The Cool Blue Blog

Killed in Committee

Now what I can understand of the current economic situation is that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's directors encouraged the lending of sub-prime mortgages nu banks and others to people of dubious means in order to increase their bonuses, promising the lenders that these mortgages would be fully backed by the Federal Government. Then Fannie and Freddie repackaged these loans and sold them to investment banks and others who bought them figuring they were good because they were backed by the Federal Government. These financial packages contained both good and bad loans. And what they really were was financial poison wrapped in financial candy. For years the packages were bought and sold until no one knew who had what and, of course, no one knew where the poison was. But what is known is that the poison was now widespread throughout the financial circulatory system.

And once that became known, no one wanted to lend to anyone since they had no idea if the collateral contained poison or not.

So it is clear that this started with Fannie May and Freddie Mac.

On September 11, 2003 the New York Times reported

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Huh. So what happened to that? Well, members of Congress shot it down, most vocal was Representative Barney Frank

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

In 2005 came yet another opportunity to fix the problem with the introduction of Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005. It intent was to supervise Fannie and Freddie. It was sponsored by Republican Senator Chuck Hagel and co-sponsored by Senators McCain, Dole and Sununu. But it never passed either the House or the Senate. In fact it never made it out of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.

Despite this history, Senator Obama has been using the current financial crisis for political gain. New to his stump speech is rhetoric that blames the Bush Administration and Republicans in general for the current problems

"The challenges facing our financial system today are more evidence that too many folks in Washington and on Wall Street weren't minding the store," Obama said in a statement. "Eight years of policies that have shredded consumer protections, loosened oversight and regulation, and encouraged outsized bonuses to CEOs while ignoring middle-class Americans have brought us to the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression."

And according to the Institutional Media, the public is buying it.

...a CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey of registered voters released Monday, 47 percent blamed Republicans for the current financial crisis the stock market. By contract, only 24 percent blamed the Democrats, with 20 percent saying both parties were to blame and 8 percent not blaming either party.

The problem is, that it is not true, of course.

It is clear that Bush and McCain tried to put a stop to it. And it is clear that most Democrats opposed it. And it is also clear that Senator Obama did nothing to identify or help fix the problem.

John Stephenson of NewsBusters writes

Since the current financial crisis is taking place under a Republican administration it is easy for people to automatically blame Republicans. The media have happily pushed this misconception too. Facts the media ignore are things such as the very groundwork for today’s problems being rooted in legislation created by Jimmy Carter , or that in 2003 President Bush proposed “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis that was blocked by Democrats on party lines. However, the media don’t report these very important and significant facts and so it is no wonder that the GOP takes the brunt of the blame in this recent CNN poll.

So it goes...

Pork explained

ABC News, when referring to Governor Palin's claims about canceling the "Bridge to Nowhere" says this:

She repeats this claim now despite having been a vocal advocate for the project during her gubernatorial run -- before she was against it. And her state kept the funds allocated for the project, even after it was canceled.

Now either ABC does not understand the nature of earmarks, (aka Pork) or they are betting you don't. And since there is at least some chance you don't understand Pork and the problem it represents, I will lay out the facts so you can more critically understand the issue.

What is Pork? The Heritage Foundation has a good definition so we'll start with that:

Originally, lawmakers would fund government grant programs and then let federal and state agencies select individual grant recipients through a competitive application process or by formula. Now, Congress actually determines, within the legislation, who will receive government grants by “earmarking” money to specific recipients. Earmarks are also known as “pork projects” because they bring the bacon home to districts.

More appropriately known as budgetary earmarks, Pork is when a legislator designates a certain amount of an appropriation bill to a particular project. So what you have is Congress appropriating funds to a Federal agency or to a State using the normal legislative process, and then after the fact, a legislator comes in and takes a portion of that appropriation and "earmarks" it for a particular purpose without any legislative oversight. And often, it designates a particular contractor subverting the bid process. And what's worse; this can be done in secret, without the public or Congress knowing who requested (and got) the earmark.

