APNewsBreak: Companies get OK to annoy polar bears

The moron's administration just can't surprise me anymore.

Less than a month after declaring polar bears a threatened species because of global warming, the Bush administration is giving oil companies permission to annoy and potentially harm them in the pursuit of oil and natural gas.

The Fish and Wildlife Service issued regulations this week providing legal protection to seven oil companies planning to search for oil and gas in the Chukchi Sea off the northwestern coast of Alaska if "small numbers" of polar bears or Pacific walruses are incidentally harmed by their activities over the next five years.

Environmentalists said the new regulations give oil companies a blank check to harass the polar bear.

Yes the bears will be coming around and are dangerous for workers, but why not just require the oil companies to fence off their sites? They can afford it.

Note: Headline links to source.

"Big Brother" Presidential Directive: "Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security"

But of course, should Americans hear about this, they'll just say, "If you're innocent you have nothing to worry about." Which is a crock of shit.

Some things:

1. Just how much more power does the idiot need?

2. The fucking greatest thing that could have ever happened to the moron was 9/11. It has given him carte blanche to fuck Americans at every turn and they just take it.

3. Who is going to use all this power if a Democrat takes over the White House? Well that would be his political appointees, silly rabbit.

4. What would be the purpose for wielding such power? That's easy. It would be to make sure the Democrats don't get so powerful as to prevent a Republican from taking back the White House in 2012.

5. How would they do that? By clamping down on any liberals who might champion a Democratic contender in 2012.

So that's your play book, GOP. Memorize it and live it.

The latest Big Brother police state measure emanating from the Bush administration, with virtually no press coverage, is NSPD 59 (HSPD 24) entitled Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National Security [Complete text of NSPD 59 (HSPD 24) in Annex below [in original - ed]]

NSPD is directed against US citizens.

It is adopted without public debate or Congressional approval. Its relevant procedures have far-reaching implications.

NSPD 59 goes far beyond the issue of biometric identification, it recommends the collection and storage of "associated biographic" information, meaning information on the private lives of US citizens, in minute detail, all of which will be "accomplished within the law":

"The contextual data that accompanies biometric data includes information on date and place of birth, citizenship, current address and address history, current employment and employment history, current phone numbers and phone number history, use of government services and tax filings. Other contextual data may include bank account and credit card histories, plus criminal database records on a local, state and federal level. The database also could include legal judgments or other public records documenting involvement in legal disputes, child custody records and marriage or divorce records."(See Jerome Corsi, June 2008)

The directive uses 9/11 as an all encompassing justification to wage a witch hunt against dissenting citizens, establishing at the same time an atmosphere of fear and intimidation across the land.

It also calls for the integration of various data banks as well as inter-agency cooperation in the sharing of information, with a view to eventually centralizing the information on American citizens.

In a carefully worded text, NSPD 59 "establishes a framework" to enable the Federal government and its various police and intelligence agencies to: "use mutually compatible methods and procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals in a lawful and appropriate manner, while respecting their information privacy and other legal rights under United States law."

The Directive recommends: "actions and associated timelines for enhancing the existing terrorist-oriented identification and screening processes by expanding the use of biometrics".

"Other Categories of Individuals"

The stated intent of NSPD 59 is to protect America from terrorists, but in fact the terms of reference include any person who is deemed to pose a threat to the Homeland. The government requires the ability:

"to positively identify those individuals who may do harm to Americans and the Nation... Since September 11, 2001, agencies have made considerable progress in securing the Nation through the integration, maintenance, and sharing of information used to identify persons who may pose a threat to national security.

The Directive is not limited to KSTs, which in Homeland Security jargon stands for "Known and Suspected Terrorists":

"The executive branch has developed an integrated screening capability to protect the Nation against "known and suspected terrorists" (KSTs). The executive branch shall build upon this success, in accordance with this directive, by enhancing its capability to collect, store, use, analyze, and share biometrics to identify and screen KSTs and other persons who may pose a threat to national security.

The executive branch recognizes the need for a layered approach to identification and screening of individuals, as no single mechanism is sufficient. For example, while existing name-based screening procedures are beneficial, application of biometric technologies, where appropriate, improve the executive branch's ability to identify and screen for persons who may pose a national security threat. To be most effective, national security identification and screening systems will require timely access to the most accurate and most complete biometric, biographic, and related data that are, or can be, made available throughout the executive branch."

