From Information Clearing House:
America and Venezuela: Constitutional Worlds Apart
By Stephen Lendman
Although imperfect, no country anywhere is closer to a model democracy than Venezuela under President Hugo Rafael Chavez Frias. In contrast, none is a more shameless failure than America, but it was true long before the age of George W. Bush.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18241.htm
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Cheney...the worst of the worst...
From Information Clearing House:
Why Cheney Really Is That Bad
By Scott Ritter
The vice president is the single greatest threat to American and international security in the world today. Not Osama Bin Laden. Not the ghost of Saddam Hussein. Not Ahmadinejad or Kim Jung Il. Not al-Qaida, the Taliban, or Jose Padilla himself. Not even George W. Bush can lay claim to this title. It is Dick Cheney's alone.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18239.htm
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Why Cheney Really Is That Bad
By Scott Ritter
The vice president is the single greatest threat to American and international security in the world today. Not Osama Bin Laden. Not the ghost of Saddam Hussein. Not Ahmadinejad or Kim Jung Il. Not al-Qaida, the Taliban, or Jose Padilla himself. Not even George W. Bush can lay claim to this title. It is Dick Cheney's alone.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18239.htm
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Terrorism Intel Report....
From Stratfor:
Threats, Situational Awareness and Perspective
In last week's Terrorism Intelligence Report, we said U.S. counterterrorism sources remain concerned an attack will occur on U.S. soil in the next few weeks. Although we are skeptical of these reports, al Qaeda and other jihadists do retain the ability -- and the burning desire -- to conduct tactical strikes within the United States. One thing we did not say last week, however, was that we publish such reports not to frighten readers, but to impress upon them the need for preparedness, which does not mean paranoia.
Fear and paranoia, in fact, are counterproductive to good personal and national security. As such, we have attempted over the past few years to place what we consider hyped threats into the proper perspective. To this end, we have addressed threats such as al Qaeda's chemical and biological weapons capabilities, reports of a looming "American Hiroshima" nuclear attack against the United States, the dirty bomb threat, the smoky bomb threat, and the threat of so-called "mubtakkar devices", among others.
Though some threats are indeed hyped, the world nonetheless remains a dangerous place. Undoubtedly, at this very moment some people are seeking ways to carry out attacks against targets in the United States. Moreover, terrorism attacks are not the only threat -- far more people are victimized by common criminals. Does this reality mean that people need to live in constant fear and paranoia? Not at all. If people do live that way, those who seek to terrorize them have won. However, by taking a few relatively simple precautions and adjusting their mindsets, people can live less-stressful lives during these uncertain times. One of the keys to personal preparedness and protection is to have a contingency plan in place in the event of an attack or other major emergency. The second element is practicing situational awareness.
The Proper State of Mind
Situational awareness is the process of recognizing a threat at an early stage and taking measures to avoid it. Being observant of one's surroundings and identifying potential threats and dangerous situations is more of an attitude or mindset than it is a hard skill. Because of this, situational awareness is not just a process that can be practiced by highly trained government agents or specialized corporate security countersurveillance teams -- it can be adopted and employed by anyone.
An important element of this mindset is first coming to the realization that a threat exists. Ignorance or denial of a threat -- or completely tuning out to one's surroundings while in a public place -- makes a person's chances of quickly recognizing the threat and avoiding it slim to none. This is why apathy, denial and complacency are so deadly.
An example is the case of Terry Anderson, the Associated Press bureau chief in Lebanon who was kidnapped March 16, 1985. The day before his abduction, Anderson was driving in Beirut traffic when a car pulled in front of his and nearly blocked him in. Due to the traffic situation, and undoubtedly a bit of luck, Anderson was able to avoid what he thought was an automobile accident -- even though events like these can be hallmarks of pre-operational planning. The next day, Anderson's luck ran out as the same vehicle successfully blocked his vehicle in the same spot. Anderson was pulled from his vehicle at gunpoint -- and held hostage for six years and nine months.
Clearly, few of us are living in the type of civil war conditions that Anderson faced in 1985 Beirut. Nonetheless, average citizens face all kinds of threats today -- from common thieves and assailants to criminals and mentally disturbed individuals who aim to conduct violent acts in the school, mall or workplace, to militants wanting to carry out large-scale attacks. Should an attack occur, then, a person with a complacent or apathetic mindset will be taken completely by surprise and could freeze up in shock and denial as their minds are forced to quickly adjust to a newly recognized and unforeseen situational reality. That person is in no condition to react, flee or resist.
Denial and complacency, however, are not the only hazardous states of mind. As mentioned above, paranoia and obsessive concern about one's safety and security can be just as dangerous. There are times when it is important to be on heightened alert -- a woman walking alone in a dark parking lot is one example -- but people are simply not designed to operate in a state of heightened awareness for extended periods of time. The body's "flight or fight" response is helpful in a sudden emergency, but a constant stream of adrenalin and stress leads to mental and physical burnout. It is very hard for people to be aware of their surroundings when they are completely fried.
Situational awareness, then, is best practiced at a balanced level referred to as "relaxed awareness," a state of mind that can be maintained indefinitely without all the stress associated with being on constant alert. Relaxed awareness is not tiring, and allows people to enjoy life while paying attention to their surroundings.
When people are in a state of relaxed awareness, it is far easier to make the transition to a state of heightened awareness than it is to jump all the way from complacency to heightened awareness. So, if something out of the ordinary occurs, those practicing relaxed awareness can heighten their awareness while they attempt to determine whether the anomaly is indeed a threat. If it is, they can take action to avoid it; if it is not, they can stand down and return to a state of relaxed awareness.
The Telltale Signs
What are we looking for while we are in a state of relaxed awareness? Essentially the same things we discussed when we described what bad surveillance looks like. It is important to remember that almost every criminal act, from a purse-snatching to a terrorist bombing, involves some degree of pre-operational surveillance and that criminals are vulnerable to detection during that time. This is because criminals, even militants planning terrorist attacks, often are quite sloppy when they are casing their intended targets. They have been able to get away with their sloppy practices for so long because most people simply do not look for them. On the positive side, however, that also means that people who are looking can spot them fairly easily.
The U.S. government uses the acronym TEDD to illustrate the principles one can use to identify surveillance, but these same principles also can be used to identify criminal threats. TEDD stands for Time, Environment, Distance and Demeanor. In other words, if a person sees someone repeatedly over time, in different environments and over distance, or one who displays poor demeanor, then that person can assume he or she is under surveillance. If a person is the specific target of a planned attack, he or she might be exposed to the time, environment and distance elements of TEDD, but if the subway car the person is riding in or the building where the person works is the target, he or she might only have the element of demeanor to key on. This also is true in the case of criminals who behave like "ambush predators" and lurk in an area waiting for a victim. Because their attack cycle is extremely condensed, the most important element to watch for is demeanor.
By poor demeanor, we simply mean a person is acting unnaturally. This behavior can look blatantly suspicious, such as someone who is lurking and/or has no reason for being where he is or for doing what he is doing. Sometimes, however, poor demeanor can be more subtle, encompassing almost imperceptible behaviors that the target senses more than observes. Other giveaways include moving when the target moves, communicating when the target moves, avoiding eye contact with the target, making sudden turns or stops, or even using hand signals to communicate with other members of a surveillance team.
In the terrorism realm, exhibiting poor demeanor also can include wearing unseasonably warm clothing, such as trench coats in the summer; displaying odd bulges under clothing or wires protruding from clothing; unnaturally sweating, mumbling or fidgeting; or attempting to avoid security personnel. In addition, according to some reports, suicide bombers often exhibit an intense stare as they approach the final stages of their mission. They seem to have tunnel vision, being able to focus only on their intended target.