So the fact that Governor Palin did not "give back" the money is a red herring. In this case, the money for Alaska was appropriated by Congress for road construction using a legitimate process. That part isn't pork. After the appropriation by Congress, Senator Stevens then "earmarked" some of those funds for the Bridge project. That's the pork part.

The Press-Register summarizes it nicely

Here are the keys to identifying pork: It comes from individual members of Congress (not from federal or state agencies), it isn't prioritized or awarded in a competitive process, and it's inserted in the budget without hearings or even a minute of debate. 

Why is Pork bad? Pork isn't bad by itself. The process for designating pork is bad. And by bad I mean corrupting.

Clearly many good projects are funded by earmarks. It is often the case that State legislators know of companies within their districts that produce good and useful products that should come to the attention of national lawmakers. And there are good and useful research projects that should be funded specifically.

The problem comes when some company (or person) contributes to a candidate's election fund and then gets a pork barrel project in return. Like in the case of John Murtha:

In the massive 2008 military-spending bill now before Congress -- which could go to a House-Senate conference as soon as Thursday -- Mr. Murtha has steered more taxpayer funds to his congressional district than any other member....

A review by The Wall Street Journal of dozens of such contracts funded by Mr. Murtha's committee shows that many weren't sought by the military or federal agencies they were intended to benefit. Some were inefficient or mismanaged, according to interviews, public records and previously unpublished Pentagon audits. One Murtha-backed firm, ProLogic Inc., is under federal investigation for allegedly diverting public funds to develop commercial software, people close to the case say. The company denies wrongdoing and is in line to get millions of dollars more in the pending defense bill....

There's no evidence that Mr. Murtha personally profits from the hometown spending he rams through Congress. He ranked No. 333 in net worth among the 435 members of the House in a 2005 analysis by the nonprofit Center for Responsive Politics. But his campaign coffers have risen since he became chairman of the defense-spending panel. In the first nine months of this year, Mr. Murtha's campaign committees have reported contributions of more than $1.05 million.

Or in the case of Barak Obama

During his three fiscal years in the U.S. Senate, the Land of Lincolner has requested more than $740 million in earmarks for Illinois--including $1 million for an expansion of the University of Chicago Medical Center, where his wife Michelle is a vice president, $8 million for a military contracting firm owned by a top donor and $3.4 million for clients of Joe Biden's lobbyist son.

Now that's pork.

The Fix. What we need is earmark reform. I have no problem with earmarks per se, just they way they are done. Earmarks need to be voted on and the requestor needs to be listed in every single case.

Daylight on the process.

Something the Democrats promised to do when they took over Congress and which they have yet to accomplish.

And Senator Obama needs a voting record to match his rhetoric, something which, as of now, he does not have.

Blasphemy

"When ye hear the signs of Allah held in defiance and ridicule, ye are not to sit with them unless they turn to a different theme." [Qur'an 4:140]

"Have patience with what they say, and leaves them with noble (dignity)." [Qur'an 73:10]

""If you offered to let me off this time on condition I am not any longer to speak my mind... I should say to you, "Men of Athens, I shall obey the Gods rather than you." Socrates at his trial.

Since the idea of Democracy was first proposed, the idea of Freedom of Speech was recognized to be an essential component. Unless there is free and open political debate, Democracy dies.

But free speech was never unrestrained, not even in the United State. There are restrictions. Clearly you can not defame someone and claim protection on the grounds of freedom of speech. You can not lie in Court or to official investigators.

But one thing that is sacrosanct in true Democracies is that no limits should be placed upon political speech

Pretenders to Democracy have used Treason to limit political speech. Consider Zimbabwe

"The government is trying to silence the opposition. If you publicly criticise the state leader, there’s a good likelihood that you will be charged with treason. That’s a threat to be feared. Treason carries the death penalty," [Edson] Chiota [the national coordinator of the Zimbabwe Association for Crime prevention and Rehabilitation of Offenders (ZACRO)] said.

