Rethinker

Hatred of Israel.

2006-12-26T21:11:00.000-08:00

At the risk of sounding too religious, I'll trot out my little theory about Israel and its eternal problem with much of the rest of the world. It's probably something our gray heads like Jimmy, "the Peacemaker," Carter never considered, but the idea merits some small and serious consideration because the land couches at the navel of the world and has forever been a pivot about which the conscience of the old world slued.

I have always believed that as lomg as one Jew remains on the planet there will be hatred focussed on him because of the Almighty's covenant with the "sons of Abraham." It does not matter whether the target of the hatred is a practicing Jew or not, it only matters that God has sworn an oath with one family. It only matters that somewhere in the darkest and most minute reaches of that one person's DNA lies the intonation that the "Lord God is one God, and He is our God," and this causes other people of evil bent to despise him automatically.

From an entirely mundane standpoint, the Jews are a wonderfully adaptable individual race who can scrape a living out of a next to nothing piece of real estate like Israel, and of course, that's got to gall the ones who lived there during the Jewish absence, the ones who did little but subsist and infight and inbreed.

This hatred is cosmic violence that masquerades as fraternal politics, nothing more nor less than covetousness shrouded in a pretense of displacement, envy cloaked in feigned self righteousness.

Of course, the same could be said of the underclass on our own country...but that's a subject for another day.

As yet an improperly defined enemy

2006-12-07T07:07:00.000-08:00

As astute as ever, Hansen lays out a wonderful commentary on the current situation, however one thing is omitted from our current discourse, and that is the fact that our enemy and his interests, his modus operandi, if you will has yet to be clearly described by anyone.

In WWII, the enemies had clearly legible goals and borders of encroachment. In the current war, the enemy's motives and goals have never been adequately illustrated by our officials. Because we are so cautious about racism, religious sensitivities, and inherent subtexts of any discussion, we have hamstrung ourselves by refusing to whip up righteous indignation against an enemy we do not clearly understand.

The current administration has dutifully and professionally managed this conflict as a matter of daily business rather than handling it as the crisis it is. Unfortunately, we on the home front still see this as a police action, not a real war.

Until we can accurately define the war as an international conflagration, we are doomed to endless recrimination and hysterical self blame by the left, who by the way roots itself in mainstream media.

Those of us who have seen death and destruction first hand are the only ones who can understand the threat sans benefit of incisive reports from our leaders. The rest are too comfortable with the illusion that we are safe from fanatics.

It is in doubt that our people will realize the true nature of this war until it is too late because we are so confident that no one in his right mind would attack us on our home turf. By then, it may be too late.

And so, Mr Putin, you're a bad one, but you're not the only one

2006-11-27T21:22:00.000-08:00

We should remember that Putin does not operate in a vacuum, nor does he wield sole authority in Russia, and while he is powerful, his enablers have nearly equal authority. The man will retire soon, and his replacement will exercise even more power.

The United States operates from a very different platform, and considering today's political climate, our system is ill-equipped to deal with terrorism as effectively as Russia does. Their opposition risks personal death with the slightest objection. Our opposition risks civilization.

Indeed, the delicate balance between opposition and efficacy in this country is at once lifeline and tripwire. Lifeline upon which future freedom depends, tripwire with which to Claymore liberal democracy into oblivion.

The United States, curiously, can only count on other English speaking countries and a few lately liberated other countries with vibrant and vital Christian populations as soul sisters in conflict. The rest are merely remoras that grudgingly attach themselves for a short and convenient period to gain points for future trade-offs.

The world's organizational status is in upheaval after a brief respite. Things have changed. One might remember the elecrtic light bulb and its eventual impact on darkness. WTC was a major move in the opposite direction.

This war was never an option like some two-bit prize fight on a Thursday night. It is a more serious business than World War II.

Our job, as the thinkers and ponderers of this new age, is to forego linear thinking, to engulf this era with supreme lateral examination so that we may place Putin, et al, in proper perspective and against a backdrop of three dimensional history.

History right now is not a snapshot of one individual, nor is it a group shot of a graduating class. It is cinema 360, going on all around us, and we should hold tight the truth that we are not on the screen, we are on the focal point smack in the center.

Odd, though. This may be as alive as we ever get to be.

What does the NYT know, and when did they know it?