Perspective
We have seen no hard intelligence that supports the assertions that a jihadist attack will occur in the next few weeks and are somewhat skeptical about such reports. Regardless of whether our U.S. counterterrorism sources are correct this time, though, the world remains a dangerous place. Al Qaeda, grassroots jihadists and domestic militants of several different political persuasions have the desire and capability to conduct attacks. Meanwhile, criminals and mentally disturbed individuals, such as the Virginia Tech shooter, appear to be getting more violent every day.
In the big picture, violence and terrorism have always been a part of the human condition. The Chinese built the Great Wall for a reason other than tourism. Today's "terrorists" are far less dangerous to society as a whole than were the Viking berserkers and barbarian tribes who terrorized Europe for centuries, and the ragtag collection of men who have sworn allegiance to Osama bin Laden pose far less of a threat to Western civilization than the large, battle-hardened army Abdul Rahman al-Ghafiqi led into the heart of France in 732.
Terrorist attacks are designed to have a psychological impact that far outweighs the actual physical damage caused by the attack itself. Denying the perpetrators this multiplication effect -- as the British did after the July 2005 subway bombings -- prevents them from accomplishing their greater goals. Therefore, people should prepare, plan and practice relaxed awareness -- and not let paranoia and the fear of terrorism and crime rob them of the joy of life.
Wrap...
Threats, Situational Awareness and Perspective
In last week's Terrorism Intelligence Report, we said U.S. counterterrorism sources remain concerned an attack will occur on U.S. soil in the next few weeks. Although we are skeptical of these reports, al Qaeda and other jihadists do retain the ability -- and the burning desire -- to conduct tactical strikes within the United States. One thing we did not say last week, however, was that we publish such reports not to frighten readers, but to impress upon them the need for preparedness, which does not mean paranoia.
Fear and paranoia, in fact, are counterproductive to good personal and national security. As such, we have attempted over the past few years to place what we consider hyped threats into the proper perspective. To this end, we have addressed threats such as al Qaeda's chemical and biological weapons capabilities, reports of a looming "American Hiroshima" nuclear attack against the United States, the dirty bomb threat, the smoky bomb threat, and the threat of so-called "mubtakkar devices", among others.
Though some threats are indeed hyped, the world nonetheless remains a dangerous place. Undoubtedly, at this very moment some people are seeking ways to carry out attacks against targets in the United States. Moreover, terrorism attacks are not the only threat -- far more people are victimized by common criminals. Does this reality mean that people need to live in constant fear and paranoia? Not at all. If people do live that way, those who seek to terrorize them have won. However, by taking a few relatively simple precautions and adjusting their mindsets, people can live less-stressful lives during these uncertain times. One of the keys to personal preparedness and protection is to have a contingency plan in place in the event of an attack or other major emergency. The second element is practicing situational awareness.
The Proper State of Mind
Situational awareness is the process of recognizing a threat at an early stage and taking measures to avoid it. Being observant of one's surroundings and identifying potential threats and dangerous situations is more of an attitude or mindset than it is a hard skill. Because of this, situational awareness is not just a process that can be practiced by highly trained government agents or specialized corporate security countersurveillance teams -- it can be adopted and employed by anyone.
An important element of this mindset is first coming to the realization that a threat exists. Ignorance or denial of a threat -- or completely tuning out to one's surroundings while in a public place -- makes a person's chances of quickly recognizing the threat and avoiding it slim to none. This is why apathy, denial and complacency are so deadly.
An example is the case of Terry Anderson, the Associated Press bureau chief in Lebanon who was kidnapped March 16, 1985. The day before his abduction, Anderson was driving in Beirut traffic when a car pulled in front of his and nearly blocked him in. Due to the traffic situation, and undoubtedly a bit of luck, Anderson was able to avoid what he thought was an automobile accident -- even though events like these can be hallmarks of pre-operational planning. The next day, Anderson's luck ran out as the same vehicle successfully blocked his vehicle in the same spot. Anderson was pulled from his vehicle at gunpoint -- and held hostage for six years and nine months.
Clearly, few of us are living in the type of civil war conditions that Anderson faced in 1985 Beirut. Nonetheless, average citizens face all kinds of threats today -- from common thieves and assailants to criminals and mentally disturbed individuals who aim to conduct violent acts in the school, mall or workplace, to militants wanting to carry out large-scale attacks. Should an attack occur, then, a person with a complacent or apathetic mindset will be taken completely by surprise and could freeze up in shock and denial as their minds are forced to quickly adjust to a newly recognized and unforeseen situational reality. That person is in no condition to react, flee or resist.
Denial and complacency, however, are not the only hazardous states of mind. As mentioned above, paranoia and obsessive concern about one's safety and security can be just as dangerous. There are times when it is important to be on heightened alert -- a woman walking alone in a dark parking lot is one example -- but people are simply not designed to operate in a state of heightened awareness for extended periods of time. The body's "flight or fight" response is helpful in a sudden emergency, but a constant stream of adrenalin and stress leads to mental and physical burnout. It is very hard for people to be aware of their surroundings when they are completely fried.
Situational awareness, then, is best practiced at a balanced level referred to as "relaxed awareness," a state of mind that can be maintained indefinitely without all the stress associated with being on constant alert. Relaxed awareness is not tiring, and allows people to enjoy life while paying attention to their surroundings.
When people are in a state of relaxed awareness, it is far easier to make the transition to a state of heightened awareness than it is to jump all the way from complacency to heightened awareness. So, if something out of the ordinary occurs, those practicing relaxed awareness can heighten their awareness while they attempt to determine whether the anomaly is indeed a threat. If it is, they can take action to avoid it; if it is not, they can stand down and return to a state of relaxed awareness.
The Telltale Signs
What are we looking for while we are in a state of relaxed awareness? Essentially the same things we discussed when we described what bad surveillance looks like. It is important to remember that almost every criminal act, from a purse-snatching to a terrorist bombing, involves some degree of pre-operational surveillance and that criminals are vulnerable to detection during that time. This is because criminals, even militants planning terrorist attacks, often are quite sloppy when they are casing their intended targets. They have been able to get away with their sloppy practices for so long because most people simply do not look for them. On the positive side, however, that also means that people who are looking can spot them fairly easily.
The U.S. government uses the acronym TEDD to illustrate the principles one can use to identify surveillance, but these same principles also can be used to identify criminal threats. TEDD stands for Time, Environment, Distance and Demeanor. In other words, if a person sees someone repeatedly over time, in different environments and over distance, or one who displays poor demeanor, then that person can assume he or she is under surveillance. If a person is the specific target of a planned attack, he or she might be exposed to the time, environment and distance elements of TEDD, but if the subway car the person is riding in or the building where the person works is the target, he or she might only have the element of demeanor to key on. This also is true in the case of criminals who behave like "ambush predators" and lurk in an area waiting for a victim. Because their attack cycle is extremely condensed, the most important element to watch for is demeanor.
By poor demeanor, we simply mean a person is acting unnaturally. This behavior can look blatantly suspicious, such as someone who is lurking and/or has no reason for being where he is or for doing what he is doing. Sometimes, however, poor demeanor can be more subtle, encompassing almost imperceptible behaviors that the target senses more than observes. Other giveaways include moving when the target moves, communicating when the target moves, avoiding eye contact with the target, making sudden turns or stops, or even using hand signals to communicate with other members of a surveillance team.