NSPD 59 calls for extending the definition of terrorists to include other categories of individuals "who may pose a threat to national security".

In this regard, it is worth noting that in the 2005 TOPOFF (Top officials) anti-terror drills, two other categories of individuals were identified as potential threats: "Radical groups" and "disgruntled employees", suggesting than any form of dissent directed against Big Brother will be categorized as a threat to America.

In a previous 2004 report of the Homeland Security Council entitled Planning Scenarios, the enemy was referred to as the Universal Adversary (UA).

The Universal Adversary was identified in the scenarios as an abstract entity used for the purposes of simulation. Yet upon more careful examination, this Universal Adversary was by no means illusory. It included the following categories of potential "conspirators":

"foreign [Islamic] terrorists" ,

"domestic radical groups", [antiwar and civil rights groups]

"state sponsored adversaries" ["rogue states", "unstable nations"]

"disgruntled employees" [labor and union activists].

Are you still thinking its a good idea to run for president of your local union or joining Students Against War? Just asking.

Note: Headline links to source.

White House: Pre-war emails 'lost'

File under: The dog ate my homework.

This administration never fails to amaze me.

The White House does not have archival copies of e-mails exchanged between administration officials during the weeks leading up to President Bush's decision to invade Iraq nor for the first two months of the war there, according to a just-released filing concerning millions of e-mails alleged to have gone missing or been deleted.

"A White House declaration filed late last night ... makes the stunning admission that the White House failed to preserve ANY backup tapes for the period March 1, 2003 through May 22, 2003, a period of time during which the U.S. went to war in Iraq," says a release from Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, a watchdog group suing for public records concerning the disappearance of internal White House e-mails.

Without computer backup tapes from this critical pre-Iraq war period, future researchers may be deprived a vital resource as the delve into the inner workings of the Bush administration as it decided to invade a country that had not attacked the United States and possessed no weapons of mass destruction.

Or as Dana Carvey as The Church Lady would say, "Well, isn't that convenient?"

Don't people get imprisoned for destroying evidence of a possible crime? Just asking.

Note: Headline links to source.

The Old Bait 'n' Switch

How do I put this without being totally coarse?

Oh yeah, I've got it. The government fucks the veterans so you don't have to.

How many join the military assuming they will get a free education after they have fulfilled they're obligation to serve? Most is my guess and they are so very wrong.

When I was sitting in a humvee in Baghdad two years ago, we had plenty of time to talk. While the conversations varied between musing about the morning's chow, the stifling heat or what type of truck we were going to buy when we got home, one theme remained constant. Everyone said they were going home to get that college degree that Uncle Sam promised us when we enlisted.

Last December, a year and a half late, I finally graduated. I still laugh when people ask me whether the military paid for my education. When I tell them how meager the actual education benefits are, their shock always make me feel like I just told a child that there is no such thing as the tooth fairy. Unfortunately, many of my battle buddies realized the hard way that the GI Bill isn't what it used to be. The education benefits for troops are so low that they either never enrolled, or dropped out of school because they couldn't handle working two part-time jobs or living back home on Mama's couch to afford to attend school.

My fellow veterans are struggling because the current GI Bill is woefully inadequate. Service members are forced to take out loans just to start classes, and then wait months to get any reimbursement. Even then, the benefit only covers 60 to 70 percent of the cost of a four-year public university. For expensive private schools, the GI Bill is barely a drop in the bucket. And every year, the GI Bill is losing value because education benefits have failed to keep up with the skyrocketing cost of education . . . .

Note: Headline links to source.

"Mission Accomplished" 5 Years Later

Just check out the emphasis which is mine. You decide. Was the banner put there by the administration or the captain of the Abraham Lincoln?

The White House said Wednesday that President Bush has paid a price for the "Mission Accomplished" banner that was flown in triumph five years ago but later became a symbol of U.S. misjudgments and mistakes in the long and costly war in Iraq.

Thursday is the fifth anniversary of Bush's dramatic landing in a Navy jet on an aircraft carrier homebound from the war. The USS Abraham Lincoln had launched thousands of airstrikes on Iraq.

"Major combat operations in Iraq have ended," Bush said at the time. "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on Sept. 11, 2001, and still goes on." The "Mission Accomplished" banner was prominently displayed above him _ a move the White House came to regret as the display was mocked and became a source of controversy.