2006-11-17T08:53:00.000-08:00

NYT knows something. Read their editorial on Pelosi this morning. It went from lukewarm two days ago to frigid today. Beginning from the exposure of nuclear plans seized from Iragi government and put up on the website and culminating with their clean and cutting editorials of the last week or so, these indicate to me that the editorial board is scared spitless about something....what they know they have not deigned to share, but they know something.

This shift is taking place throughout the Dem hierarchy. Hoyer's win by such a margin was concrete affirmation that the liberals finally get it.

It is a very spooky moment. If NYT makes a move toward a semblance of apology to Bush and his team, it will be in the form of criticism about not doing enough with Damascus and Teheran.

On the up side, it's good that NYT woke up; on the bad side, their sleep enhanced the danger by giving the bad guys valuable time to get their nuclear act together.

I see an attack here, which will totally discredit the liberals. Then, I see them jumping on board with a clamor for pre-emptive attacks on Syria and Iran.

The only thing that can save this situation is for an attack on Russia by Islamists spur Putin or his successor into an alliance with us, but don't bet on it. The crap table has better odds.

How Good Was Rumsfeld

2006-11-10T18:49:00.000-08:00

Rumsfeld was as effective as he was allowed to be.

Same goes for Rice.

Remember when Kissinger displayed such stunning eclat with the "shuttle
diplomacy?" Afterward, he was not so effective....why?

When Henry the K was on the move in the shuttle, he was working for,
and backed up by, RMN, who everybody thought would pull the trigger
on a nuke if piqued.

Bush 42 is a good guy, but nobody thinks he's crazy, so they think he can
be pushed.....Democrats included.

If on 9/12/01, Bush had looked less like a Dad, and more like the Tasmanian
Devil, he would have been taken more seriously, and the Republicans would still be
in control of Congress because they would have been seriously afraid to cross him,
as well.

It's a scary world out there. Sometimes it's better to look like a demented pit bull
than a guard trained retriever.

Retirement of a Giant

2006-11-10T06:35:00.000-08:00

There have always been men who do our hard jobs for us, the thankless, but necessary, tasks that require keen insight, yea, even prescience. It is not rare that these visionaries are vilified, nor is it uncommon that their achievements are belittled by lesser individuals, but the truth is that genius is rarely recognized by its contemporaries.

Mr. Rumsfeld did not need the job, he had a good one. He did not need a pinnacle to crown off his legacy, he'd already served many times and well. And, as we were reminded daily by the press and the liberals, the Secretary didn't need the aggrandizement for his ego, he was well supplied in that category.

He took the job for the challenge, certainly, but the overriding reason this terrifically talented guy spent his energy, intellect, stamina, and courage was because he knew it was his duty.

Duty is an underused word of late because so few can be bothered with such mundane matters....probably the reason our troops in the field know why they're there and the reason the critics don't get it.

Mr. Rumsfeld understands what his grunts understand...duty...that's why he was good at it. We owe him.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. When it counted, you did your duty.

Reply to VDH on The Strange War via Austin Bay

2005-06-05T07:40:00.000-07:00

Actually, this cult of the underdog is more symptomatic
of supreme arrogance of the liberal left than of
a deep and abiding sickness of the west. The elite, partly
habitated by the MSM, simply does not believe to any serious
degree that there is any danger posed by the threats of the
Islamofascisti, even when they see it with their own eyes.

The press lives by daily Rorscharchs called Arbitron Ratings and
circulation numbers and have no memory or historical base from
which to make judgments or to parse insights, unless, of course,
it is to revive half dead ex-FBI officials who will dredge up
the same old right bashing stories. Their best hope is to divert
attention from the common sense implications of today’s threats.

Real people understand, or perhaps intuit, the danger of forgetful-
ness. Why else would the New Minutemen movement have struck such a
hearty chord?

The real problem here is that the destruction of 9/11/01 was buried
sometime in April of 2003 when all that could have been said and
tolerated of the Twin Towers massacre was put to rest in the “morgues”
of the news services, as were the murders of Danny Pearl, et al.

Surgical air strikes, lightning attacks, tightly focussed firepower
are all well and good if infrastructure were all there was to a
regime and a mindset, but they are not. Gradual escalations always
lead to final cataclysms, i.e. Hiroshima. The true goal of warfare
is to destroy the enemies’ will to fight, to convict them that anything
is better than war, even surrender.

