everyone from Malcolm X to Johnny Carson, has written his second memoir. Wallace was in Brookline, his hometown, recently to talk about ''Between You and Me." He managed to squeeze in trips to his old house on Osborne Road and to his elementary school, Edward Devotion, before answering a few questions.
Q. President George W. Bush has declined to be interviewed by you. What would you ask him if you had the chance?
A. What in the world prepared you to be the commander in chief of the largest superpower in the world? In your background, Mr. President, you apparently were incurious. You didn't want to travel. You knew very little about the military. . . . The governor of Texas doesn't have the kind of power that some governors have. . . . Why do you think they nominated you? . . . Do you think that has anything to do with the fact that the country is so [expletive] up?...
Q. Of all the people you have interviewed, whom do you admire most?
A. Martin Luther King. . . . Despite the gratitude he felt for what Lyndon Johnson did about relations between the races, Martin had the guts during the Vietnam War to say this is the wrong war, the wrong time, the wrong place.
There once were Giants that walked the earth, and you could see them on the tube.
Now all you get is the Lyin', the Witch, and her Wardrobe.
Thursday, December 08, 2005
We're the Good Guys 'Cause We Wear the White Sheets
Avedon Carol notes a little detail:
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice explains:
U.S. obligations under the U.N. Convention Against Torture, which prohibits cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, extend as "a matter of policy" to "U.S. personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the United States or outside of the United States," Rice said here at a news conference with Ukraine's president, Viktor Yushchenko.
"Policy"? Oh, I think it's a bit more than that:
Article V., Clause 2
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Geneva Conventions qualify under this clause and have the full force of US law. The actual policy of this administration clearly involves torture and just as clearly involves refusing to acknowledge any responsibility for doing it...
It seems the British have a clearer recollection of their Constitution than we do of ours:
Thrusting itself into the middle of a stormy international debate, Britain's highest court declared today that evidence obtained through torture - no matter who had done the torturing - was not admissible in British courts. It also said that Britain had a "positive obligation" to uphold anti-torture principles abroad as well as at home.
"The issue is one of constitutional principle, whether evidence obtained by torturing another human being may lawfully be admitted against a party to proceedings in a British court, irrespective of where, or by whom, or on whose authority the torture was inflected," said Lord Bingham, writing the lead opinion for the Law Lords, roughly equivalent to the United States Supreme Court. "To that question I would give a very clear negative answer." ...
Alas, it seems that the Bu$hCo tendency to creatively reinterpret the law is a habit the Blair administration has picked up:
...But in a statement, the British home secretary, Charles Clarke, said that the ruling would have no substantive effect on the 10 terror suspects whose cases were at issue. Nor, he said, would the lords' judgment have any bearing on the government's anti-terrorism policies.
"The government has always made it clear that we do not condone torture in any way, nor would we carry out this completely unacceptable behavior or encourage others to do so," Mr. Clarke said.
So presumably the Brits are not torturing the same way we don't torture.
Because if it's us doing the waterboarding, it couldn't be torture.
Still, it may not do the Blair government any good to brush it off like Condi. They're going to have to show they didn't coerce evidence from now on. That's bound to complicate things a little for the government. They're going to have to follow our lead and classify their records.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice explains:
U.S. obligations under the U.N. Convention Against Torture, which prohibits cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, extend as "a matter of policy" to "U.S. personnel wherever they are, whether they are in the United States or outside of the United States," Rice said here at a news conference with Ukraine's president, Viktor Yushchenko.
"Policy"? Oh, I think it's a bit more than that:
Article V., Clause 2
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Geneva Conventions qualify under this clause and have the full force of US law. The actual policy of this administration clearly involves torture and just as clearly involves refusing to acknowledge any responsibility for doing it...
It seems the British have a clearer recollection of their Constitution than we do of ours:
Thrusting itself into the middle of a stormy international debate, Britain's highest court declared today that evidence obtained through torture - no matter who had done the torturing - was not admissible in British courts. It also said that Britain had a "positive obligation" to uphold anti-torture principles abroad as well as at home.
"The issue is one of constitutional principle, whether evidence obtained by torturing another human being may lawfully be admitted against a party to proceedings in a British court, irrespective of where, or by whom, or on whose authority the torture was inflected," said Lord Bingham, writing the lead opinion for the Law Lords, roughly equivalent to the United States Supreme Court. "To that question I would give a very clear negative answer." ...
Alas, it seems that the Bu$hCo tendency to creatively reinterpret the law is a habit the Blair administration has picked up:
...But in a statement, the British home secretary, Charles Clarke, said that the ruling would have no substantive effect on the 10 terror suspects whose cases were at issue. Nor, he said, would the lords' judgment have any bearing on the government's anti-terrorism policies.
"The government has always made it clear that we do not condone torture in any way, nor would we carry out this completely unacceptable behavior or encourage others to do so," Mr. Clarke said.
So presumably the Brits are not torturing the same way we don't torture.
Because if it's us doing the waterboarding, it couldn't be torture.
Still, it may not do the Blair government any good to brush it off like Condi. They're going to have to show they didn't coerce evidence from now on. That's bound to complicate things a little for the government. They're going to have to follow our lead and classify their records.
Their Patriotic Duty
Oil industry targets EU climate policy
· US lobby seeks to derail Kyoto measures
· Documents show plan to sway post-2012 agenda
David Adam in Montreal
Thursday December 8, 2005
The Guardian
Lobbyists funded by the US oil industry have launched a campaign in Europe aimed at derailing efforts to tackle greenhouse gas pollution and climate change.
Documents obtained by Greenpeace and seen by the Guardian reveal a systematic plan to persuade European business, politicians and the media that the EU should abandon its commitments under the Kyoto protocol, the international agreement that aims to reduce emissions that lead to global warming. The disclosure comes as United Nations climate change talks in Montreal on the future of Kyoto, the first phase of which expires in 2012, enter a critical phase.
The documents, an email and a PowerPoint presentation, describe efforts to establish a European coalition to "challenge the course of the EU's post-2012 agenda". They were written by Chris Horner, a Washington DC lawyer and senior fellow at the rightwing thinktank, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which has received more than $1.3m (£750,000) funding from the US oil giant Exxon Mobil. Mr Horner also acts for the Cooler Heads Coalition, a group set up "to dispel the myth of global warming".
The PowerPoint document sets out plans to establish a group called the European Sound Climate Policy Coalition. It says: "In the US an informal coalition has helped successfully to avert adoption of a Kyoto-style program. This model should be emulated, as appropriate, to guide similar efforts in Europe."...