After shifting explanations, the White House eventually said the "Mission Accomplished" phrase referred to the carrier's crew completing its 10-month mission, not the military completing its mission in Iraq. Bush, in October 2003, disavowed any connection with the "Mission Accomplished" message. He said the White House had nothing to do with the banner; a spokesman later said the ship's crew asked for the sign and the White House staff had it made by a private vendor.

"President Bush is well aware that the banner should have been much more specific and said `mission accomplished' for these sailors who are on this ship on their mission," White House press secretary Dana Perino said Wednesday. "And we have certainly paid a price for not being more specific on that banner. And I recognize that the media is going to play this up again tomorrow, as they do every single year."

The WH sounds guilty to me.

Note: Headline links to source.

Planning

This will be a strange/unusual post for SPIIDERWEB™ because it won't be short, won't just steal other's ideas and postings, may appear to negate some things I've written and might even add something to the discussion.

As I read the excerpt below from Balloon Juice, I got to thinking (rare) there are at least three types of planning.

1. Necessary.

2. Prudent.

3. Scary.

Necessary planning is the type almost never done by the Bush administration or is done in piss poor fashion.

Think Katrina.

Had adequate planning been done many lives could have been saved or at least the impact on those lives not lost been mitigated.

Had sufficient planning been done about what to do after the results of Katrina were known we wouldn't be years down the road with a mess in NOLA.

What should be done after Saddam Hussein is ousted? How do we rebuild Iraq? How do we win over the people?

Prudent planning also is the type almost never done by the Bush administration or is done in piss poor fashion.

What if someone attacks US? What if Iran does develop nuclear capabilities? What if Obama or Clinton becomes the GOP opponent? What should we do if we discover a "dirty bomb" is on its way to the US?

It would be foolish to wake up in the morning to see your party under attack on an issue (anti-black, anti-woman) and have no planned response.

Scary planning is the Bush administration's forté.

How do we go about attacking Iran? How do we deploy more troops to Afghanistan so we can kill more dark skinned people when we don't have enough people?

This planning is scary because it may well be assumed it will be acted upon. It isn't preventative, necessary, prudent planning. Its scary in its a blueprint for boneheaded action.

Top Republican strategists are working on plans to protect the GOP from charges of racism or sexism in the general election, as they prepare for a presidential campaign against the first ever African-American or female Democratic nominee.

Anyone in business knows necessary and prudent planning are absolutes for success. Blindly barging into a situation without preparation, unless you are excellent at reacting, improvising, readjusting, parrying, at which the Bush administration has proven woefully inadequate, is fucking stupid.

Via Balloon Juice.

Gates: U.S. won't promise to defend Iraq in accord

For starters, why wouldn't the US promise to defend Iraq? It's what amounts to a US colony.

And why the constant fucking lies to the American people? The US is building permanent bases already.

Jesus H Christ playing hide and seek, this ain't no secret. Check here too. Why do they always assume Americans are fucking idiots? Just asking.

Follow the first link to an earlier post of mine. Tell me if you think that base is temporary.

The United States will not promise to defend Iraq nor seek permanent bases there under a planned agreement on future relations between the two states, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Wednesday.

Via Yahoo News.

Is Ombudsman Already in Jeopardy?

Whew that was close! Bush nearly blew it, but he came up with a great fucking save.

He can't just let anyone have access to information via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). That would be so, like, un-American.

Hours before the new year, open-government groups won a key victory in their years-long fight to force government agencies to release documents without months, and sometimes years, of delay. The moment came when President Bush reluctantly signed a law enforcing better compliance with the Freedom of Information Act.

But in his budget request this week, Bush proposed shifting a newly created ombudsman’s position from the National Archives and Records Administration to the Department of Justice. Because the ombudsman would be the chief monitor of compliance with the new law, that move is akin to killing the critical function, some members of Congress and watchdog groups say.

“Justice represents the agencies when they’re sued over FOIA. It doesn’t make a lot of sense for them to be the mediator,” said Kristin Adair, staff counsel at the National Security Archive, which is suing the White House to force it to preserve e-mails the administration says it may have lost.

What is totally bizarre is how people in the Bush administration don't seem to understand what unlimited power they are handing to the next administration which very likely will be Democratic.

Sometimes the hight of stupidity within this goddamn administration really is mind-blowing.