In the terrorism realm, exhibiting poor demeanor also can include wearing unseasonably warm clothing, such as trench coats in the summer; displaying odd bulges under clothing or wires protruding from clothing; unnaturally sweating, mumbling or fidgeting; or attempting to avoid security personnel. In addition, according to some reports, suicide bombers often exhibit an intense stare as they approach the final stages of their mission. They seem to have tunnel vision, being able to focus only on their intended target.
Perspective
We have seen no hard intelligence that supports the assertions that a jihadist attack will occur in the next few weeks and are somewhat skeptical about such reports. Regardless of whether our U.S. counterterrorism sources are correct this time, though, the world remains a dangerous place. Al Qaeda, grassroots jihadists and domestic militants of several different political persuasions have the desire and capability to conduct attacks. Meanwhile, criminals and mentally disturbed individuals, such as the Virginia Tech shooter, appear to be getting more violent every day.
In the big picture, violence and terrorism have always been a part of the human condition. The Chinese built the Great Wall for a reason other than tourism. Today's "terrorists" are far less dangerous to society as a whole than were the Viking berserkers and barbarian tribes who terrorized Europe for centuries, and the ragtag collection of men who have sworn allegiance to Osama bin Laden pose far less of a threat to Western civilization than the large, battle-hardened army Abdul Rahman al-Ghafiqi led into the heart of France in 732.
Terrorist attacks are designed to have a psychological impact that far outweighs the actual physical damage caused by the attack itself. Denying the perpetrators this multiplication effect -- as the British did after the July 2005 subway bombings -- prevents them from accomplishing their greater goals. Therefore, people should prepare, plan and practice relaxed awareness -- and not let paranoia and the fear of terrorism and crime rob them of the joy of life.
Wrap...
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
BushCo destruction goes on and on....
From The New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/us/23coal.html?hp
WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 — The Bush administration is set to issue a regulation on Friday that would enshrine the coal mining practice of mountaintop removal. The technique involves blasting off the tops of mountains and dumping the rubble into valleys and streams....
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/23/us/23coal.html?hp
WASHINGTON, Aug. 22 — The Bush administration is set to issue a regulation on Friday that would enshrine the coal mining practice of mountaintop removal. The technique involves blasting off the tops of mountains and dumping the rubble into valleys and streams....
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Citizens and satellite spying on same....
From Secrecy News:
DETAILS SOUGHT ON DOMESTIC USE OF SPY SATELLITES
Although Congress is out of session, the news that classified
intelligence satellites may increasingly be used for domestic
surveillance applications did not go unnoticed by congressional
overseers.
Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), chair of a House Energy and Commerce
subcommittee, last week sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary
Michael Chertoff seeking answers to a series of detailed questions
about the new initiative, which was first reported in the Wall Street
Journal. Among Rep. Markey's questions were these:
Will the public have an opportunity to comment on the development of
appropriate guidelines for domestic use of spy satellites?
What assessments of the legality of the new surveillance program have
been performed? (Please provide copies.)
How does the Department plan to ensure that Americans' privacy and
civil rights are protected once this new surveillance program becomes
operational?
A copy of Mr. Markey's August 16 letter is here:
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2007_cr/markey081607.pdf
The new surveillance program "has drawn sharp criticism from civil
liberties advocates who say the government is overstepping the use of
military technology for domestic surveillance," wrote Eric Schmitt in
the New York Times. See "Liberties Advocates Fear Abuse of Satellite
Images," August 17:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/17/us/17spy.html
[Use links above to continue reading]
Wrap...
DETAILS SOUGHT ON DOMESTIC USE OF SPY SATELLITES
Although Congress is out of session, the news that classified
intelligence satellites may increasingly be used for domestic
surveillance applications did not go unnoticed by congressional
overseers.
Rep. Ed Markey (D-MA), chair of a House Energy and Commerce
subcommittee, last week sent a letter to Homeland Security Secretary
Michael Chertoff seeking answers to a series of detailed questions
about the new initiative, which was first reported in the Wall Street
Journal. Among Rep. Markey's questions were these:
Will the public have an opportunity to comment on the development of
appropriate guidelines for domestic use of spy satellites?
What assessments of the legality of the new surveillance program have
been performed? (Please provide copies.)
How does the Department plan to ensure that Americans' privacy and
civil rights are protected once this new surveillance program becomes
operational?
A copy of Mr. Markey's August 16 letter is here:
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2007_cr/markey081607.pdf
The new surveillance program "has drawn sharp criticism from civil
liberties advocates who say the government is overstepping the use of
military technology for domestic surveillance," wrote Eric Schmitt in
the New York Times. See "Liberties Advocates Fear Abuse of Satellite
Images," August 17:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/17/us/17spy.html
[Use links above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
BushCo has opened opportunities to Russia....
From Stratfor:
Window of Opportunity; Window of Vulnerability
All U.S. presidents eventually become lame ducks, though the lameness of any particular duck depends on the amount of power he has left to wield. It not only is an issue of the president's popularity, but also of the opposition's unity and clarity. In the international context, the power of a lame duck president depends on the options he has militarily. Foreign powers do not mess with American presidents, no matter how lame one might be, as long as the president retains military options.
The core of the American presidency is in its role as commander in chief. With all of the other presidential powers deeply intersecting with those of Congress and the courts, the president has the greatest autonomous power when he is acting as supreme commander of the armed forces. There is a remarkable lot he can do if he wishes to, and relatively little Congress can do to stop him -- unless it is uniquely united. Therefore, foreign nations remain wary of the American president's military power long after they have stopped taking him seriously in other aspects of foreign relations.
There is a school of thought that argues that President George W. Bush is likely to strike at Iran before he leaves office. The sense is that Bush is uniquely indifferent to either Congress or public opinion and that he therefore is likely to use his military powers in some decisive fashion, under the expectation and hope that history will vindicate him. In that sense, Bush is very much not a lame duck, because if he wanted to strike, there is nothing legally preventing him from doing so. The endless debates over presidential powers -- which have roiled both Republican and Democratic administrations -- have left one thing clear: The courts will not intervene against an American president's use of his power as commander in chief. Congress may cut off money after the fact, but as we have seen, that is not a power that is normally put to use.
The problem for Bush, of course, is that he is fighting two simultaneous wars, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. These wars have sucked up the resources of the U.S. Army to a remarkable degree. Units are either engaged in these theaters of operation, recovering from deployment or preparing for deployment. To an extraordinary degree, the United States does not have a real strategic reserve in its ground forces, the Army and the Marines. A force could probably be scraped up to deal with a limited crisis, but U.S. forces are committed and there are no more troops to scatter around.
The United States faces another potential theater of operations in Iran. Fighting there might not necessarily be something initiated by the United States. The Iranians might choose to create a crisis the United States couldn’t avoid. That would suck up not only what little ground reserves are available, but also a good part of U.S. air and naval forces. The United States would be throwing all of its chips on the table, with few reserves left. With all U.S. forces engaged in a line from the Euphrates to the Hindu Kush, the rest of the world would be wide open to second-tier powers.
This is Bush's strategic problem -- the one that shapes his role as commander in chief. He has committed virtually all of his land forces to two wars. His only reserves are the Air Force and Navy. If they were sucked into a war in Iran, it would limit U.S. reserves for other contingencies. The United States alone does not get to choose whether there is a crisis with Iran. Iran gets to vote too. We don’t believe there will be a military confrontation with Iran, but the United States must do its contingency planning as if there will be.