In the email, dated January 28 this year, Mr Horner describes Europe as an "opportunity". He says it "would be like Neil Armstrong, it's a developing untapped frontier". He adds: "US companies need someone they can trust, and it's just a den of thieves over there."
They should feel right at home then.
· US lobby seeks to derail Kyoto measures
· Documents show plan to sway post-2012 agenda
David Adam in Montreal
Thursday December 8, 2005
The Guardian
Lobbyists funded by the US oil industry have launched a campaign in Europe aimed at derailing efforts to tackle greenhouse gas pollution and climate change.
Documents obtained by Greenpeace and seen by the Guardian reveal a systematic plan to persuade European business, politicians and the media that the EU should abandon its commitments under the Kyoto protocol, the international agreement that aims to reduce emissions that lead to global warming. The disclosure comes as United Nations climate change talks in Montreal on the future of Kyoto, the first phase of which expires in 2012, enter a critical phase.
The documents, an email and a PowerPoint presentation, describe efforts to establish a European coalition to "challenge the course of the EU's post-2012 agenda". They were written by Chris Horner, a Washington DC lawyer and senior fellow at the rightwing thinktank, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which has received more than $1.3m (£750,000) funding from the US oil giant Exxon Mobil. Mr Horner also acts for the Cooler Heads Coalition, a group set up "to dispel the myth of global warming".
The PowerPoint document sets out plans to establish a group called the European Sound Climate Policy Coalition. It says: "In the US an informal coalition has helped successfully to avert adoption of a Kyoto-style program. This model should be emulated, as appropriate, to guide similar efforts in Europe."...
In the email, dated January 28 this year, Mr Horner describes Europe as an "opportunity". He says it "would be like Neil Armstrong, it's a developing untapped frontier". He adds: "US companies need someone they can trust, and it's just a den of thieves over there."
They should feel right at home then.
Wednesday, December 07, 2005
He's on a Mission...
Voice Of God Revealed To Be Cheney On Intercom
December 7, 2005 | Issue 41•49
WASHINGTON, DC—Telephone logs recorded by the National Security Agency and obtained by Congress as part of an ongoing investigation suggest that the vice president may have used the Oval Office intercom system to address President Bush at crucial moments, giving categorical directives in a voice the president believed to be that of God...
December 7, 2005 | Issue 41•49
WASHINGTON, DC—Telephone logs recorded by the National Security Agency and obtained by Congress as part of an ongoing investigation suggest that the vice president may have used the Oval Office intercom system to address President Bush at crucial moments, giving categorical directives in a voice the president believed to be that of God...
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Keeping the Treasury Safe For Lockheed-Martin, Northrop-Grumman, and General Dynamics
Via Defense Tech:
A few weeks back, it looked like the Pentagon really might go after some of its biggest, fattest weapons programs with an axe. Now, that's looking less likely.
In fact, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that the Air Force is "looking to secure much of its savings by cutting active and reserve forces, instead of slashing weapons purchases.
"To stay within its expected budget, the Air Force is planning to cut at least 30,000, and perhaps as many as 40,000, uniformed personnel, civilians and contractor-support staff through fiscal 2011, military officials said..."
Is Rumsfeld insane? Or just totally amoral, and almost everyone else in Washington insane for not seeing it?
A few weeks back, it looked like the Pentagon really might go after some of its biggest, fattest weapons programs with an axe. Now, that's looking less likely.
In fact, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that the Air Force is "looking to secure much of its savings by cutting active and reserve forces, instead of slashing weapons purchases.
"To stay within its expected budget, the Air Force is planning to cut at least 30,000, and perhaps as many as 40,000, uniformed personnel, civilians and contractor-support staff through fiscal 2011, military officials said..."
Is Rumsfeld insane? Or just totally amoral, and almost everyone else in Washington insane for not seeing it?
Savage Killing Machine as Christ?- TheoCons Love It
...For non-CS Lewis aficionados, here is a recap. The four children enter Narnia through a wardrobe and find themselves in a land frozen into "always winter, never Christmas" by the white witch, (played with elemental force by Tilda Swinton). Unhappy middle child Edmund, resentful of being bossed about by his older brother, broods with meanness and misery. The devil, in the shape of the witch, tempts him: for the price of several chunks of turkish delight, rather than 30 pieces of silver, Edmund betrays his siblings and their Narnian friends.
The sins of this "son of Adam" can only be redeemed by the supreme sacrifice of Aslan. This Christ-lion willingly lays down his life, submitting himself to be bound, thrashed and humiliated by the white witch, allowing his golden mane to be cut and himself to be slaughtered on the sacrificial stone table: it cracks in sympathetic agony and his body goes missing. The two girls lay down their heads and weep, Magdalene and Mary-like. Be warned, the film lingers long and lovingly over all this.
But so far, so good. The story makes sense. The lion exchanging his life for Edmund's is the sort of thing Arthurian legends are made of. Parfait knights and heroes in prisoner-of-war camps do it all the time. But what's this? After a long, dark night of the soul and women's weeping, the lion is suddenly alive again. Why? How?, my children used to ask. Well, it is hard to say why. It does not make any more sense in CS Lewis's tale than in the gospels. Ah, Aslan explains, it is the "deep magic", where pure sacrifice alone vanquishes death.
Of all the elements of Christianity, the most repugnant is the notion of the Christ who took our sins upon himself and sacrificed his body in agony to save our souls. Did we ask him to? Poor child Edmund, to blame for everything, must bear the full weight of a guilt only Christians know how to inflict, with a twisted knife to the heart. Every one of those thorns, the nuns used to tell my mother, is hammered into Jesus's holy head every day that you don't eat your greens or say your prayers when you are told. So the resurrected Aslan gives Edmund a long, life-changing talking-to high up on the rocks out of our earshot. When the poor boy comes back down with the sacred lion's breath upon him he is transformed unrecognisably into a Stepford brother, well and truly purged.
Tolkien hated Narnia: the two dons may have shared the same love of unquestioning feudal power, with worlds of obedient plebs and inferior folk eager to bend at the knee to any passing superior white persons - even children; both their fantasy worlds and their Christianity assumes that rigid hierarchy of power - lord of lords, king of kings, prince of peace to be worshipped and adored. But Tolkien disliked Lewis's bully-pulpit.