Islamists have multiple methods for limiting political speech, but they are not pretenders to Democracy; they are opponents of Democracy.

“We have declared a bitter war against the principle of democracy and all those who seek to enact it.” - Abu Musab al-Zarqawi

Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh made and released a film critical of how women were treated by Islamists. It was a political statement. And he was killed.

Theo Van Gogh was shot eight times then his throat was cut until he was nearly decapitated. Two knives were left impaled in his chest, and a five page letter was attached. That letter was addressed to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Dutch politician and a Somali immigrant. They threatened her for what they considered attacks on Islam

Since your appearence in the Dutch political arena you have been constantly busy criticising Muslims and terrorising Islam with your statements. You are hereby not the first and not the last and also won't be the last to have joined the crusade against Islam.

With your attacks you have not only turned your back on the Truth, but you are also marching along the ranks of the soldiers of evil. U are not putting your hostility towards Islam under chairs and benches and therefore your masters have rewarded you with a seat in parliament. They have found in you an ally who gives them all the "powder" so that they dont have to dirty their own hands. It appears that you are blinded by your burning unbelief and in your rage you are not able to see that your are just an instrument of the real enemies of Islam....

This letter is Insha Allah (God willing) an attempt to stop your evil and silence you forever.These writings will Inshallah cause your mask to fall off....

Death, Mrs. Hirshi Ali , is a shared theme of everything that exists. You, I and the rest of creation cannot get loose from this truth.

There will come a Day when one soul will not be able to help another soul. A Day of horrible tortures and painful tribulations which will go together with with the terrible cries being pressed out of the lungs of the unjust .Cries. Mrs. Hirshi Ali, which will cause chills to run up someones spine, and cause the hair on their head to stand straight up....

So will we use the same names and send this out ahead of us, so that the heavens and the stars will receive this news and this will be spread as a tidal wave throughout all the corners of the universe.

"I surely know that you, O America, will be destroyed ".

"I surely know that you O Europe, will be destroyed"

"I surely know that you O Holland will be destroyed"

"I surely know that you, O Hirshi Ali will be destroyed"

Her response was to write a book

The Caged Virgin, which is subtitled An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam. The three themes of the story are: first, her own gradual emancipation from tribalism and superstition; second, her work as a parliamentarian to call attention to the crimes being committed every day by Islamist thugs in mainland Europe; and third, the dismal silence, or worse, from many feminists and multiculturalists about this state of affairs.

But she had to quit the Dutch Paliament because

After being forced into hiding by fascist killers, Ayaan Hirsi Ali found that the Dutch government and people were slightly embarrassed to have such a prominent "Third World" spokeswoman in their midst. She was first kept as a virtual prisoner, which made it almost impossible for her to do her job as an elected representative. When she complained in the press, she was eventually found an apartment in a protected building. Then the other residents of the block filed suit and complained that her presence exposed them to risk. In spite of testimony from the Dutch police, who assured the court that the building was now one of the safest in all Holland, a court has upheld the demand from her neighbors and fellow citizens that she be evicted from her home. In these circumstances, she is considering resigning from parliament and perhaps leaving her adopted country altogether.

In other words, the Islamists won this round and forced a Democracy to limit political speech: the greatest sin of a Democracy

The murder of Theo Van Gough occurred in November of 2004. In September 2005, the Danish newspaper  Jyllands-Posten published 12 cartoons critical of the Islamists. One of which follows

(See them all here)

The result was more threats and intimidation

Islam is no laughing matter. The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten is being protected by security guards and several cartoonists have gone into hiding after the newspaper published a series of twelve cartoons (see  them all here, halfway the article) about the prophet Muhammad. According to the Islam it is blasphemous to make images of the prophet. Muslim fundamentalists have threatened to bomb the paper’s offices and kill the cartoonists...