Thus, Bush is a lame-duck commander in chief as well. Even if he completely disregards the politics of his position, which he can do, he still lacks the sheer military resources to achieve any meaningful goal without the use of nuclear weapons. But his problem goes beyond the Iran scenario. Lacking ground forces, the president's ability to influence events throughout the world is severely impaired. Moreover, if he were to throw his air forces into a non-Iranian crisis, all pressure on Iran would be lifted. The United States is strategically tapped out. There is no land force available and the use of air and naval forces without land forces, while able to achieve some important goals, would not be decisive.
The United States has entered a place where it has almost no room to maneuver. The president is becoming a lame duck in the fullest sense of the term. This opens a window of opportunity for powers, particularly second-tier powers, that would not be prepared to challenge the United States while its forces had flexibility. One power in particular has begun to use this window of opportunity -- Russia.
Russia is not the country it was 10 years ago. Its economy, fueled by rising energy and mineral prices, is financially solvent. The state has moved from being a smashed relic of the Soviet era to becoming a more traditional Russian state: authoritarian, repressive, accepting private property but only under terms it finds acceptable. It also is redefining its sphere of influence in the former Soviet Union and reviving its military.
For example, a Russian aircraft recently fired a missile at a Georgian village. Intentionally or not, the missile was a dud, though it clearly was meant to signal to the Georgians -- close allies of the United States and unfriendly to Russian interests in the region -- that not only is Russia unhappy, it is prepared to take military action if it chooses. It also clearly told the Georgians that the Russians are unconcerned about the United States and its possible response. It must have given the Georgians a chill.
The Russians planted their flag under the sea at the North Pole after the Canadians announced plans to construct armed icebreakers and establish a deepwater port from which to operate in the Far North. The Russians announced the construction of a new air defense system by 2015 -- not a very long time as these things go. They also announced plans to create a new command and control system in the same time frame. Russian long-range aircraft flew east in the Pacific to the region of Guam, an important U.S. air base, causing the United States to scramble fighter planes. They also flew into what used to be the GIUK gap (Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom) probing air defenses along the Norwegian coast and in Scotland.
Most interestingly, they announced the resumption of patrols in the Atlantic, along the U.S. coast, using Blackjack strategic bombers and the old workhorse of the Russian fleet, the Bear. (The balance does remain in U.S. favor along the East Coast). During the Cold War, patrols such as these were designed to carry out electronic and signal intelligence. They were designed to map out U.S. facilities along the Eastern seaboard and observe response time and procedures. During the Cold War they would land in Cuba for refueling before retracing their steps. It will be interesting to see whether Russia will ask Cuba for landing privileges and whether the Cubans will permit it. As interesting, Russian and Chinese troops conducted military exercises recently in the context of regional talks. It is not something to take too seriously, but then they are not trivial.
Many of these are older planes. The Bear, for example, dates back to the 1950s -- but so does the B-52, which remains important to the U.S. strategic bomber fleet. The age of the airframe doesn't matter nearly as much as maintenance, refits, upgrades to weapons and avionics and so on. Nothing can be assumed from the mere age of the aircraft.
The rather remarkable flurry of Russian air operations -- as well as plans for naval development -- is partly a political gesture. The Russians are tired of the United States pressing into their sphere of influence, and they see a real window of opportunity to press back with limited risk of American response. But the Russians appear to be doing more than making a gesture.
The Russians are trying to redefine the global balance. They are absolutely under no illusion that they can match American military power in any sphere. But they are clearly asserting their right to operate as a second-tier global power and are systematically demonstrating their global reach. They may be old and they may be slow, but when American aircraft on the East Coast start to scramble routinely to intercept and escort Russian aircraft, two things happen. First, U.S. military planning has to shift to take Russia into account. Second, the United States loses even more flexibility. It can't just ignore the Russians. It now needs to devote scarce dollars to upgrading systems along the East Coast -- systems that have been quite neglected since the end of the Cold War.
There is a core assumption in the U.S. government that Russia no longer is a significant power. It is true that its vast army has disintegrated. But the Russians do not need a vast army modeled on World War II. They need, and have begun to develop, a fairly effective military built around special forces and airborne troops. They also have appeared to pursue their research and development, particularly in the area of air defense and air-launched missiles -- areas in which they have traditionally been strong. The tendency to underestimate the Russian military -- something even Russians do -- is misplaced. Russia's military is capable and improving.
The increased Russian tempo of operations in areas that the United States has been able to ignore for many years further pins the United States. It can be assumed that the Russians mean no harm -- but assumption is not a luxury national security planners can permit themselves, at least not good ones. It takes years to develop and deploy new systems. If the Russians are probing the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic again, it is not the current threat that matters, but the threat that might evolve. That diverts budget dollars from heavily armored trucks that can survive improvised explosive device attacks, and cuts into the Air Force and Navy.
The Russians are using the window of opportunity to redefine, in a modest way, the global balance and gain some room to maneuver in their region. As a result of their more assertive posture, American thoughts of unilateral interventions must decline. For example, getting involved in Georgia once was a low-risk activity. The risk just went up. Taking that risk while U.S. ground forces are completely absorbed in Iraq and Afghanistan is hard for the Americans to justify -- but rather easy for the Russians.
This brings us back to the discussion of the commander in chief's options in the Middle East. The United States already has limited options against Iran. The more the Russians maneuver, the more the United States must hold what forces it has left -- Air Force and Navy -- in reserve. Launching an Iranian adventure becomes that much more risky. If it is launched, Russia has an even greater window of opportunity. Every further involvement in the region makes the United States that much less of a factor in the immediate global equation.
All wars end, and these will too. The Russians are trying to rearrange the furniture a bit before anyone comes home and forces them out. They are dealing with a lame duck president with fewer options than most lame ducks. Before there is a new president and before the war in Iraq ends, the Russians want to redefine the situation a bit.
Wrap...
Window of Opportunity; Window of Vulnerability
All U.S. presidents eventually become lame ducks, though the lameness of any particular duck depends on the amount of power he has left to wield. It not only is an issue of the president's popularity, but also of the opposition's unity and clarity. In the international context, the power of a lame duck president depends on the options he has militarily. Foreign powers do not mess with American presidents, no matter how lame one might be, as long as the president retains military options.
The core of the American presidency is in its role as commander in chief. With all of the other presidential powers deeply intersecting with those of Congress and the courts, the president has the greatest autonomous power when he is acting as supreme commander of the armed forces. There is a remarkable lot he can do if he wishes to, and relatively little Congress can do to stop him -- unless it is uniquely united. Therefore, foreign nations remain wary of the American president's military power long after they have stopped taking him seriously in other aspects of foreign relations.
There is a school of thought that argues that President George W. Bush is likely to strike at Iran before he leaves office. The sense is that Bush is uniquely indifferent to either Congress or public opinion and that he therefore is likely to use his military powers in some decisive fashion, under the expectation and hope that history will vindicate him. In that sense, Bush is very much not a lame duck, because if he wanted to strike, there is nothing legally preventing him from doing so. The endless debates over presidential powers -- which have roiled both Republican and Democratic administrations -- have left one thing clear: The courts will not intervene against an American president's use of his power as commander in chief. Congress may cut off money after the fact, but as we have seen, that is not a power that is normally put to use.
The problem for Bush, of course, is that he is fighting two simultaneous wars, one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. These wars have sucked up the resources of the U.S. Army to a remarkable degree. Units are either engaged in these theaters of operation, recovering from deployment or preparing for deployment. To an extraordinary degree, the United States does not have a real strategic reserve in its ground forces, the Army and the Marines. A force could probably be scraped up to deal with a limited crisis, but U.S. forces are committed and there are no more troops to scatter around.