Over the years, others have had uneasy doubts about the Narnian brand of Christianity. Christ should surely be no lion (let alone with the orotund voice of Liam Neeson). He was the lamb, representing the meek of the earth, weak, poor and refusing to fight. Philip Pullman - he of the marvellously secular trilogy His Dark Materials - has called Narnia "one of the most ugly, poisonous things I have ever read".
Why? Because here in Narnia is the perfect Republican, muscular Christianity for America - that warped, distorted neo-fascist strain that thinks might is proof of right. I once heard the famous preacher Norman Vincent Peel in New York expound a sermon that reassured his wealthy congregation that they were made rich by God because they deserved it. The godly will reap earthly reward because God is on the side of the strong. This appears to be CS Lewis's view, too. In the battle at the end of the film, visually a great epic treat, the child crusaders are crowned kings and queens for no particular reason. Intellectually, the poor do not inherit Lewis's earth...
Thanks to Pharyngula for the link.
One other item of note: here in the Homeland, it pays to keep anonymous, because the Lions are cowardly bullying brutes who think Might Makes Right.
The sins of this "son of Adam" can only be redeemed by the supreme sacrifice of Aslan. This Christ-lion willingly lays down his life, submitting himself to be bound, thrashed and humiliated by the white witch, allowing his golden mane to be cut and himself to be slaughtered on the sacrificial stone table: it cracks in sympathetic agony and his body goes missing. The two girls lay down their heads and weep, Magdalene and Mary-like. Be warned, the film lingers long and lovingly over all this.
But so far, so good. The story makes sense. The lion exchanging his life for Edmund's is the sort of thing Arthurian legends are made of. Parfait knights and heroes in prisoner-of-war camps do it all the time. But what's this? After a long, dark night of the soul and women's weeping, the lion is suddenly alive again. Why? How?, my children used to ask. Well, it is hard to say why. It does not make any more sense in CS Lewis's tale than in the gospels. Ah, Aslan explains, it is the "deep magic", where pure sacrifice alone vanquishes death.
Of all the elements of Christianity, the most repugnant is the notion of the Christ who took our sins upon himself and sacrificed his body in agony to save our souls. Did we ask him to? Poor child Edmund, to blame for everything, must bear the full weight of a guilt only Christians know how to inflict, with a twisted knife to the heart. Every one of those thorns, the nuns used to tell my mother, is hammered into Jesus's holy head every day that you don't eat your greens or say your prayers when you are told. So the resurrected Aslan gives Edmund a long, life-changing talking-to high up on the rocks out of our earshot. When the poor boy comes back down with the sacred lion's breath upon him he is transformed unrecognisably into a Stepford brother, well and truly purged.
Tolkien hated Narnia: the two dons may have shared the same love of unquestioning feudal power, with worlds of obedient plebs and inferior folk eager to bend at the knee to any passing superior white persons - even children; both their fantasy worlds and their Christianity assumes that rigid hierarchy of power - lord of lords, king of kings, prince of peace to be worshipped and adored. But Tolkien disliked Lewis's bully-pulpit.
Over the years, others have had uneasy doubts about the Narnian brand of Christianity. Christ should surely be no lion (let alone with the orotund voice of Liam Neeson). He was the lamb, representing the meek of the earth, weak, poor and refusing to fight. Philip Pullman - he of the marvellously secular trilogy His Dark Materials - has called Narnia "one of the most ugly, poisonous things I have ever read".
Why? Because here in Narnia is the perfect Republican, muscular Christianity for America - that warped, distorted neo-fascist strain that thinks might is proof of right. I once heard the famous preacher Norman Vincent Peel in New York expound a sermon that reassured his wealthy congregation that they were made rich by God because they deserved it. The godly will reap earthly reward because God is on the side of the strong. This appears to be CS Lewis's view, too. In the battle at the end of the film, visually a great epic treat, the child crusaders are crowned kings and queens for no particular reason. Intellectually, the poor do not inherit Lewis's earth...
Thanks to Pharyngula for the link.
One other item of note: here in the Homeland, it pays to keep anonymous, because the Lions are cowardly bullying brutes who think Might Makes Right.
Monday, December 05, 2005
Masters of the Obvious
Somewhere along the line keeping your corporate and political policies based on reality got to be out of vogue.
Which is why when someone speaks up to talk about the poor quality of the Emperor's new clothes- or economic agenda- it's worthy of notice. So here, for your consideration, and for academic purposes only is:
The Joyless Economy
The New York Times
December 5, 2005
by Paul Krugman
Falling gasoline prices have led to some improvement in consumer confidence over the past few weeks. But the public remains deeply unhappy about the state of the economy. According to the latest Gallup poll, 63 percent of Americans rate the economy as only fair or poor, and by 58 to 36 percent people say economic conditions are getting worse, not better.
Yet by some measures, the economy is doing reasonably well. In particular, gross domestic product is rising at a pretty fast clip. So why aren't people pleased with the economy's performance?
Like everything these days, this is a political as well as factual question. The Bush administration seems genuinely puzzled that it isn't getting more credit for what it thinks is a booming economy. So let me be helpful here and explain what's going on.
I could point out that the economic numbers, especially the job numbers, aren't as good as the Bush people imagine. President Bush made an appearance in the Rose Garden to hail the latest jobs report, yet a gain of 215,000 jobs would have been considered nothing special -- in fact, a bit subpar -- during the Clinton years. And because the average workweek shrank a bit, the total number of hours worked actually fell last month.
But the main explanation for economic discontent is that it's hard to convince people that the economy is booming when they themselves have yet to see any benefits from the supposed boom. Over the last few years G.D.P. growth has been reasonably good, and corporate profits have soared. But that growth has failed to trickle down to most Americans.
Back in August the Census bureau released family income data for 2004. The report, which was overshadowed by Hurricane Katrina, showed a remarkable disconnect between overall economic growth and the economic fortunes of most American families.
It should have been a good year for American families: the economy grew 4.2 percent, its best performance since 1999. Yet most families actually lost economic ground. Real median household income -- the income of households in the middle of the income distribution, adjusted for inflation -- fell for the fifth year in a row. And one key source of economic insecurity got worse, as the number of Americans without health insurance continued to rise.
We don't have comparable data for 2005 yet, but it's pretty clear that the results will be similar. G.D.P. growth has remained solid, but most families are probably losing ground as their earnings fail to keep up with inflation.