The publication led to outrage among the Muslim immigrants living in Denmark. 5,000 of them took to the streets to protest. Muslim organisations have demanded an apology, but Juste rejects this idea: “We live in a democracy. That’s why we can use all the journalistic methods we want to. Satire is accepted in this country, and you can make caricatures,” he said. The Danish imam Raed Hlayhel reacted with the statement: “This type of democracy is worthless for Muslims. Muslims will never accept this kind of humiliation. The article has insulted every Muslim in the world.”

The Danes stood up, not just to the Islamists, but to Europe as well

For four months the imams and their radical Muslim organizations have unsuccesfully demanded government censorship. However, despite immense pressure (also from international organizations such as the UN and the EU) the Danish government refused to call the newspaper to account. Last week a couple of Norwegian papers decided to publish the cartoons in support of the Danish paper while in Denmark moderate Muslims, encouraged by the government’s refusal to be intimidated by the radicals, have distanced themselves from the imams. The latter announced on Friday that they no longer demand apologies from Jyllands-Posten for the publication. Instead they said they just want two things: a guarantee from the Danish authorities that Muslims can freely practice their religion without being “provoked and discriminated.” And a declaration from Jyllands-Posten that the cartoons were not published with the intention of mocking the Muslim faith.

Well that's easy since it is clear that the cartoons don't make fun of Islam, but they make fun of Islamist Jihadists.

Asked if wider publication will not lead to unnecessary confrontations between Christians and Muslims Sæle said the intention was not to provoke just for the sake of provoking, but rather to confront radical Islam in Norway.

In Norway and every other place where people want to control their government's rather than the other way around.

Last Thursday, Osama bin Laden again brought up the incursion of the cartoons

Although our tragedy in your killing of our women and children is a very great one, it paled when you went overboard in your unbelief and freed yourselves of the etiquettes of dispute and fighting and went to the extent of publishing these insulting drawings. This is the greater and more serious tragedy, and reckoning for it will be more severe.

Evil can take a lot, but it hates being laughed at.

"If any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility.."[from 'On Liberty by John Stuart Mill]

"The principle of free thought is not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought we hate.."[Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes]

Neither free thought nor free speech is what the Islamists fight for.

Free thought and free speech is what the Islamists fight against.

And that is why we fight them.

UPDATE: Dan Moran links to this post and, now, I to his. He and I disagree on a number of issues. But at the core, we don't disagree on much. Approaches maybe, but not principles. And principles are what really matter.

And on the principle of freedom of political speech and the threat that the Islamists pose to it, we are in solid and violent agreement.

Only for Americans?

The Declaration of Independence

...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security...

President John F. Kennedy

We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans—born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage—and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

This much we pledge—and more....

Some think the truths our founders held to be self-evident were only for Americans. That the struggle against the forces of darkness should not cost American lives unless it is American freedom that is threatened. That you can abandon any ally once they have served their purpose of protecting Americans.

But the face of evil has been described. Many would obscure that face and point to something else instead.

But the evil must be faced and fought by those who have the courage and the will to do so. Do we have the courage and the will?

But if not us, than who?

Border war

On January 3, the new Mexican President Felipe Calderon initiated the us a Federal forces to crack down on drug trafficking in Mexico. He sent 3,000 soldiers and federal police to the border city of Tijuana.

The force -- backed by 28 boats, 21 planes and nine helicopters -- will hunt down drug gangs, patrol the coast and man checkpoints in a city that is a popular smuggling route for cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana entering the United States, Interior Secretary Francisco Ramirez Acuna said Tuesday at a news conference in Mexico City.

"We will carry out all the necessary actions to retake every region of national territory," Ramirez Acuna said.

Tijuana Mayor Jorge Hank Rhon welcomed the additional forces.

He said he would like the soldiers and federal police to work hand in hand with city police to re-establish order.

But before the Federal and local police could work hand-in-hand, the Feds had to know who was on their side and who were compromised. To do this, they disarmed all of the Tijuana police officers so their guns may be tested for use in open murder investigations

Top officials in the Calderón administration have been blunt in their characterization of the Tijuana police department being riddled with informers and other organized crime operatives working for the Tijuana cartel of the Arellano Félix family.