Via Free Press.

Longer waits to become citizense

Now put on your tinfoil hat. We're going on a field trip.

Immigrants in Massachusetts and nationwide could wait 16 to 18 months - more than double the usual period - to become US citizens because of a massive backlog, leaving thousands possibly unable to vote in November.

The backlog is the result of millions of applications for citizenship, green cards, and work permits that swamped immigration offices last summer before hefty fee increases went into effect July 30.

Federal immigration officials across the nation are hiring hundreds of staff members, paying overtime, and streamlining bureaucracy to process the applications more quickly. In Boston, officials will add more officers and in March will add an extra day, Saturday, to help break up the backlog in citizenship interviews.

Officials in Massachusetts had hoped the delays would be shorter. But after opening hundreds of applications that came in before the fee increases, a process they finished just recently, they realized the wait could be as long as 18 months, which is also the national average. Before the fee change, the wait here was four to five months, and about six months nationally.

I'm sure, for the Bush administration, this is a fantastically low priority problem.

Why speed up the process to allow them foreigners to vote? They might not be controllable like the natives.

Hell, they might even vote against anyone remotely connected to this administration. Talk about your fucking ingrates.

Via Boston Globe.

UN budget approved but US votes against

Jesus H Christ clasping his wallet. Is there anything at all this administration can agree on with other nations?

Why is it still called the "United" Nations? They seem only united in eating canapés and sucking down champagne.

And don't get me started on the Israeli tail wagging the fucking dog.

The General Assembly early Saturday approved a two-year UN budget of 4.17 billion dollars (2.9 billion euros) but the United States cast a lone dissenting vote [emphasis mine].

After marathon overnight talks, 141 members endorsed the recommendation of the assembly's budgetary committee to support UN chief Ban Ki-moon's request for the 2008-2009 budget, up 0.5 percent from the previous one.

The United States voted against because it objected to a 6.7 million-dollar outlay in the budget to fund a follow-up to a 2001 world conference on racism and racial discrimination which it viewed as anti-Israel.

The US delegation withdrew from the 2001 conference on racism in Durban, South Africa, because it felt that the parley singled out Israel "for censure and abuse" and suggested that apartheid existed in the Jewish state.

In recent days, US diplomats here also complained that the 25 percent increase in the administrative part of the budget was too high.

The United States is the world body's largest contributor, covering around 22 percent of the regular budget.

Ban welcomed the adoption of the budget by the assembly but expressed regret that "the resolution was not adopted by consensus, marking a break with tradition after 20 years."

To be fair, that budget is nearly 10% of the cost of killing Iraqis and Afghans next year. Ya gotta watch your money.

And probably the most important thing is how America looks to other nations. Fucking idiotic, inhumane is my guess.

Via Channel NewsAsia.

EPA denies California emission's waiver

Jesus H Christ in a SUV, I can't wait until the fucking Bush administration is gone.

The Bush administration said it will deny California's bid to set stricter vehicle emissions standards than federal law required.

What in hell is wrong with California's setting stricter standards? Its a good idea and Cali has to battle horrible air pollution.

The only downside I've noticed before when Cali had stricter standards than the other states is one couldn't sell an out of state vehicle there. They just couldn't meet the standards.

SPIIDERWEB™ Rulz!

Via IHT.

US says it has right to kidnap British citizens

Jesus H Christ in a blindfold, somewhere I missed that tipping point where the Bush administration went from a political organization to a Mafia mob.

This is gonna negate 100's of old movie plots where the bad guy makes it into Mexico or Canada and the US can't follow him.

AMERICA has told Britain that it can “kidnap” British citizens if they are wanted for crimes in the United States.

A senior lawyer for the American government has told the Court of Appeal in London that kidnapping foreign citizens is permissible under American law because the US Supreme Court has sanctioned it.

The admission will alarm the British business community after the case of the so-called NatWest Three, bankers who were extradited to America on fraud charges. More than a dozen other British executives, including senior managers at British Airways and BAE Systems, are under investigation by the US authorities and could face criminal charges in America.

Until now it was commonly assumed that US law permitted kidnapping only in the “extraordinary rendition” of terrorist suspects.
The American government has for the first time made it clear in a British court that the law applies to anyone, British or otherwise, suspected of a crime by Washington.