Behind the disconnect between economic growth and family incomes lies the extremely lopsided nature of the economic recovery that officially began in late 2001. The growth in corporate profits has, as I said, been spectacular. Even after adjusting for inflation, profits have risen more than 50 percent since the last quarter of 2001. But real wage and salary income is up less than 7 percent.
There are some wealthy Americans who derive a large share of their income from dividends and capital gains on stocks, and therefore benefit more or less directly from soaring profits. But these people constitute a small minority. For everyone else the sluggish growth in wages is the real story. And much of the wage and salary growth that did take place happened at the high end, in the form of rising payments to executives and other elite employees. Average hourly earnings of nonsupervisory workers, adjusted for inflation, are lower now than when the recovery began.
So there you have it. Americans don't feel good about the economy because it hasn't been good for them. Never mind the G.D.P. numbers: most people are falling behind.
It's much harder to explain why. The disconnect between G.D.P. growth and the economic fortunes of most American families can't be dismissed as a normal occurrence. Wages and median family income often lag behind profits in the early stages of an economic expansion, but not this far behind, and not for so long. Nor, I should say, is there any easy way to place more than a small fraction of the blame on Bush administration policies. At this point the joylessness of the economic expansion for most Americans is a mystery.
What's clear, however, is that advisers who believe that Mr. Bush can repair his political standing by making speeches telling the public how well the economy is doing have misunderstood the situation. The problem isn't that people don't understand how good things are. It's that they know, from personal experience, that things really aren't that good.
Since shortly before Thanksgiving, gasoline prices have been returning to their pre-Katrina levels, which has led to an increase in Chrnistmas spending at bargain retail outlets.
But it's not like no one noticed the price gouging didn't stop until the CEOs of the major American oil companies got hauled before Congress to testify- excuse me, "clarify" exactly what was going on with prices.
What's the real cause of the joylessness of the Wrecovery outside of the corporate boardroom?
It's quite simple. You'd figure an economist would savvy it the same way a scientist would savvy the conservation of matter and energy.
In a new book, "Ahead of the Curve" (Harvard Business School Press, 2005), Mr. Ellis argues that the economy's direction is easier to divine than many people think. Cast aside the recession obsession, look beyond the torrent of confusing data each week, he says, and you can often tell what the economy's next move will be. You still won't know when the next recession is coming, but neither do Mr. Greenspan or Wall Street's prophets.
In 2006, Mr. Ellis says, the economy will probably slow more than most forecasters predict, for the same important reason it has typically slowed at other points in the last 40 years: weak wage growth.
The forecasters polled in a regular survey by the Philadelphia Fed say they think that the economy will expand 3.4 percent next year, down from 3.6 this year. To Mr. Ellis - who is also the founder of Blue Tulip, a chain of gift and paper stores in the Northeast - 2 percent growth might be more likely.
"We're probably past the peak," he said.
The key to his system is paying attention to people's paychecks and comparing them with inflation. These checks receive less attention than the unemployment rate or job growth, but they are far more important to the economy...
But let's be honest with ourselves. Economists outside academia working for political and corporate interests generally understand this kind of thing. It's just very hard to stay employed if you talk about it very much.
Which is why when someone speaks up to talk about the poor quality of the Emperor's new clothes- or economic agenda- it's worthy of notice. So here, for your consideration, and for academic purposes only is:
The Joyless Economy
The New York Times
December 5, 2005
by Paul Krugman
Falling gasoline prices have led to some improvement in consumer confidence over the past few weeks. But the public remains deeply unhappy about the state of the economy. According to the latest Gallup poll, 63 percent of Americans rate the economy as only fair or poor, and by 58 to 36 percent people say economic conditions are getting worse, not better.
Yet by some measures, the economy is doing reasonably well. In particular, gross domestic product is rising at a pretty fast clip. So why aren't people pleased with the economy's performance?
Like everything these days, this is a political as well as factual question. The Bush administration seems genuinely puzzled that it isn't getting more credit for what it thinks is a booming economy. So let me be helpful here and explain what's going on.
I could point out that the economic numbers, especially the job numbers, aren't as good as the Bush people imagine. President Bush made an appearance in the Rose Garden to hail the latest jobs report, yet a gain of 215,000 jobs would have been considered nothing special -- in fact, a bit subpar -- during the Clinton years. And because the average workweek shrank a bit, the total number of hours worked actually fell last month.
But the main explanation for economic discontent is that it's hard to convince people that the economy is booming when they themselves have yet to see any benefits from the supposed boom. Over the last few years G.D.P. growth has been reasonably good, and corporate profits have soared. But that growth has failed to trickle down to most Americans.
Back in August the Census bureau released family income data for 2004. The report, which was overshadowed by Hurricane Katrina, showed a remarkable disconnect between overall economic growth and the economic fortunes of most American families.
It should have been a good year for American families: the economy grew 4.2 percent, its best performance since 1999. Yet most families actually lost economic ground. Real median household income -- the income of households in the middle of the income distribution, adjusted for inflation -- fell for the fifth year in a row. And one key source of economic insecurity got worse, as the number of Americans without health insurance continued to rise.
We don't have comparable data for 2005 yet, but it's pretty clear that the results will be similar. G.D.P. growth has remained solid, but most families are probably losing ground as their earnings fail to keep up with inflation.
Behind the disconnect between economic growth and family incomes lies the extremely lopsided nature of the economic recovery that officially began in late 2001. The growth in corporate profits has, as I said, been spectacular. Even after adjusting for inflation, profits have risen more than 50 percent since the last quarter of 2001. But real wage and salary income is up less than 7 percent.
There are some wealthy Americans who derive a large share of their income from dividends and capital gains on stocks, and therefore benefit more or less directly from soaring profits. But these people constitute a small minority. For everyone else the sluggish growth in wages is the real story. And much of the wage and salary growth that did take place happened at the high end, in the form of rising payments to executives and other elite employees. Average hourly earnings of nonsupervisory workers, adjusted for inflation, are lower now than when the recovery began.
So there you have it. Americans don't feel good about the economy because it hasn't been good for them. Never mind the G.D.P. numbers: most people are falling behind.
It's much harder to explain why. The disconnect between G.D.P. growth and the economic fortunes of most American families can't be dismissed as a normal occurrence. Wages and median family income often lag behind profits in the early stages of an economic expansion, but not this far behind, and not for so long. Nor, I should say, is there any easy way to place more than a small fraction of the blame on Bush administration policies. At this point the joylessness of the economic expansion for most Americans is a mystery.