The first major results of this operation were seen not on Tijuana, but further east in Mexicali where

state and federal agents working together captured a gang of seven kidnappers, rescuing three hostages in the same act.

It has been observed, that President Calderon is acting like a war-time president

President Calderón rallied federal troops Wednesday, urging them "not to lose heart" in what he said could be a drawn-out offensive against organized drug traffickers.

...Calderón indicated that the states of Michoacán and Baja California may be only the first of many theaters in his new drug war.

"We have been carrying out this joint operation in Michoacán and as of yesterday a similar one in the city of Tijuana," the president said Wednesday. "But we also need to attend to the needs of many other of the nation´s cities and regions that are threatened by crime and violence."

Wearing an olive-green cap with a five-starred insignia indicating his rank as the supreme commander of the military, Calderón used the language of national defense as he praised his troops for their effort so far in the so-called Michoacán Joint Operation that began Dec. 11.

"Organized crime in Mexico, especially in this state with the largest number of violent crime victims, has profoundly damaged our families´ quality of life and our ability to grow and be successful in the world," he said. "But if we continue in our work, our cities and our land will no longer be in the hands of the criminals."

And as wartime presidents often need to do, Calderón urged the gathered troops to be prepared for a long haul.

"The task will not be easy or quick," he said. "It will require an enormous commitment from the public, including, regrettably, the loss of human life. I ask you not to lose heart, and to continue with determination in this struggle against organized crime."

Further East, somewhere in the 120 mile stretch between Lukeville Arizona and Nogales, Mexico came news of a border incursion that may have something to do with Calderon's war on drug traffickers

A U.S. Border Patrol entry Identification Team site was overrun Wednesday night along Arizona's border with Mexico.

According to the Border Patrol, an unknown number of gunmen attacked the site in the state's West Desert Region around 11 p.m. The site is manned by National Guardsmen. Those guardsmen were forced to retreat.

A Guardsman who was at the scene claimed they didn't run, but were acting under orders: orders that include not shooting a illegals crossing the border. They retreated when it was determined the subjects were armed.

Getting control of the drug trafficking and border is a matter of national security. This must be clear to everyone. The government knows this, but as was the case prior to September 11, 2001, the information isn't being shared as Sara Carter of the dailybulletin.com writes

Evidence of "special-interest aliens" using the Mexican border to gain entry to the United States has been kept secret from the American public, according to federal law enforcement agents, terrorism experts and critics of U.S. foreign policy with Mexico.

In 2005, the Border Patrol apprehended approximately 1.2 million people in the U.S. illegally. Of those, 165,000 were from countries other than Mexico, and roughly 650 were, like Kamal, from special-interest countries, according to the Border Patrol.

Those interviewed by the Daily Bulletin say agencies including the FBI and CIA are not using information from Border Patrol and Drug Enforcement Administration agents to make connections between the drug trade, illegal immigration and terrorist organizations.

"For us to believe that Mexican smugglers will not assist, knowingly or unknowingly, foreign terrorists trying to enter the United States is incomprehensible," said Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, who, along with other congressional representatives, has pushed for stricter border security policies.

...the links between illegal immigration, expanded trade, Mexican narcotics organizations and terrorist groups has already been assessed by U.S. federal law enforcement agencies, according to DEA documents obtained by the Daily Bulletin.

According to an intelligence report written by the DEA, "La Entrada al Pac fico (Gateway to the Pacific)" - also the name of a Texas-Mexico plan to expand border trade - Asian narcotics traffickers, in collusion with Mexican drug trafficking organizations and terrorist groups, could use expanded trade routes to bring contraband into the United States.

"The DEA has made a conscious effort to generate predictive intelligence so policy makers can be aware and plan ahead for significant changes in narcotics and smuggling operations," said a DEA official who asked to remain anonymous. "Any time you send in a predictive piece of intelligence that has merit and it's ignored, then the consequences of that can be devastating to national security."