Legal experts confirmed this weekend that America viewed extradition as just one way of getting foreign suspects back to face trial. Rendition, or kidnapping, dates back to 19th-century bounty hunting and Washington believes it is still legitimate.

Via BlackListedNews.

Documents pinpoint origin of foreign fighters

Now why would the Bush administration ignore this? OIL?

Saudi Arabia and Libya, both considered allies by the United States in its fight against terrorism, were the source of about 60 percent of the foreign fighters who came to Iraq in the past year to serve as suicide bombers or to facilitate other attacks, according to senior U.S. military officials.

The data comes largely from a trove of documents and computers discovered in September, when U.S. forces raided a tent camp in the desert near Sinjar, close to the Syrian border. The raid's target was an insurgent cell believed to be responsible for smuggling the vast majority of foreign fighters into Iraq.

The most significant discovery was a collection of biographical sketches that listed hometowns and other details for more than 700 fighters brought into Iraq since August 2006.

Hahaha. I'm listening to internets tubes online radio and they just reported this. You may mentally listen to the Twilight Zone theme song here.

Via International News Ireland.

I can bring you down, down, down

Update below.

Something no one seems to be mentioning about Scotty "I unwittingly lied" McClellan is its one man's word. He also has to sell his fucking book.

I've no doubt he's now telling the truth and his allegations should be investigated, but...

I seriously doubt he was innocent. Politics don't work like that. He knew exactly what the truth was.

In addition, if one of your neighbors turns you in for having sex with barnyard animals, it isn't true until proven.

Hey, it was consensual!

Jesus H Christ in Doc Martens, I hate seeing both sides of a situation and sure as hell hate to appear to be defending the Bush administration.

Update: Check out Roger Ailes (the good one) for more information. Damn I wish I had his contacts.

Gaza: the Final Solution in Slow Motion

This is genocide and it is in slow motion. It might be a great tactic, but only sadists and psychopaths would resort to it.

And where's the Bush administration's condemnation? This seems humanitarian to it?

Oh yeah, why the fuck do I keep forgetting the Bush administration is made up of sadists and psychopaths. They undoubtedly see nothing wrong here.

About four o'clock in the morning the pharmacist Salim Madani is in Sufa, the only border post to the Gaza Strip that the government of Israel opens every now and then. They have been waiting for 14 day for a truck loaded with medicines for distribution in the Strip, still stuck on the Israeli side. They have been waiting for permission from the Israeli government so that they may move the load onto another truck so the medicines can move into Khan Yunis on the Palestinian side.

For many months ill Palestinians have been dying needlessly because many other trucks have not been authorized to transport medicines or even any other basic products - to the prison into which Gaza has been transformed. The martyr children Mohammad Turk, Mohammad Helow and Shaban Lulu, are only three of the hundreds of Palestinians that have died in the last so many months as a result of the Israeli and international blockade.

Shifa'a hospital staff in Gaza City pointed out September 5, 2006 that the three boys had died because of renal complications that could not be treated as they had run out of the necessary medicines. The Emergency General Director of the Ministry of Health warned at the time of the imminent danger of death faced by more than six hundred children suffering from renal deficiencies. Since then, actually since Israel occupied Palestine for the first time, it has been very plain that Palestinian children, old people, women and men face the very present danger of losing their land, their houses, their way of life and even life itself, for no other reason other than they are not Jews.

It is also glaringly clear that from that date on that the international community has refused to put a stop to this slow and painful genocide. On the contrary, they have chosen to make it possible in many ways for Israel to carry out its own Final Solution in Palestine: giving them weapons, money, political support and punishing the Palestinians in Gaza with a boycott that cries out to heaven with anguish for its cruelty and brutality.

...

Talking in less technical terms but closer to reality, what OCHA [UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs] is actually saying is that the Israelis stop the food at the border until it perishes and the medicines go out of date. In this way " the beasts in two legs" (as the Palestinians are called by the Israelis) fall ill for lack of vitamins, enough food or the essential elements necessary for a healthy life. Then they find that they cannot find any help in medicines that turn out to be ineffective. [emphasis in the original]

Stopping shipments of industrial materials, building materials, household supplies and such is one thing, but three categories of shipments should never be stopped or delayed at the Gaza border crossing.

1. Medicines.

2. Food for the people.

3. Animal feed.

If you want to read more on this, here's the Oxfam page from whence the photo came.