What's clear, however, is that advisers who believe that Mr. Bush can repair his political standing by making speeches telling the public how well the economy is doing have misunderstood the situation. The problem isn't that people don't understand how good things are. It's that they know, from personal experience, that things really aren't that good.
Since shortly before Thanksgiving, gasoline prices have been returning to their pre-Katrina levels, which has led to an increase in Chrnistmas spending at bargain retail outlets.
But it's not like no one noticed the price gouging didn't stop until the CEOs of the major American oil companies got hauled before Congress to testify- excuse me, "clarify" exactly what was going on with prices.
What's the real cause of the joylessness of the Wrecovery outside of the corporate boardroom?
It's quite simple. You'd figure an economist would savvy it the same way a scientist would savvy the conservation of matter and energy.
In a new book, "Ahead of the Curve" (Harvard Business School Press, 2005), Mr. Ellis argues that the economy's direction is easier to divine than many people think. Cast aside the recession obsession, look beyond the torrent of confusing data each week, he says, and you can often tell what the economy's next move will be. You still won't know when the next recession is coming, but neither do Mr. Greenspan or Wall Street's prophets.
In 2006, Mr. Ellis says, the economy will probably slow more than most forecasters predict, for the same important reason it has typically slowed at other points in the last 40 years: weak wage growth.
The forecasters polled in a regular survey by the Philadelphia Fed say they think that the economy will expand 3.4 percent next year, down from 3.6 this year. To Mr. Ellis - who is also the founder of Blue Tulip, a chain of gift and paper stores in the Northeast - 2 percent growth might be more likely.
"We're probably past the peak," he said.
The key to his system is paying attention to people's paychecks and comparing them with inflation. These checks receive less attention than the unemployment rate or job growth, but they are far more important to the economy...
But let's be honest with ourselves. Economists outside academia working for political and corporate interests generally understand this kind of thing. It's just very hard to stay employed if you talk about it very much.
Sunday, December 04, 2005
Yosemite Rice
Rice rejects EU protests over secret terror prisons
America does not break international law, Secretary of State insists
Antony Barnett and Jamie Doward
Sunday December 4, 2005
The Observer
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will inflame the transatlantic row over America's alleged torture of terror suspects in secret jails by telling Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and other European officials to 'back off'.
Rice, who arrives in Brussels tomorrow for a meeting with Nato foreign ministers, has been under pressure to respond to claims the US has been using covert prisons in Eastern Europe to interrogate Islamic militants. Human rights groups have alleged the CIA is flying terror suspects to secret jails in planes that have used airports throughout Europe, including Britain.
Rice's refusal to answer detailed questions on what has become known as 'extraordinary rendition' will anger many in Europe. Last week Straw wrote to Rice asking for clarification about some 80 flights by CIA planes that have passed through the UK. European politicians and human rights groups claim the flights and use of a network of secret jails breach international law.
State Department officials have hinted that Rice's response to Straw and other European ministers will remind them of their 'co-operation' in the war on terror. She is expected to make a public statement today stressing that the US does not violate allies' sovereignty or break international law. She will also remind people their governments are co-operating in a fight against militants who have bombed commuters in London and Madrid. She will drive home her message in private meetings with officials in Germany and at the EU headquarters in Brussels.
Irish Foreign Minister Dermot Ahern said Rice told him in Washington she expected allies to trust that America does not allow rights abuses.
An unnamed European diplomat who had contact with US officials over the handling of the scandals told Reuters yesterday: 'It's very clear they want European governments to stop pushing on this... They were stuck on the defensive for weeks, but suddenly the line has toughened up incredibly.'
Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative MP who will be chairing a Commons committee of MPs along with Menzies Campbell, Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, has said Rice needs to make a clear statement. She 'does not seem to realise that for a large section of Washington and European opinion, the Bush administration is in a shrinking minority of people that has not grasped that lowering our standards [on human rights] makes us less, not more, secure'...
There they go again, trying to make their own reality.
The problem is that no one wants to shake your hand if it's covered in blood.
Rice's approach may get her a one way ticket to the Hague someday.
America does not break international law, Secretary of State insists
Antony Barnett and Jamie Doward
Sunday December 4, 2005
The Observer
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will inflame the transatlantic row over America's alleged torture of terror suspects in secret jails by telling Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and other European officials to 'back off'.
Rice, who arrives in Brussels tomorrow for a meeting with Nato foreign ministers, has been under pressure to respond to claims the US has been using covert prisons in Eastern Europe to interrogate Islamic militants. Human rights groups have alleged the CIA is flying terror suspects to secret jails in planes that have used airports throughout Europe, including Britain.
Rice's refusal to answer detailed questions on what has become known as 'extraordinary rendition' will anger many in Europe. Last week Straw wrote to Rice asking for clarification about some 80 flights by CIA planes that have passed through the UK. European politicians and human rights groups claim the flights and use of a network of secret jails breach international law.
State Department officials have hinted that Rice's response to Straw and other European ministers will remind them of their 'co-operation' in the war on terror. She is expected to make a public statement today stressing that the US does not violate allies' sovereignty or break international law. She will also remind people their governments are co-operating in a fight against militants who have bombed commuters in London and Madrid. She will drive home her message in private meetings with officials in Germany and at the EU headquarters in Brussels.
Irish Foreign Minister Dermot Ahern said Rice told him in Washington she expected allies to trust that America does not allow rights abuses.
An unnamed European diplomat who had contact with US officials over the handling of the scandals told Reuters yesterday: 'It's very clear they want European governments to stop pushing on this... They were stuck on the defensive for weeks, but suddenly the line has toughened up incredibly.'
Andrew Tyrie, the Conservative MP who will be chairing a Commons committee of MPs along with Menzies Campbell, Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, has said Rice needs to make a clear statement. She 'does not seem to realise that for a large section of Washington and European opinion, the Bush administration is in a shrinking minority of people that has not grasped that lowering our standards [on human rights] makes us less, not more, secure'...
There they go again, trying to make their own reality.
The problem is that no one wants to shake your hand if it's covered in blood.
Rice's approach may get her a one way ticket to the Hague someday.
Circular Firing Squad
It seems what the progressive blogsphere does best.
Robert Schlesinger takes Nancy Pelosi to task for even suggesting that General Shinseki was fired for saying we should have used more troops to secure Iraq.
When in reality, Joint Chiefs only have four year terms anyway.