The United States faces another potential theater of operations in Iran. Fighting there might not necessarily be something initiated by the United States. The Iranians might choose to create a crisis the United States couldn’t avoid. That would suck up not only what little ground reserves are available, but also a good part of U.S. air and naval forces. The United States would be throwing all of its chips on the table, with few reserves left. With all U.S. forces engaged in a line from the Euphrates to the Hindu Kush, the rest of the world would be wide open to second-tier powers.
This is Bush's strategic problem -- the one that shapes his role as commander in chief. He has committed virtually all of his land forces to two wars. His only reserves are the Air Force and Navy. If they were sucked into a war in Iran, it would limit U.S. reserves for other contingencies. The United States alone does not get to choose whether there is a crisis with Iran. Iran gets to vote too. We don’t believe there will be a military confrontation with Iran, but the United States must do its contingency planning as if there will be.
Thus, Bush is a lame-duck commander in chief as well. Even if he completely disregards the politics of his position, which he can do, he still lacks the sheer military resources to achieve any meaningful goal without the use of nuclear weapons. But his problem goes beyond the Iran scenario. Lacking ground forces, the president's ability to influence events throughout the world is severely impaired. Moreover, if he were to throw his air forces into a non-Iranian crisis, all pressure on Iran would be lifted. The United States is strategically tapped out. There is no land force available and the use of air and naval forces without land forces, while able to achieve some important goals, would not be decisive.
The United States has entered a place where it has almost no room to maneuver. The president is becoming a lame duck in the fullest sense of the term. This opens a window of opportunity for powers, particularly second-tier powers, that would not be prepared to challenge the United States while its forces had flexibility. One power in particular has begun to use this window of opportunity -- Russia.
Russia is not the country it was 10 years ago. Its economy, fueled by rising energy and mineral prices, is financially solvent. The state has moved from being a smashed relic of the Soviet era to becoming a more traditional Russian state: authoritarian, repressive, accepting private property but only under terms it finds acceptable. It also is redefining its sphere of influence in the former Soviet Union and reviving its military.
For example, a Russian aircraft recently fired a missile at a Georgian village. Intentionally or not, the missile was a dud, though it clearly was meant to signal to the Georgians -- close allies of the United States and unfriendly to Russian interests in the region -- that not only is Russia unhappy, it is prepared to take military action if it chooses. It also clearly told the Georgians that the Russians are unconcerned about the United States and its possible response. It must have given the Georgians a chill.
The Russians planted their flag under the sea at the North Pole after the Canadians announced plans to construct armed icebreakers and establish a deepwater port from which to operate in the Far North. The Russians announced the construction of a new air defense system by 2015 -- not a very long time as these things go. They also announced plans to create a new command and control system in the same time frame. Russian long-range aircraft flew east in the Pacific to the region of Guam, an important U.S. air base, causing the United States to scramble fighter planes. They also flew into what used to be the GIUK gap (Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom) probing air defenses along the Norwegian coast and in Scotland.
Most interestingly, they announced the resumption of patrols in the Atlantic, along the U.S. coast, using Blackjack strategic bombers and the old workhorse of the Russian fleet, the Bear. (The balance does remain in U.S. favor along the East Coast). During the Cold War, patrols such as these were designed to carry out electronic and signal intelligence. They were designed to map out U.S. facilities along the Eastern seaboard and observe response time and procedures. During the Cold War they would land in Cuba for refueling before retracing their steps. It will be interesting to see whether Russia will ask Cuba for landing privileges and whether the Cubans will permit it. As interesting, Russian and Chinese troops conducted military exercises recently in the context of regional talks. It is not something to take too seriously, but then they are not trivial.
Many of these are older planes. The Bear, for example, dates back to the 1950s -- but so does the B-52, which remains important to the U.S. strategic bomber fleet. The age of the airframe doesn't matter nearly as much as maintenance, refits, upgrades to weapons and avionics and so on. Nothing can be assumed from the mere age of the aircraft.
The rather remarkable flurry of Russian air operations -- as well as plans for naval development -- is partly a political gesture. The Russians are tired of the United States pressing into their sphere of influence, and they see a real window of opportunity to press back with limited risk of American response. But the Russians appear to be doing more than making a gesture.
The Russians are trying to redefine the global balance. They are absolutely under no illusion that they can match American military power in any sphere. But they are clearly asserting their right to operate as a second-tier global power and are systematically demonstrating their global reach. They may be old and they may be slow, but when American aircraft on the East Coast start to scramble routinely to intercept and escort Russian aircraft, two things happen. First, U.S. military planning has to shift to take Russia into account. Second, the United States loses even more flexibility. It can't just ignore the Russians. It now needs to devote scarce dollars to upgrading systems along the East Coast -- systems that have been quite neglected since the end of the Cold War.
There is a core assumption in the U.S. government that Russia no longer is a significant power. It is true that its vast army has disintegrated. But the Russians do not need a vast army modeled on World War II. They need, and have begun to develop, a fairly effective military built around special forces and airborne troops. They also have appeared to pursue their research and development, particularly in the area of air defense and air-launched missiles -- areas in which they have traditionally been strong. The tendency to underestimate the Russian military -- something even Russians do -- is misplaced. Russia's military is capable and improving.
The increased Russian tempo of operations in areas that the United States has been able to ignore for many years further pins the United States. It can be assumed that the Russians mean no harm -- but assumption is not a luxury national security planners can permit themselves, at least not good ones. It takes years to develop and deploy new systems. If the Russians are probing the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic again, it is not the current threat that matters, but the threat that might evolve. That diverts budget dollars from heavily armored trucks that can survive improvised explosive device attacks, and cuts into the Air Force and Navy.
The Russians are using the window of opportunity to redefine, in a modest way, the global balance and gain some room to maneuver in their region. As a result of their more assertive posture, American thoughts of unilateral interventions must decline. For example, getting involved in Georgia once was a low-risk activity. The risk just went up. Taking that risk while U.S. ground forces are completely absorbed in Iraq and Afghanistan is hard for the Americans to justify -- but rather easy for the Russians.
This brings us back to the discussion of the commander in chief's options in the Middle East. The United States already has limited options against Iran. The more the Russians maneuver, the more the United States must hold what forces it has left -- Air Force and Navy -- in reserve. Launching an Iranian adventure becomes that much more risky. If it is launched, Russia has an even greater window of opportunity. Every further involvement in the region makes the United States that much less of a factor in the immediate global equation.
All wars end, and these will too. The Russians are trying to rearrange the furniture a bit before anyone comes home and forces them out. They are dealing with a lame duck president with fewer options than most lame ducks. Before there is a new president and before the war in Iraq ends, the Russians want to redefine the situation a bit.
Wrap...
Monday, August 20, 2007
On 9/11? How blatant can they get?!!!
From Information Clearing House:
White House: Iraq progress report could be Sept 11:
U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, will likely testify to Congress about progress in the war on Sept. 11 or Sept. 12, the White House said on Monday.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N20291179.htm
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
White House: Iraq progress report could be Sept 11:
U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker and the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, will likely testify to Congress about progress in the war on Sept. 11 or Sept. 12, the White House said on Monday.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N20291179.htm
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Romney refuses invitation from VFW...
From Newsunfiltered.com :
August 20, 2007
DNC:
Mitt Romney Rejects Veterans; Refuses to Address VFW
After months of demonstrating his lack of understanding of the challenges
facing America's veterans and military families and refusing to outline a
plan for Iraq, smooth talking Mitt Romney has elected to skip this week's
108th annual convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Kansas City.