According to DEA intelligence reports, the link between terrorism and narcotics has been well known since the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania.

But federal agents say getting bureaucrats to understand the growing danger is difficult when most lawmakers won't even acknowledge many of the problems already happening along the U.S. border.

I think President Calderon's war against the drug cartels is an important step to securing our border from terrorists and drug mobsters.

But it also seems to me that National Guard members patrolling our border should have the right to shoot, and kill, armed people who try to cross our border.

I sure as hell hope that legislation on illegal immigration, sure to come from the 110th Congress, includes such authorization.

Not Happening

Austrailian police are saying they prevented an attack by terrorists

Australian authorities arrested 17 terror suspects on Tuesday — including a prominent radical Muslim cleric sympathetic to Osama bin Laden — and said they had foiled a major terror attack on the country by men committed to “violent jihad.”

Meanwhile the Whitehouse has released this information about successes here

Overall, the United States and our partners have disrupted at least ten serious al-Qaida terrorist plots since September 11--including three al-Qaida plots to attack inside the United States.  We have stopped at least five more al-Qaida efforts to case targets in the United States or infiltrate operatives into our country.

10 Plots

1. The West Coast Airliner Plot: In mid-2002 the U.S. disrupted a plot to attack targets on the West Coast of the United States using hijacked airplanes.  The plotters included at least one major operational planner involved in planning the events of 9/11. 
2. The East Coast Airliner Plot: In mid-2003 the U.S. and a partner disrupted a plot to attack targets on the East Coast of the United States using hijacked commercial airplanes. 
3. The Jose Padilla Plot: In May 2002 the U.S. disrupted a plot that involved blowing up apartment buildings in the United States.  One of the plotters, Jose Padilla, also discussed the possibility of using a "dirty bomb" in the U.S.
4. The 2004 UK Urban Targets Plot: In mid-2004 the U.S. and partners disrupted a plot that involved urban targets in the United Kingdom.  These plots involved using explosives against a variety of sites.
5. The 2003 Karachi Plot: In the Spring of 2003 the U.S. and a partner disrupted a plot to attack Westerners at several targets in Karachi, Pakistan. 
6. The Heathrow Airport Plot: In 2003 the U.S. and several partners disrupted a plot to attack Heathrow Airport using hijacked commercial airliners. The planning for this attack was undertaken by a major 9/11 operational figure.
7. The 2004 UK Plot: In the Spring of 2004 the U.S. and partners, using a combination of law enforcement and intelligence resources, disrupted a plot to conduct large-scale bombings in the UK. 
8. The 2002 Arabian Gulf Shipping Plot: In late 2002 and 2003 the U.S. and a partner nation disrupted a plot by al-Qa'ida operatives to attack ships in the Arabian Gulf. 
9. The 2002 Straits of Hormuz Plot: In 2002 the U.S. and partners disrupted a plot to attack ships transiting the Straits of Hormuz. 
10. The 2003 Tourist Site Plot: In 2003 the U.S. and a partner nation disrupted a plot to attack a tourist site outside the United States.

5 Casings and Infiltrations

1. The U.S. Government & Tourist Sites Tasking: In 2003 and 2004, an individual was tasked by al-Qa'ida to case important U.S. Government and tourist targets within the United States.
2. The Gas Station Tasking: In approximately 2003, an individual was tasked to collect targeting information on U.S. gas stations and their support mechanisms on behalf of a senior al-Qa'ida planner.
3. Iyman Faris & the Brooklyn Bridge: In 2003, and in conjunction with a partner nation, the U.S. government arrested and prosecuted Iyman Faris, who was exploring the destruction of the Brooklyn Bridge in New York.  Faris ultimately pleaded guilty to providing material support to al-Qa'ida and is now in a federal correctional institution.
4. 2001 Tasking: In 2001, al-Qa'ida sent an individual to facilitate post-September 11 attacks in the U.S.  U.S. law enforcement authorities arrested the individual.
5. 2003 Tasking: In 2003, an individual was tasked by an al-Qa'ida leader to conduct reconnaissance on populated areas in the U.S.