I like the comments. As a Clinton appointee, he was being emasculated by the administration before his testimony anyway, and the total power of Bu$hCo came to bear upon him after he said what he thought about Darth Rumsfeld's plan. So unlike some voices on the web, I have to disagree. Pelosi might have used a little more precision in how she spoke, but Schlesinger is splitting hairs.
One good read in the comments is this link to a PBS timeline/documentary on the leadup to the war. Check it out.
Robert Schlesinger takes Nancy Pelosi to task for even suggesting that General Shinseki was fired for saying we should have used more troops to secure Iraq.
When in reality, Joint Chiefs only have four year terms anyway.
I like the comments. As a Clinton appointee, he was being emasculated by the administration before his testimony anyway, and the total power of Bu$hCo came to bear upon him after he said what he thought about Darth Rumsfeld's plan. So unlike some voices on the web, I have to disagree. Pelosi might have used a little more precision in how she spoke, but Schlesinger is splitting hairs.
One good read in the comments is this link to a PBS timeline/documentary on the leadup to the war. Check it out.
Pattern
George Johnston notices what must surely be a coincidence:
Nov 19th - 9 US Soldiers Killed
Nov 20th - al-Zarqawi Dead? Al Qaeda Terrorist Perhaps Killed in Firefight
Nov 16th - 8 US Soldiers Killed
Nov 16th - IRAQ: US MILITARY ANNOUNCES CAPTURE OF KEY AL-QAEDA OFFICER
Nov 2nd - 7 US Soldiers Killed
Nov 3rd - Top Al Qaeda Leader Believed Captured
Sep 28th - 7 US Soldiers Killed
Sep 28th - Al-Qaida chief killed, says Pakistan
Nov 19th - 9 US Soldiers Killed
Nov 20th - al-Zarqawi Dead? Al Qaeda Terrorist Perhaps Killed in Firefight
Nov 16th - 8 US Soldiers Killed
Nov 16th - IRAQ: US MILITARY ANNOUNCES CAPTURE OF KEY AL-QAEDA OFFICER
Nov 2nd - 7 US Soldiers Killed
Nov 3rd - Top Al Qaeda Leader Believed Captured
Sep 28th - 7 US Soldiers Killed
Sep 28th - Al-Qaida chief killed, says Pakistan
Saturday, December 03, 2005
Creating Their Own Reality
Just like Brownie.
"...there's a complete wack-job sitting on the Defense Science Board.
I picked up more juicy tidbits about the missile defense program in the last three posts over at Arms Control Wonk than I had seen anywhere else in the last three months.
First off, the laser jet. That'd be the Airborne Laser, the modified 747 that's supposed to use a chemical-powered ray gun to zap enemy missiles before they get too far off of the ground. Begun in 1996, the Airborne Laser's $1 billion budget has grown to $7.3 billion. Flight tests, originally planned for 2002, then for 2005, are now scheduled for 2008. And then there's growing consensus in the military community that SUV-sized vats of toxic chemicals aren't really the best way to produce laser light. So, finally, some White House budget analysts are suggested that the program get axed, Arms Control Wonk guest-blogger Victoria Samson notes.
Another chronically late, ever-more-bloated program, the Space Tracking and Surveillance System, may also be heading for cuts, Victoria says.
That’s an incredibly important part of the missile defense infrastructure, as the decades-old Defense Support Program satellites, originally designed to see a swarm of Soviet ICBMs coming over the horizon, are nowhere near sensitive enough to provide an adequate early warning of missile launches...
So how serious is this administration at getting missile defense to work if it’s willing to take out the needed eyes in the sky for it to function at all? And how credible are assertions that missile defense has, at this very moment, achieved any sort of operational status if this major hole in its infrastructure exists today, tomorrow, and forever more?
But never mind all that, says Defense Science Board chair William Schneider, who became (in)famous in arms control circles a few years back for his suggestion that missile interceptors go nuclear. He's now asserting that, despite the, um, uneven test record, "that members of Congress need to include missile defense programs in their tactical planning when determining defense budgets," Victoria writes...
Read the whole thing and marvel at the insight of Dear Leader. It's still Morning in America, indeed. It must be terribly difficult to take over the world when you can't hit the broadside of a barn without going all nukular about it.
"...there's a complete wack-job sitting on the Defense Science Board.
I picked up more juicy tidbits about the missile defense program in the last three posts over at Arms Control Wonk than I had seen anywhere else in the last three months.
First off, the laser jet. That'd be the Airborne Laser, the modified 747 that's supposed to use a chemical-powered ray gun to zap enemy missiles before they get too far off of the ground. Begun in 1996, the Airborne Laser's $1 billion budget has grown to $7.3 billion. Flight tests, originally planned for 2002, then for 2005, are now scheduled for 2008. And then there's growing consensus in the military community that SUV-sized vats of toxic chemicals aren't really the best way to produce laser light. So, finally, some White House budget analysts are suggested that the program get axed, Arms Control Wonk guest-blogger Victoria Samson notes.
Another chronically late, ever-more-bloated program, the Space Tracking and Surveillance System, may also be heading for cuts, Victoria says.
That’s an incredibly important part of the missile defense infrastructure, as the decades-old Defense Support Program satellites, originally designed to see a swarm of Soviet ICBMs coming over the horizon, are nowhere near sensitive enough to provide an adequate early warning of missile launches...
So how serious is this administration at getting missile defense to work if it’s willing to take out the needed eyes in the sky for it to function at all? And how credible are assertions that missile defense has, at this very moment, achieved any sort of operational status if this major hole in its infrastructure exists today, tomorrow, and forever more?
But never mind all that, says Defense Science Board chair William Schneider, who became (in)famous in arms control circles a few years back for his suggestion that missile interceptors go nuclear. He's now asserting that, despite the, um, uneven test record, "that members of Congress need to include missile defense programs in their tactical planning when determining defense budgets," Victoria writes...
Read the whole thing and marvel at the insight of Dear Leader. It's still Morning in America, indeed. It must be terribly difficult to take over the world when you can't hit the broadside of a barn without going all nukular about it.
Which Is the Real Joke?
And who's laughing?
Last week:
Enough plutonium to make dozens of nuclear bombs hasn't been accounted for at the UC-run Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and may be missing, an activist group says in a new report.
There is no evidence that the weapons-grade plutonium has been stolen or diverted for illegal purposes, the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research said. However, the amount of unaccounted-for plutonium -- more than 600 pounds, and possibly several times that -- is so great that it raises "a vast security issue," the group said in a report to be made public today.