In this particular war, the fifth column of liberals needed to be
persuaded that anything was better than being a sitting duck for
terrorists, and we should probably should have unleashed unforgettable
destruction with terrifying collateral damage one hour after the
deadline. Nothing says “knock it off” to close observers like
a firestorm.

The delays made us look weak and provided time to plan a back door
war, and this in turn gave the liberal left time to equivocate,
snipe, and get their story together in order to blame a very
competent and decent President, and military, for the middle-Eastern
hatred and uptick the violence.

Are we sick? No. We are trying to be decent, but we have let the left
set the agenda which could change in the wink of an eye….
if the Islamofascisti find a way to offend the liberals and their
sisters in the press.

Remember the atomic bomb was developed and dropped by, you guessed
it, liberals who were forced into it by failed negotiations.

The rest of America gets it.

The McCain Myth Response

2005-05-31T06:35:00.000-07:00

Democrats Won't Prevail

Mr. McCain kicked his presidential aspirations and probably his senatorial seat into the sewer when he worked to broker that deal with the Democratic "moderates." The Republican base is as angry as I have ever seen them, and it is making its anger felt.

I was called by a Republican fundraiser (a nice young woman) who told me that every last dependable giver laced into her because of the deal. Mr. McCain was mentioned prominently in every call.

The deal itself, mostly Bill Frist's fault, was the exact opposite of what the base wanted, but it was so revealing that it was a thing inevitable. It had to happen.

A few important revelations rose. One, Mr. McCain demonstrated his complete lack of perception into his other side colleagues. Does anyone want this guy staring down terrorists? Two, Mr. McCain edged himself into the "good old boys" clan where the art of the deal trumps the facts. Three, Mr. McCain showed exactly that he's been inside the club too long.

Even so, the liberals stand almost no chance of prevailing anytime soon. The electorate is ticked off. There's a war on, boys, and running heady exercises in politics won't cut it.

Mr. McCain and the rest better wise up, or they'll be looking for lobbyist jobs sooner than they expect. Recall worked in California, Arizona is right next door.

ICRC's Attitude Toward US

2005-05-23T17:10:00.000-07:00

Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it, or so someone said. The same goes for those who do not remember it, or ignore it. The United States and its citizens should immediately withdraw all (and I mean all) support for not only the ICRC, but for its sister organizations. If the American Red Cross renounces its ties, it can stay, but it's time to exact civility in return for help.

Likewise, we should withdraw all support from countries who can't demonstrate a modicum of gratitude and respect for our largesse. They should be given 90 days to clean up their stables, or they should be shown the door. Think of what "foreign aid" money would do for border protection.

Our Insular Media response to Rossett

2005-05-18T17:10:00.000-07:00

The bigger picture: which is all about why Muslims offended by an item in a U.S. magazine, true or false, would react with riots that end in the maiming and killing of their own, is more complex than most American journalists can handle in one sitting. The underdeveloped editors have no concept of penetrating insight, so they go for the tabloid scream banners and call it good reporting, whether substantiated or vetted or not.

Is it true the Newsweek reporters and editors were all graduates of People magazine?

As to the real issue, why did all these Muslims go bonkers over a book supposedly being tossed into a latrine? No one will say it, but the truth is that this form of Islam is mostly on the printed page, and if that's all it is, then they were right to get really mad and vent their rage on the nearest victim or property. These people have nothing but their anger because that's all their Allah is: angry, punishing, demanding. If this Allah is their paradigm, how can they be anything else?

In the Orient, saving face is very important, even crucial to the society because they have nothing else, there is nothing else, so respect and a graceful way out is the essential glue that holds it together. In Islam, or at least this form, there is nothing but anger because the "blessed men" of authority have sold their constituencies on the idea that the onus of blame is not on the individual, but on some faraway evil that corrupts the very air, and the suckers buy into it wholesale because personal responsibility is kind of dull and doesn't have the same panache of righteous indignation.

Allah must be very indignant if one sentence in one infidel rag could cause so much outpouring of emotion. Maybe one day Allah will really get indignant with His servants who fan the flames of indignation in very foolish people who think violence is a pleasing odor in His nostrils. That should be fun.

Wonder if they know who going to unknowingly offend Him next. Not to worry, there's probably a thirteen year old kid on some corner in Sana getting his hands around the throat of some new truth right this minute, and in a couple of years, his hands will change venue to some mosque leader who didn't quite have it right. But the kid'll have it right...right around the neck.