Then there's this headline: Israel approves arms shipment to Abbas. Of course none of those arms will ever be used against Israelis.

Olmert categorized this as "a goodwill gesture". No, a goodwill gesture is to allow shipments of food and medicines.

We live in very strange times indeed.

Via The Signs.

Wounded soldiers asked to return signing bonuses

I have nothing much to add to the excerpt below except, there's always and "except, there is a tremendous fucking chasm between Bush's words and actions.

You're surprised?

How comfortable is that cave you've been living in? Hell, even Osama knows what's going on in the world from his caves.

When Jordan Fox was serving in Iraq, his mother helped organize Operation Pittsburgh Pride, which sends thousands of care packages to U.S. troops from his hometown, which prompted a personal “thank you” from the White House. When Fox was seriously injured in Iraq, the president sent what appeared to be personal note, expressing his concerns to the Fox family.

But more recently, Fox received a different piece of correspondence from the Bush administration.

The U.S. Military is demanding that thousands of wounded service personnel give back signing bonuses because they are unable to serve out their commitments.

To get people to sign up, the military gives enlistment bonuses up to $30,000 in some cases.

Now men and women who have lost arms, legs, eyesight, hearing and can no longer serve are being ordered to pay some of that money back.

I watched the report from the CBS affiliate in Pittsburgh, and I kept thinking, “This can’t be right.” Apparently, it is.

In Jordan Fox’s case, he was seriously injured when a roadside bomb blew up his vehicle, causing back injuries and blindness in his right eye. He was sent home, unable to complete the final three months of his military commitment.

Last week, the Pentagon sent him a bill: Fox owed the government nearly $3,000 of his signing bonus.

“I tried to do my best and serve my country. I was unfortunately hurt in the process. Now they’re telling me they want their money back,” Fox said.

Look, if a soldier signed a contract, collected a signing bonus, and then quit, I can understand the military asking for the signing bonus back.

But we’re talking about troops who volunteered, served, and were seriously injured. It’s not their fault they got hurt. How on earth is the Pentagon justified in asking for a refund?

In the next to last paragraph, I agree with that assessment. If one reneges on a contract that's one thing. But compare this situation with an athlete who is injured. Do they have to return some or all of their signing bonuses if downed by injury?

I did a superficial search of the NFL (National Football League) and the only thing I came up with was Kellen Winslow Jr: Winslow knew he was breaching contract.

My search seemed to indicate players injured in the line of work (playing football) are not penalized.

Oh, but he's a football player, a much more serious undertaking than being a soldier, so I suppose that doesn't count as a decent comparison.

Via Carpetbagger Report.

Up, up, and away, fat chance

First off I'm not proud, but I stole this whole fucking post from Ted Compton.

This is mind bloggering boggling. Its an impossible situation.

Is the Bush administration involved? Oh yeah, I thought so.

So after a note on air transport congestion yesterday and some conversation about it at dinner last night I checked this morning, on a whim, the departure board at O'Hare. It listed 28 departures at 8:00AM, with another 13 within five minutes after 8:00. I've spent a lot of time at O'Hare over the years and I know they're pretty good at what they do, but no way are they going to get 41 flights off the ground in five minutes - especially when they have 26 flights scheduled to arrive within the same span of time.

So pack a few good books on your iPod, Bunky, it's gonna be a while.

My comment.

I did a quick search of O'hare runways. It appears they have 5, but 4 cross each other and one is too close to be used if the others are already in use.

Now, add to that the fact every airport I've ever been in, and its been many, gives priority to incoming traffic (logical); I'd say ya better pack a couple meals at least.

For some reason "Its a Small World" comes to mind.

Oh yeah, if you are expecting a baby soon you might consider naming it Tarmac.

Via 76003.1414.

The Neoconservative Agenda to Sacrifice the Fifth Fleet - The New Pearl Harbor

US Fifth Fleet carrier group
This is something one hopes isn't true or at least one doesn't want to think about.

And in this case Dim Son and company are the ones who don't want to think about it.