According to a VFW spokesperson, Romney "was invited but declined" to
participate in the annual conference of one of America's largest veteran's
organizations. Full release
http://newsunfiltered.com/
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
August 20, 2007
DNC:
Mitt Romney Rejects Veterans; Refuses to Address VFW
After months of demonstrating his lack of understanding of the challenges
facing America's veterans and military families and refusing to outline a
plan for Iraq, smooth talking Mitt Romney has elected to skip this week's
108th annual convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Kansas City.
According to a VFW spokesperson, Romney "was invited but declined" to
participate in the annual conference of one of America's largest veteran's
organizations. Full release
http://newsunfiltered.com/
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Repub warns: Impeach Bush & do it NOW...
From Information Clearing House:
America's biggest threat comes from within :
Paul Craig Roberts is a Republican who served as undersecretary of the treasury under Ronald Reagan and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal's editorial page, so he's no kook or Commie. He warns, "Unless Congress immediately impeaches Bush and Cheney, a year from now the United States could be a dictatorial police state at war with Iran."
http://tinyurl.com/2vp9kv
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
America's biggest threat comes from within :
Paul Craig Roberts is a Republican who served as undersecretary of the treasury under Ronald Reagan and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal's editorial page, so he's no kook or Commie. He warns, "Unless Congress immediately impeaches Bush and Cheney, a year from now the United States could be a dictatorial police state at war with Iran."
http://tinyurl.com/2vp9kv
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
WTF?!!! US troops in Canada?!!!
From Information Clearing House:
Canada's Sovereignty in Jeopardy
The Militarization of North America
By Michel Chossudovsky
Canadian jurisdiction over its Northern territories was redefined, following an April 2002 military agreement between Ottawa and Washington. This agreement allows for the deployment of US troops anywhere in Canada, as well as the stationing of US warships in Canada's territorial waters.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18207.htm
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Canada's Sovereignty in Jeopardy
The Militarization of North America
By Michel Chossudovsky
Canadian jurisdiction over its Northern territories was redefined, following an April 2002 military agreement between Ottawa and Washington. This agreement allows for the deployment of US troops anywhere in Canada, as well as the stationing of US warships in Canada's territorial waters.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18207.htm
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Bad Padilla jury....
From Information Clearing House:
Convicting Padilla: Bad News for All Americans
By Dave Lindorff
With habeas corpus a thing of the past, with arrest and detention without charge permitted, with torture and spying without court oversight all the rage, with prosecutors free to tape conversations between lawyers and their clients, and with the judicial branch now infested by rightwing judges who would have been at home in courtrooms of the Soviet Union or Hitler's Germany, for all they seem to care about common law tradition, the only real thing holding the line against absolute tyranny in the U.S. has been the jury.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18208.htm
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Convicting Padilla: Bad News for All Americans
By Dave Lindorff
With habeas corpus a thing of the past, with arrest and detention without charge permitted, with torture and spying without court oversight all the rage, with prosecutors free to tape conversations between lawyers and their clients, and with the judicial branch now infested by rightwing judges who would have been at home in courtrooms of the Soviet Union or Hitler's Germany, for all they seem to care about common law tradition, the only real thing holding the line against absolute tyranny in the U.S. has been the jury.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18208.htm
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Wrong DNA? No meds for troops...
From LA Times via truthout.org :
US Military Practices Genetic Discrimination in Denying Benefits
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081807C.shtml
Karen Kaplan of The Los Angeles Times writes: "Eric Miller's career as an Army Ranger wasn't ended by a battlefield wound, but his DNA. Lurking in his genes was a mutation that made him vulnerable to uncontrolled tumor growth. So began his journey into a dreaded scenario of the genetic age."
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
US Military Practices Genetic Discrimination in Denying Benefits
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081807C.shtml
Karen Kaplan of The Los Angeles Times writes: "Eric Miller's career as an Army Ranger wasn't ended by a battlefield wound, but his DNA. Lurking in his genes was a mutation that made him vulnerable to uncontrolled tumor growth. So began his journey into a dreaded scenario of the genetic age."
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Now Gonzales....is where?
So Bush sends Gonzo over to Iraq to make sure they're setting up their legal system properly. That got him out of the way.
Then Rove resigns. Everybody forgets about Gonzo.
But normally, Gonzo would have given his report on how well things went in Iraq. Not a word have we heard. Not even a peep.
But we are hearing about his late night visit to Ashcroft in the hospital. BushCo wouldn't want Gonzo commenting on that...nor available for questioning.
So where the hell is he? Still over there? Still being kept out of sight and out of mind?
And nobody has even noticed, nor has anyone asked so far as I know.
Guess we have the case of a disappearing man here.
Wrap...
Then Rove resigns. Everybody forgets about Gonzo.
But normally, Gonzo would have given his report on how well things went in Iraq. Not a word have we heard. Not even a peep.
But we are hearing about his late night visit to Ashcroft in the hospital. BushCo wouldn't want Gonzo commenting on that...nor available for questioning.
So where the hell is he? Still over there? Still being kept out of sight and out of mind?
And nobody has even noticed, nor has anyone asked so far as I know.
Guess we have the case of a disappearing man here.
Wrap...
A slim selection of up-coming books....
From Publishers Lunch Weekly:
NON-FICTION: COOKING:
Canadian freelance magazine writer, Mark Schatzker's STEAK: One Man's Search for the World's Tastiest Piece of Beef, to Rick Kot at Viking, by Richard Morris at Janklow & Nesbit (NA).
HISTORY/POLITICS/CURRENT AFFAIRS:
Jim Hightower's SWIM AGAINST THE CURRENT: Even and Dead Fish can Go with the Flow, with Susan DeMarco, using humorous stories about people who changed their lives and their world to inspire a new generation of activists, to Eric Nelson at Wiley, for publication in 2008, by Rafe Sagalyn at The Sagalyn Agency (NA).
1989 National Book Award finalist William Pfaff's MANIFEST DESTINY: The American Crisis and the Enlightenment Era, examining the deep forces behind the new American militarism that will likely continue unchecked long after President Bush leaves office, to George Gibson at Walker, by Steve Wasserman at Kneerim & Williams at Fish & Richardson (NA).
MEMOIR:
THE FIRST EMANCIPATOR: Slavery, Religion, and the Quiet Revolution of Robert Carter author Andrew Levy's A BRAIN WIDER THAN THE SKY: A Migraine Diary, a cultural, historical, medical, and personal memoir of migraines and their transformative power and pain, to Sarah Hochman at Simon & Schuster, by Lydia Wills at Paradigm (world).
Prince of Asturias Awards for International Cooperation recipient Somaly Mam's THE ROAD TO LOST INNOCENCE, the story of being sold into sexual slavery in Cambodia at a young age by her family only to emerge years later as a spokesperson for and rescuer of women and children tortured in the brothels of Southeast Asia, to Julie Grau at Spiegel & Grau, for publication in September 2008, by Susanna Lea at Susanna Lea Associates (US).
GENERAL/OTHER:
Amanda Robb's THE WAR ON SEX, a look inside the hidden culture of the abstinence movement, its surprising influence on public policy, and its impact on our health, our families and our relationships, to Nan Graham at Scribner, by Stuart Krichevsky at the Stuart Krichevsky Agency (NA).
sk@skagency.com
UK:
Richard Guilliatt and Peter Hohnen's THE WOLF ODYSSEY: An Epic Tale of Chivalry and Destruction in World War I, about a lone, audacious German naval raider which, disguised as a civilian vessel, made an 15-month journey around the world, destroying dozens of Allied ships and taking prisoner four hundred men, women, and children, to Bill Scott Kerr at Transworld, for publication in October 2009, by Mark Lucas of Lucas Alexander Whitely, on behalf of the Mary Cunnane Agency.