The President Lied and People Died

Most people have suspected for a very long time that the incident that precipitated a build up of military might in Vietnam, the Gulf of Tonkin event, was a lie perpetrated by President Johnson to justify increased military operations there.

Now there is proof that the incident was indeed a fabrication and that people knew it.

The U.S. National Security Agency has kept secret since 2001 a finding by an agency historian that NSA officers deliberately distorted critical intelligence during the Tonkin Gulf episode that helped precipitate the Vietnam War, according to two people familiar with the historian's work.

The historian's conclusion is the first serious accusation that communications intercepted by the NSA, the secretive eavesdropping and code-breaking agency, were falsified so that they made it look as if North Vietnam had attacked American destroyers on Aug. 4, 1964, two days after a previous clash.

President Lyndon B. Johnson cited the supposed attack to persuade Congress to authorize broad military action in Vietnam, but most historians have concluded in recent years that there was no second attack.

The NSA historian, Robert Hanyok, found a pattern of translation mistakes that went uncorrected, altered intercept times and selective citation of intelligence that persuaded him that midlevel agency officers had deliberately skewed the evidence.

Hanyok concluded that they had done it not out of any political motive but to cover up earlier errors, and that top NSA and military officials and Johnson neither knew about nor condoned the deception.

The research by the NSA historian was detailed four years ago in an in-house article. It remains classified, in part because agency officials feared its release might prompt uncomfortable comparisons with the flawed intelligence used to justify the war in Iraq, according to an intelligence official familiar with some internal discussions of the matter.

Matthew Aid, an independent historian who has discussed Hanyok's Tonkin Gulf research with current and former NSA and CIA officials who have read it, said he had decided to speak publicly about the findings because he believed they should have been released long ago.

"This material is relevant to debates we as Americans are having about the war in Iraq and intelligence reform," said Aid, who is writing a history of the NSA. "To keep it classified simply because it might embarrass the agency is wrong."

Ooops.

The CIA may have got many things wrong in Iraq, but it is quite obvious that Democrats believed Iraq had WMDs BB (Before Bush)

But one thing that was clear to everyone was that he was not complying with the UN inspection regime that ended the first Gulf War. And while the particular meme of historical revisionism involves "remembering" that the whole invasion rationale was based on WMDs, it was not. And we have as proof the Congressional authorization for a War in Iraq which lists a whole laundry list of reason for finally calling Iraq in breech of the agreements that the ended the Gulf War.

Was Johnson to blame for the Gulf of Tonkin event? This report may actually vindicate him, not indict him. The report may implicate bad intelligence, not malice.

But for Bush, not only will he not be given the benefit of the doubt with regards to WMDs, but people are actively misrepresenting the history of our involvement and their relationship to WMDs.

Intelligence mistakes or no, we had more justification to invade Iraq, as detailed in the Congressional authorization for war, than President Johnson had because his decision was based solely on bad intelligence.

Bush's was not.

al Qaeda and Iraq

You know, I'm tired of hearing that there was no connection between the Iraq of Saddam and al Qaeda. So I've decided that with this post, I will collect in one place all articles regarding that very connection of which I am aware so that anyone searching and finding this post will have easy access to the information.

If anyone would like to add links, I'll be glad to include them.

For now, here's the evidence that I have collected and believe is quite compelling. Compelling enough that you have to either be a partisan hack or an al Qaeda sympathizer to dismiss.

First up is a piece by Stephen F. Hayes of the Weekly Standard titled "Case Closed"

OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD...

Genesis

Islam, Wahabbism, al Qaeda; Clair lays it all out.

Go there now and get informed.

Fallujah: Small Wars and Microcosm

Fallujah has been out of the news for a while. It was once the news so long as Marines were getting killed and there was a hot war.

And many had varying opinions on what should and should not be done in Fallujah.

From my point of view, what the Marines did do could be predicted just by reading the Small Wars Manual.