Strangleholds garrote truth as surely as strangleholds choke people. Maybe Newsweek and the Islamists could get together for a conference on widening viewpoints to include a modicum of humility and a soupcon of fact checking. Might do them equally well.

Y'know, it's amazing the similarities in the human-bomb fodder in Islamistan and the reporters and editors who keep throwing themselves over the media cliff in efforts to stop something they don't understand.

As Riley used to say "What a revoltin' development this turned out to be."

Separatist Movement in LA?

2005-05-16T21:38:00.000-07:00

In response to the question as to whether a separatist movement brews on the left coast.

Warning the language on this one tints blue (as in language, not sentiment)

Glad you asked....

the little deal over the archway is just that....little.

the big deal, and it's really big...is the race war developing between the black and latin gangs....

seems that the black guys ripped off a s--tload of drugs from the latins, and the latins aregoing around popping the black guys in white tee shirts.... on or near the freeways....

since it is election time, the stupid white guy (Mayor Hahn) says there's no gang involvement because "crime has gone down under my leadership." on the other hand, the slimy latin schmuck (Tony "I led Macha for four years" Villaraogosa) is no way going to blame the latin base of his electorate.... and the prevaricator-deluxe cop from NY sits by looking for the best deal...he ain't sayin' nothin' cause his new wife is in the tourism PR agency.....

nobody has a reason to tell the truth....'cept maybe for "INTEGRITY."

Here's the way it sits:

race relations here are a powder keg, but not the way you'd expect.

the local blacks have shot the community to hell with smarmy crap and ignorance and shirking,
the latins are too interested in drug money to piss off or piss away the clientele,
the whites have just about had it with all the b.s.
and the asians will shoot to kill if anybody messes with their liquor stores

we do this kind of thing every forty years or so (you can look it up, or watch L.A. Confidential, or Mulholland Falls or Chinatown...you get the idea.)

East LA might get testy, but there's enough firepower out there and enough willing VNV's to single file the bad boys into the drydock we call the LA River.... plus there's enough pissed off cops who would be happy to help out.... don't, BTW, ask the deputy sheriffs to get involved, they give new meaning to the "gang who couldn't shoot straight."

If it did blow up, Arnie would not hesitate to call out the Cal Natl Guard with orders to fire at anything that moved, and he would not be kidding.

It's show biz, kids, but it bears watching because it would turn the liberals inside out, and when they fear loss of their power, they'll insist on closing the border, ousting illegals and other various forms of intercultural mayhem. I cite Howard Dean's outbursts as proof.

Here's the big deal: if everybody's mad, there will be too many unsolved crimes to prosecute, so a lot of upstanding types will skate...if you get my drift.

You can catch this piece....not as slick as I usually write.... and others on my blog:
http://rethinker.blogspot.com/

come visit me.

Bush in Georgia: Not So Far Over There

2005-05-10T20:45:00.000-07:00

Diogenes said that hope was the dream of a waking man. Is there not some parallel to be found in the spirit of the awakening nations? Is it not good that the United States is the paradigm to which the stirring nations aspire?

Is it not better that it is our plain spoken representative is welcomed in emerging countries? And is it not best that we take away from their welcome a remembrance that we were like them and have reawakened with their example and with our own reflection in their eyes?

Mr. Bush once again demonstrates that plain speech has great value, or as Solomon put it, "An honest answer is like a kiss on the mouth."

Much has been made of Arabic islands of democracy because of the fighting, but consider the serenic islands where diplomacy and good comradeship develops in places like Georgia, Ukraine, Latvia. The former SSRs will be the carriers of freedom and democracy in eastern Europe.

Texans know about down home politics. Our history is rife with it. Who better than Mr. Bush, a Texan, to convey it?

The Chavez Ravine

2005-05-07T09:48:00.000-07:00

Nothing is what it appears to be, it is always something else.

Chavez' unionization gambit is nothing more than an attempt to gather a census of his potential enemies, the middle class households of Venezuela. When he finishes, he will have every name he needs to clamp down harder and to solidify his reach into the homes of those who can turn on him.

Chavez is clever. He has used a more enticing approach than gun registration, and he has played to the insecurities of his countryfolk.