Australian rights to Tim Whiting at Random House Australia, for publication in October 2009.
Wrap...
NON-FICTION: COOKING:
Canadian freelance magazine writer, Mark Schatzker's STEAK: One Man's Search for the World's Tastiest Piece of Beef, to Rick Kot at Viking, by Richard Morris at Janklow & Nesbit (NA).
HISTORY/POLITICS/CURRENT AFFAIRS:
Jim Hightower's SWIM AGAINST THE CURRENT: Even and Dead Fish can Go with the Flow, with Susan DeMarco, using humorous stories about people who changed their lives and their world to inspire a new generation of activists, to Eric Nelson at Wiley, for publication in 2008, by Rafe Sagalyn at The Sagalyn Agency (NA).
1989 National Book Award finalist William Pfaff's MANIFEST DESTINY: The American Crisis and the Enlightenment Era, examining the deep forces behind the new American militarism that will likely continue unchecked long after President Bush leaves office, to George Gibson at Walker, by Steve Wasserman at Kneerim & Williams at Fish & Richardson (NA).
MEMOIR:
THE FIRST EMANCIPATOR: Slavery, Religion, and the Quiet Revolution of Robert Carter author Andrew Levy's A BRAIN WIDER THAN THE SKY: A Migraine Diary, a cultural, historical, medical, and personal memoir of migraines and their transformative power and pain, to Sarah Hochman at Simon & Schuster, by Lydia Wills at Paradigm (world).
Prince of Asturias Awards for International Cooperation recipient Somaly Mam's THE ROAD TO LOST INNOCENCE, the story of being sold into sexual slavery in Cambodia at a young age by her family only to emerge years later as a spokesperson for and rescuer of women and children tortured in the brothels of Southeast Asia, to Julie Grau at Spiegel & Grau, for publication in September 2008, by Susanna Lea at Susanna Lea Associates (US).
GENERAL/OTHER:
Amanda Robb's THE WAR ON SEX, a look inside the hidden culture of the abstinence movement, its surprising influence on public policy, and its impact on our health, our families and our relationships, to Nan Graham at Scribner, by Stuart Krichevsky at the Stuart Krichevsky Agency (NA).
sk@skagency.com
UK:
Richard Guilliatt and Peter Hohnen's THE WOLF ODYSSEY: An Epic Tale of Chivalry and Destruction in World War I, about a lone, audacious German naval raider which, disguised as a civilian vessel, made an 15-month journey around the world, destroying dozens of Allied ships and taking prisoner four hundred men, women, and children, to Bill Scott Kerr at Transworld, for publication in October 2009, by Mark Lucas of Lucas Alexander Whitely, on behalf of the Mary Cunnane Agency.
Australian rights to Tim Whiting at Random House Australia, for publication in October 2009.
Wrap...
Torture & BushCo's private army....
From truthout.org :
Paul J. Nyden
Secrecy, Torture, Religious Zeal Distinguish Mercenaries
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081607P.shtml
Paul Nyden, in an OP-ED for the West Virginia Gazette, writes: "The use of contractors, and their secrecy, shifts more and more authority from Congress to the White House, which makes its own decisions without any public input. Secrecy hides the real costs of military operations and enables widespread legal abuses, including capturing prisoners and 'rendering' them to unknown locations for questioning and torture."
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Paul J. Nyden
Secrecy, Torture, Religious Zeal Distinguish Mercenaries
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081607P.shtml
Paul Nyden, in an OP-ED for the West Virginia Gazette, writes: "The use of contractors, and their secrecy, shifts more and more authority from Congress to the White House, which makes its own decisions without any public input. Secrecy hides the real costs of military operations and enables widespread legal abuses, including capturing prisoners and 'rendering' them to unknown locations for questioning and torture."
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
The Christians and the military....
From truthout.org :
DOD Stops Plan to Send Christian Video Game to Troops in Iraq
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081507C.shtml
Anna Schecter, of ABC News, reports, "Plans by a Christian group to send an evangelical video game to U.S. troops in Iraq were abruptly halted yesterday by the Department of Defense after ABC News inquired about the program."
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
DOD Stops Plan to Send Christian Video Game to Troops in Iraq
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081507C.shtml
Anna Schecter, of ABC News, reports, "Plans by a Christian group to send an evangelical video game to U.S. troops in Iraq were abruptly halted yesterday by the Department of Defense after ABC News inquired about the program."
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Amer. Psych. Assn. & BushCo go head to head...
From Salon.com :
Go get em shrinks! Maybe.
In a rebuke of President Bush, the American Psychological Association has resolved to condemn brutal CIA and military interrogations.
By Mark Benjamin Salon.com
Aug. 15, 2007 | The American Psychological Association, the world's largest professional organization of psychologists, is poised to issue a formal condemnation of a raft of notorious interrogation tactics employed by U.S. authorities against detainees during the so-called war on terror, from simulated drowning to sensory deprivation. The move is expected during the APA's annual convention in San Francisco this weekend.
The APA's anti-torture resolution follows a string of revelations in recent months of the key role played by psychologists in the development of brutal interrogation regimes for the CIA and the military. And it comes just weeks after news that the White House may be calling on psychologists once again: On July 20, President Bush signed an executive order restarting a coercive CIA interrogation program at the agency's "black sites." Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell has indicated that psychological techniques will be part of the revamped program, but that the interrogations would be subject to careful medical oversight. That oversight is likely to be performed by psychologists.
In fact, given what promises to be the continuing involvement of psychologists in coercive interrogation, there is intense infighting within the organization about whether simply condemning abusive tactics is enough. Some of the APA's 148,000 members think the anti-torture resolution put forward by APA leadership is too weak, and they are putting intense pressure on the organization's leadership to go a step further and ban psychologists from participating in detainee interrogations altogether. They have introduced their own resolution proposing a moratorium. "I and others think that a moratorium is essential to try to tell the government that psychologists are not going to participate in the interrogation of enemy combatants," said Bernice Lott, a member of the Council of Representatives, the APA's policy-making body. Others oppose the moratorium because they think psychologists must be involved in the interrogations to prevent abuse -- and because the government may just choose to use non-APA members for its interrogations, as has already happened.
[Go to www.salon.com to continue reading]
Wrap...
Go get em shrinks! Maybe.
In a rebuke of President Bush, the American Psychological Association has resolved to condemn brutal CIA and military interrogations.
By Mark Benjamin Salon.com
Aug. 15, 2007 | The American Psychological Association, the world's largest professional organization of psychologists, is poised to issue a formal condemnation of a raft of notorious interrogation tactics employed by U.S. authorities against detainees during the so-called war on terror, from simulated drowning to sensory deprivation. The move is expected during the APA's annual convention in San Francisco this weekend.
The APA's anti-torture resolution follows a string of revelations in recent months of the key role played by psychologists in the development of brutal interrogation regimes for the CIA and the military. And it comes just weeks after news that the White House may be calling on psychologists once again: On July 20, President Bush signed an executive order restarting a coercive CIA interrogation program at the agency's "black sites." Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell has indicated that psychological techniques will be part of the revamped program, but that the interrogations would be subject to careful medical oversight. That oversight is likely to be performed by psychologists.