The Bush administration has covered up and ignored dissenting Pentagon war games analysis that suggests an attack on Iran's nuclear or military facilities will lead directly to the annihilation of the Navy's Fifth Fleet now stationed in the Persian Gulf. Lt. General Paul Van Riper led a hypothetical Persian Gulf state in the 2002 Millennium Challenge wargames that resulted in the destruction of the Fifth Fleet. His experience and conclusions regarding the vulnerability of the Fifth Fleet to an asymmetrical military conflict with Iran have been ignored. Neoconservatives within the Bush administration are currently aggressively promoting a range of military actions against Iran that will culminate in it attacking the US Navy's Fifth Fleet with sophisticated cruise anti-ship missiles. They are ignoring Van Riper's experiences in the Millennium Challenge and how it applies to the current nuclear conflict with Iran.

Iran has sufficient quantities of cruise missiles to destroy much or all of the Fifth Fleet which is within range of Iran's mobile missile launchers strategically located along its mountainous terrain overlooking the Persian Gulf. The Bush administration is deliberately downplaying the vulnerability of the Fifth Fleet to Iran's advanced missile technology which has been purchased from Russia and China since the late 1990's. The most sophisticated of Iran's cruise missiles are the 'Sunburn' and 'Yakhonts'. These are missiles against which U.S. military experts conclude modern warships have no effective defense. By deliberately provoking an Iranian retaliation to U.S. military actions, the neoconservatives will knowingly sacrifice much or all of the Fifth Fleet. This will culminate in a new Pearl Harbor that will create the right political environment for total war against Iran, and expanded military actions in the Persian Gulf region.

Via The Signs.

Iraq war was badly planned, says Army

This is the British Army here. And who believes we need to be told this? Hasn't this been a given since about, more or less, the 100th day of the invasion?

For many of us, before the invasion in fact.

That said, this is heady stuff. Its about as condemning of the the British and American administrations as you're likely to hear outside a mess tent. And it contains things the public has to hear. Many will trust their soldiers more than their politicians when it comes to the truth.

A leaked internal Army report has delivered an unprecedented attack on the planning and execution of the war in Iraq.

The document, which openly condemns British and US foreign policy, says that "leaders should not start an operation without thinking through the options and implications of their plans".

The leaked document claims the faillure in Iraq is due in part to a lack of understanding of Arab culture

It claims that widespread planning failures in the post-war phase led to the peace in Iraq being lost by September 2003, within the first 100 days of the occupation.

The report, marked "restricted", adds that many senior officers now believe that the Government has developed a "bureaucratic approach to problem solving" and is "no longer capable" of running large scale military operations such as the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The 16-page document describes how the Iraq campaign was undermined by a lack of planning, resources, funding and intelligence.

"The evidence shows that too little planning was done for Operation Telic [the codename for the war in Iraq] particularly on the non-military side, and that too few resources, both human and financial were allocated to the post-war situation," it says.

The report, drawn up in late 2006, suggests that Britain and the US may have breeched the Geneva Convention by failing properly to conduct their duties as "occupying powers".

Actually, the last paragraph is one of the best although just a little too milquetoast for my taste. I'm not partial to "suggests" and "may have". But the British Army seems to do subtle better than I.

Via Telegraph.

'Just followed orders': Guantanamo mission came straight from Bush, Rumsfeld

When military investigators questioned Erie County Judge Michael E. Dunlavey about reported prisoner abuse during his tenure at the Guantanamo Bay camp for suspected terrorists, Dunlavey told them he got his "marching orders" from President Bush, according to a new book about U.S. policies regarding torture.

The book, "Administration of Torture: A Documentary Record from Washington to Abu Ghraib and Beyond," relies on government documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act to trace the development of what the authors claim was prisoner abuse and torture that emerged in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The book uses Dunlavey's words to place him, a retired two-star general in the U.S. Army Reserve, at the advent of the development of what have become disputed interrogation policies.

In a statement Dunlavey provided to a U.S. Air Force lieutenant general investigating FBI reports of detainee abuses at Guantanamo Bay, Dunlavey explains that as leader of interrogations at Guantanamo, he reported directly to President Bush and then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Hmmm.

I have no reason to question what the authors claim. In fact I'd bet the farm they've got it right, but "just following orders" didn't work at Nuremberg and I seriously doubt if that defense is gonna get Judge Dunlavey off either.

War crimes are war crimes no matter what the provocation. Dunlavey was a military general at the time and under military command, but that doesn't exonerate him for his participation.

There's gonna be a lot of "correcting" required when the dust clears. The Bush administration is stacking up war crimes like chord wood.

I've said it before and will repeat it. There are some things people just shouldn't do to other people.

Via The Signs.