The institute, which is based in Takoma Park, Md., says it compared data from five publicly available reports and documents issued by the U.S. Energy Department and Los Alamos from 1996 to 2004 and found inconsistencies in them. It says the records aren't clear on what the lab did with the plutonium, a byproduct of nuclear bomb research at Los Alamos...
On the other hand:
ZAHEDAN, IRAN—Yaquub Akhtar, the leader of an eight-man cell linked to a terrorist organization known as the Army Of Martyrs, admitted Tuesday that he "doesn't have the slightest clue" what to do with the quarter-kilogram of plutonium he recently acquired.
"We had just given thanks to Allah for this glorious means to destroy the Great Satan once and for all, when [sub-lieutenant] Mahmoud [Ghassan] asked, 'So, what's the next step?'" Akhtar said. "I was at a loss."
The 28-year-old fanatic said he and his associates had initially assumed that at least one member of their group had the physics and engineering background necessary to construct a thermonuclear device...
It's Morning in America, and hard to tell who's kidding whom.
Last week:
Enough plutonium to make dozens of nuclear bombs hasn't been accounted for at the UC-run Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and may be missing, an activist group says in a new report.
There is no evidence that the weapons-grade plutonium has been stolen or diverted for illegal purposes, the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research said. However, the amount of unaccounted-for plutonium -- more than 600 pounds, and possibly several times that -- is so great that it raises "a vast security issue," the group said in a report to be made public today.
The institute, which is based in Takoma Park, Md., says it compared data from five publicly available reports and documents issued by the U.S. Energy Department and Los Alamos from 1996 to 2004 and found inconsistencies in them. It says the records aren't clear on what the lab did with the plutonium, a byproduct of nuclear bomb research at Los Alamos...
On the other hand:
ZAHEDAN, IRAN—Yaquub Akhtar, the leader of an eight-man cell linked to a terrorist organization known as the Army Of Martyrs, admitted Tuesday that he "doesn't have the slightest clue" what to do with the quarter-kilogram of plutonium he recently acquired.
"We had just given thanks to Allah for this glorious means to destroy the Great Satan once and for all, when [sub-lieutenant] Mahmoud [Ghassan] asked, 'So, what's the next step?'" Akhtar said. "I was at a loss."
The 28-year-old fanatic said he and his associates had initially assumed that at least one member of their group had the physics and engineering background necessary to construct a thermonuclear device...
It's Morning in America, and hard to tell who's kidding whom.
Friday, December 02, 2005
Employment Center
Given Billmon's post of a couple of days ago, I wonder how many internet trolls work for the Lincoln Group?
Lambert at Correntwire suggests the Ketchum Corporation, the ones that handed a quarter of a million to Armstrong Williams to plug No ChildMoved Ahead Left Behind.
To supplement this, you might want to examine information on both Ketchum and The Washington Group.
That's $59 million in federal PR contracts in 2004. That's a whole hell of a lot of Cheetos for the trollsphere. I bet they go through keyboards like Kleenex.
Lambert at Correntwire suggests the Ketchum Corporation, the ones that handed a quarter of a million to Armstrong Williams to plug No Child
To supplement this, you might want to examine information on both Ketchum and The Washington Group.
That's $59 million in federal PR contracts in 2004. That's a whole hell of a lot of Cheetos for the trollsphere. I bet they go through keyboards like Kleenex.
Current Topics
The New York Times notes that again,
Scientists say they have measured a significant slowing in the Atlantic currents that carry warm water toward Northern Europe. If the trend persists, they say, the weather there could cool considerably in coming decades.
Some climate experts have said the potential cooling of Europe was paradoxically consistent with global warming caused by the accumulation of heat-trapping "greenhouse" emissions. But several experts said it was premature to conclude that the new measurements, to be described today in the journal Nature, meant that such a change was already under way.
The currents, branching off from the Gulf Stream, are part of an oceanic system that disperses tropical heat toward the poles and makes Northern Europe far warmer than its latitude would suggest.
Warming, in theory, could stall the salty, sun-heated, north-flowing currents by causing fresh water to build up in high-latitude seas as ice melts and more precipitation falls.
The scientists, from the National Oceanography Center in Britain, measured sea temperature, currents and other conditions across the Atlantic from the Bahamas to Africa last year and found a 30 percent drop in the flow of warming waters since a similar set of measurements were taken in 1957.
The team, led by Harry L. Bryden, wrote that even though they had measurements from only 5 years out of the past 50, the pattern of change seen at various depths supported the idea that the shift was a significant trend and not random variability.
They also cited independent measurements of a long-term decline in the flow of water between some Arctic seas and the North Atlantic as evidence that a slowing of the overall Atlantic circulation was under way.
In an accompanying commentary in Nature, Detlef Quadfasel of the University of Hamburg, who was not involved with the British study, said it provided "worrying support for computer models that predict just such an effect in a world made warmer by greenhouse-gas emissions."
Other scientists were more cautious. Gavin A. Schmidt, a climate modeler at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said that the estimated decline in ocean circulation should have produced a perceptible decline in surface temperatures, but that no such dip had yet been measured...
They're confusing three different events, which are theoretically linked.
1) The planetary increased retention of solar-derived heat due the greenhouse effect of a high carbon dioxide atmosphere content.
2) The slowdown and possible eventual cessation of the global conveyor current due to desalinization at the melting poles.
3) The subsequent re-cooling of the Northern hemisphere and poles due to lower conveyor current activity.
The Nature paper they're citing is pretty specific. They only measured the current flow. Which looks to be unequivocally slowing in the deeps and accelerating at the surface.
Slowing of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation at 25° N
Harry L. Bryden, Hannah R. Longworth and Stuart A. Cunningham
The Atlantic meridional overturning circulation carries warm upper waters into far-northern latitudes and returns cold deep waters southward across the Equator1. Its heat transport makes a substantial contribution to the moderate climate of maritime and continental Europe, and any slowdown in the overturning circulation would have profound implications for climate change. A transatlantic section along latitude 25° N has been used as a baseline for estimating the overturning circulation and associated heat transport. Here we analyse a new 25° N transatlantic section and compare it with four previous sections taken over the past five decades. The comparison suggests that the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation has slowed by about 30 per cent between 1957 and 2004. Whereas the northward transport in the Gulf Stream across 25° N has remained nearly constant, the slowing is evident both in a 50 per cent larger southward-moving mid-ocean recirculation of thermocline waters, and also in a 50 per cent decrease in the southward transport of lower North Atlantic Deep Water between 3,000 and 5,000 m in depth. In 2004, more of the northward Gulf Stream flow was recirculating back southward in the thermocline within the subtropical gyre, and less was returning southward at depth.