In fact, given what promises to be the continuing involvement of psychologists in coercive interrogation, there is intense infighting within the organization about whether simply condemning abusive tactics is enough. Some of the APA's 148,000 members think the anti-torture resolution put forward by APA leadership is too weak, and they are putting intense pressure on the organization's leadership to go a step further and ban psychologists from participating in detainee interrogations altogether. They have introduced their own resolution proposing a moratorium. "I and others think that a moratorium is essential to try to tell the government that psychologists are not going to participate in the interrogation of enemy combatants," said Bernice Lott, a member of the Council of Representatives, the APA's policy-making body. Others oppose the moratorium because they think psychologists must be involved in the interrogations to prevent abuse -- and because the government may just choose to use non-APA members for its interrogations, as has already happened.
[Go to www.salon.com to continue reading]
Wrap...
Bush is watching and listening to you...
From Secrecy News:
INCREASED DOMESTIC ROLE FOR INTELLIGENCE FORESEEN
Spy satellites and other classified intelligence technologies are
poised to play a greater role in domestic homeland security and law
enforcement missions, challenging long-standing legal and policy
barriers against their domestic use.
The Wall Street Journal reported today that the Director of National
Intelligence recently authorized access to intelligence satellite
products by officials of the Department of Homeland Security to help
support border security.
See "U.S. to Expand Domestic Use of Spy Satellites" by Robert Block,
Wall Street Journal, August 15, p.1:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118714764716998275.html
A comprehensive 2005 government study of the use of intelligence
capabilities for domestic applications concluded that "significant
change is needed in policy regimes regulating domestic use of IC
[intelligence community] capabilities" in order to permit their full
exploitation.
"The use of IC capabilities for domestic purposes should be. based on
the premise that most uses of IC capabilities are lawful rather than
treating any use as an exception to the rule requiring a case-by-case
adjudication," the study said.
"There is an urgent need for a top-down, Executive Branch review of all
laws and policies affecting use of intelligence capabilities purposes,"
the report said.
In particular, the 1981 Executive Order 12333 which governs
intelligence activities "should be amended to permit as unfettered an
operational environment for the collection, exploitation and
dissemination [of domestic intelligence data] as is reasonably
possible," the report recommended.
The authors acknowledged that such "unfettered" operation would require
increased oversight, but they suggested that it could be satisfactorily
accomplished by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. The
Board has been a minor, not notably influential player in recent
intelligence policy disputes.
The report acknowledged in passing a problematic 2001 U.S. Supreme
Court ruling in the case Kyllo v. United States, which concluded that
the use of infrared sensors to scan a private residence for heat lamps
used in marijuana cultivation constituted an unlawful warrantless
search. The ruling appears to be significantly at odds with the new
domestic intelligence thrust.
"This decision has placed in question the continued viability of past
settled practice of the IC within the domestic domain," the study
delicately observed.
Nevertheless, "to date we are not aware of any clear authoritative
guidance issued on the impact, if any, of this decision."
The 2005 study was first reported by the Wall Street Journal today. A
copy of the unclassified study, which was "produced solely for the use
of the United States Government," was obtained by Secrecy News.
See "Civil Applications Committee (CAC) Blue Ribbon Study," Independent
Study Group Final Report, September 2005:
http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/cac-report.pdf
Intelligence support to domestic environmental monitoring and emergency
response has been conducted since the 1970s under the supervision of the
little-known interagency Civil Appplications Committee. A 2001 fact
sheet describing the history and mission of the Committee is available
here:
http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/cac-fs.pdf
[Use links above to continue reading]
Wrap...
INCREASED DOMESTIC ROLE FOR INTELLIGENCE FORESEEN
Spy satellites and other classified intelligence technologies are
poised to play a greater role in domestic homeland security and law
enforcement missions, challenging long-standing legal and policy
barriers against their domestic use.
The Wall Street Journal reported today that the Director of National
Intelligence recently authorized access to intelligence satellite
products by officials of the Department of Homeland Security to help
support border security.
See "U.S. to Expand Domestic Use of Spy Satellites" by Robert Block,
Wall Street Journal, August 15, p.1:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118714764716998275.html
A comprehensive 2005 government study of the use of intelligence
capabilities for domestic applications concluded that "significant
change is needed in policy regimes regulating domestic use of IC
[intelligence community] capabilities" in order to permit their full
exploitation.
"The use of IC capabilities for domestic purposes should be. based on
the premise that most uses of IC capabilities are lawful rather than
treating any use as an exception to the rule requiring a case-by-case
adjudication," the study said.
"There is an urgent need for a top-down, Executive Branch review of all
laws and policies affecting use of intelligence capabilities purposes,"
the report said.
In particular, the 1981 Executive Order 12333 which governs
intelligence activities "should be amended to permit as unfettered an
operational environment for the collection, exploitation and
dissemination [of domestic intelligence data] as is reasonably
possible," the report recommended.
The authors acknowledged that such "unfettered" operation would require
increased oversight, but they suggested that it could be satisfactorily
accomplished by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. The
Board has been a minor, not notably influential player in recent
intelligence policy disputes.
The report acknowledged in passing a problematic 2001 U.S. Supreme
Court ruling in the case Kyllo v. United States, which concluded that
the use of infrared sensors to scan a private residence for heat lamps
used in marijuana cultivation constituted an unlawful warrantless
search. The ruling appears to be significantly at odds with the new
domestic intelligence thrust.
"This decision has placed in question the continued viability of past
settled practice of the IC within the domestic domain," the study
delicately observed.
Nevertheless, "to date we are not aware of any clear authoritative
guidance issued on the impact, if any, of this decision."
The 2005 study was first reported by the Wall Street Journal today. A
copy of the unclassified study, which was "produced solely for the use
of the United States Government," was obtained by Secrecy News.
See "Civil Applications Committee (CAC) Blue Ribbon Study," Independent
Study Group Final Report, September 2005:
http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/cac-report.pdf
Intelligence support to domestic environmental monitoring and emergency
response has been conducted since the 1970s under the supervision of the
little-known interagency Civil Appplications Committee. A 2001 fact
sheet describing the history and mission of the Committee is available
here:
http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/cac-fs.pdf
[Use links above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Don't tell..and don't even think about asking Bush...
From Information Clearing House:
Bush Administration Says Warrantless Eavesdropping Cannot Be Questioned :
The Bush administration said Monday the constitutionality of its warrantless electronic eavesdropping program cannot be challenged
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/08/bush-administ-1.html
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Bush Administration Says Warrantless Eavesdropping Cannot Be Questioned :
The Bush administration said Monday the constitutionality of its warrantless electronic eavesdropping program cannot be challenged
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/08/bush-administ-1.html
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Paraguay...Bush's perfect retirement place...
From truthout.org :
A Laboratory for Latin America's New Militarism
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081407H.shtml
Benjamin Dangl reports for the Guerilla News Network, "Paraguay now illustrates three new characteristics of Latin America's right-wing militarism: joint exercises with US military in counterinsurgency training and monitoring of social organizations, the use of private mercenaries for security and the criminalization of social protest through 'anti-terrorism' tactics and legislation."
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
A Laboratory for Latin America's New Militarism
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/081407H.shtml
Benjamin Dangl reports for the Guerilla News Network, "Paraguay now illustrates three new characteristics of Latin America's right-wing militarism: joint exercises with US military in counterinsurgency training and monitoring of social organizations, the use of private mercenaries for security and the criminalization of social protest through 'anti-terrorism' tactics and legislation."
[Use link above to continue reading]
Wrap...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)