The editors of Nature summarize this group's results as follows:
Most warm waters in the upper ocean circulate clockwise in a giant horizontal swirl in the subtropics, but some flow farther north and cross the Greenland–Scotland Ridge (GSR). This branch warms the northern North Atlantic and Europe, and keeps most of the Nordic Seas free of ice. Here the water sinks (indicated by the star) and flows back southwards at depth, mostly down the western edge of the Atlantic basin. The Scandinavian monitoring array tracks only the northern limb of the overturning circulation, but more deep water is added south of the GSR and in the Labrador Sea (stars). The 25° N section covers all of the overturning circulation, and also includes the horizontal recirculation in the subtropics. According to Bryden and colleagues' results, the former is weakening and the latter strengthening.
So why hasn't the reflexive cooling of the Northern hemisphere started if this has been going on since 1998? In fact, the deglaciation seems to be accelerating, if anything.
Notice, as the Editor at Nature points out, by the Bryden results, the surface recirculation from the North is increasing. In fact, this current is what sends hurricanes born off the west coast of Africa towards us. The Gulf Stream is the return current at the surface, which is what keeps Europe warm. In the past, a lot of the water has returned southward by sinking as it cooled in the North. Now, it simply seems to be recirculating at the surface.
Increasing storms, possibly.
The other parameter playing with the models is the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere which won't let it radiate heat as fast as it usually does. The Northern hemisphere may not be cooling on average because it can't.
Scientists say they have measured a significant slowing in the Atlantic currents that carry warm water toward Northern Europe. If the trend persists, they say, the weather there could cool considerably in coming decades.
Some climate experts have said the potential cooling of Europe was paradoxically consistent with global warming caused by the accumulation of heat-trapping "greenhouse" emissions. But several experts said it was premature to conclude that the new measurements, to be described today in the journal Nature, meant that such a change was already under way.
The currents, branching off from the Gulf Stream, are part of an oceanic system that disperses tropical heat toward the poles and makes Northern Europe far warmer than its latitude would suggest.
Warming, in theory, could stall the salty, sun-heated, north-flowing currents by causing fresh water to build up in high-latitude seas as ice melts and more precipitation falls.
The scientists, from the National Oceanography Center in Britain, measured sea temperature, currents and other conditions across the Atlantic from the Bahamas to Africa last year and found a 30 percent drop in the flow of warming waters since a similar set of measurements were taken in 1957.
The team, led by Harry L. Bryden, wrote that even though they had measurements from only 5 years out of the past 50, the pattern of change seen at various depths supported the idea that the shift was a significant trend and not random variability.
They also cited independent measurements of a long-term decline in the flow of water between some Arctic seas and the North Atlantic as evidence that a slowing of the overall Atlantic circulation was under way.
In an accompanying commentary in Nature, Detlef Quadfasel of the University of Hamburg, who was not involved with the British study, said it provided "worrying support for computer models that predict just such an effect in a world made warmer by greenhouse-gas emissions."
Other scientists were more cautious. Gavin A. Schmidt, a climate modeler at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said that the estimated decline in ocean circulation should have produced a perceptible decline in surface temperatures, but that no such dip had yet been measured...
They're confusing three different events, which are theoretically linked.
1) The planetary increased retention of solar-derived heat due the greenhouse effect of a high carbon dioxide atmosphere content.
2) The slowdown and possible eventual cessation of the global conveyor current due to desalinization at the melting poles.
3) The subsequent re-cooling of the Northern hemisphere and poles due to lower conveyor current activity.
The Nature paper they're citing is pretty specific. They only measured the current flow. Which looks to be unequivocally slowing in the deeps and accelerating at the surface.
Slowing of the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation at 25° N
Harry L. Bryden, Hannah R. Longworth and Stuart A. Cunningham
The Atlantic meridional overturning circulation carries warm upper waters into far-northern latitudes and returns cold deep waters southward across the Equator1. Its heat transport makes a substantial contribution to the moderate climate of maritime and continental Europe, and any slowdown in the overturning circulation would have profound implications for climate change. A transatlantic section along latitude 25° N has been used as a baseline for estimating the overturning circulation and associated heat transport. Here we analyse a new 25° N transatlantic section and compare it with four previous sections taken over the past five decades. The comparison suggests that the Atlantic meridional overturning circulation has slowed by about 30 per cent between 1957 and 2004. Whereas the northward transport in the Gulf Stream across 25° N has remained nearly constant, the slowing is evident both in a 50 per cent larger southward-moving mid-ocean recirculation of thermocline waters, and also in a 50 per cent decrease in the southward transport of lower North Atlantic Deep Water between 3,000 and 5,000 m in depth. In 2004, more of the northward Gulf Stream flow was recirculating back southward in the thermocline within the subtropical gyre, and less was returning southward at depth.
The editors of Nature summarize this group's results as follows:
Most warm waters in the upper ocean circulate clockwise in a giant horizontal swirl in the subtropics, but some flow farther north and cross the Greenland–Scotland Ridge (GSR). This branch warms the northern North Atlantic and Europe, and keeps most of the Nordic Seas free of ice. Here the water sinks (indicated by the star) and flows back southwards at depth, mostly down the western edge of the Atlantic basin. The Scandinavian monitoring array tracks only the northern limb of the overturning circulation, but more deep water is added south of the GSR and in the Labrador Sea (stars). The 25° N section covers all of the overturning circulation, and also includes the horizontal recirculation in the subtropics. According to Bryden and colleagues' results, the former is weakening and the latter strengthening.
So why hasn't the reflexive cooling of the Northern hemisphere started if this has been going on since 1998? In fact, the deglaciation seems to be accelerating, if anything.
Notice, as the Editor at Nature points out, by the Bryden results, the surface recirculation from the North is increasing. In fact, this current is what sends hurricanes born off the west coast of Africa towards us. The Gulf Stream is the return current at the surface, which is what keeps Europe warm. In the past, a lot of the water has returned southward by sinking as it cooled in the North. Now, it simply seems to be recirculating at the surface.
Increasing storms, possibly.
The other parameter playing with the models is the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere which won't let it radiate heat as fast as it usually does. The Northern hemisphere may not be cooling on average because it can't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