This guy is one evil and greedy despot whose every move is calculated to gain power by whatever subterfuge.

Surprises me that you didn't see immediately that Chavez is a long range thinker, and this idea of his is brilliant, not to mention devious.

Immediate future plans probably include a long runway airbase and an alliance with Castro for an air threat in the southern gulf plus a sub rosa contract with the drug lords of northern South America.

Just like in Grenada, it's all about hang time and money, and we'd better get hip to it sooner rather than later.

Why Hitchens Rooting Against the Religious Right is an Error

2005-05-05T09:39:00.000-07:00

This essayist, much esteemed by me personally, is quite wrong if he sees a large and growing Religious Right as a threat. It is none of the above. What he sees is merely a perception much ballyhooed by a fearful elite press, of which he is a member, so he should certainly know better than to believe the hype. The fringe always gets the ink.

As a practicing Christian, I disagree with any law regarding such personal issues as abortion or homosexuality. These are personal choices, and so what if I think they are sins? They are matters best settled between the individuals and their deity. It is, however, galling to be asked to pay taxes for the action or result of these personal matters. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

The "crusading right" is a marketing device exactly like any protest, and it's as American as apple pie. There is much to be said for the supreme wisdom of the American people. We eventually get it right. If the Christians have a say, it won't come from a monolithic construction of a few noisy hardliners, it'll come from decent, thoughtful folks who go to work every day, bring home a paycheck, watch their world, and vote for what they want.

True republican democracy is designed so that the will of the people is done by their representatives. Sometimes it takes a while to get it right. The good of our people depends on all kinds of opinions being aired, the religious as well as the secularists. Don't worry, Christopher, this is not Salem. You face more danger from the liberals than from the Christians. We like you. Good thinking is hard to find...on either side.

Shame the Obstructionists

2005-04-27T17:00:00.000-07:00

Champions are determined this way: you can win by one point, it's still a win. The champions are the ones who can capitalize on a one point win.

The Republican leadership has been far too sensitive to their counterparts. Forget calling it the "nuclear option." I much prefer "doomsday for the Democrats."

Thirty year old battles like abortion rights, civil rights, trumped up voting irregularities are smoke screens sent up by a lazy and irresponsible press. They are emotional subterfuge for soap opera addicted pols, and the people who dole it out, like Kennedy, Byrd, Boxer, Reed should just go away.

Frist should engineer a major humiliation for his opponents, and if he can't figure it out, I hear DeLay has some experience in just this kind of thing. Maybe they should chat.

Kerry's Attack on Christians

2005-04-22T20:27:00.000-07:00

Kerry succeeds in deminishing his ignorance quotient below that of Boxer when he links the religious community with the Darfur situation. He does not remember or realize that it was the evangelicals who first drew attention to the murders, as they did to the slave children of mid Africa, the slaughter in Rwanda, the Liberian and Ivory Coast oppression.

I have not taken the time to provide documentary support in the form of old news releases and URLs but if my memory serves me well, somewhere in the dark crevices, I seem to recall that it was a Jesuit who first called attention to Rwanda. Could be wrong, but you get the idea, and your resources for morgue-crawling are far better than mine

Let it be understood by one and all: the UN did not call the public ear because its legendary cowardice would not bear the embarrassment of public scrutiny, it was the Christians who brought out stories and made a lazy press notice, however superficially. The United States Congress took virtually no action, the extant administration sat on its hands because they felt an emasculated President lacked the moral authority to move with potency.

All this talk of the religious right's hijacking of the government is nonsense. Since Day One, minus several years, it has been the religious of this country who have called for fairness and mercy. It was the Baptists who insisted on payment to the natives for land. It was the Methodists who breathed life into universities. It was the religious Christians who called for an end to slavery.

The religious fell away from government in the period following Richard Nixon, and the religious have paid the price in small tariffs every day. Now the price has been deemed too steep, and they take a pro-active position.

Is this a bad thing? Maybe yes, maybe no, but the crux of the matter boils down to its origin. The religious of this country are once again ready to shoulder the burden of being the conscience of a magnificent and diverse people, and, contrary to gigantic opinion, it is the right thing to do.

Can the task be resumed? Surely. Remember, it started with one guy.

Bush Perserveres

2005-04-11T21:51:00.000-07:00

Perserverance in the war in Iraq signals not only the resolve of the President, it is an affirmation of the de-centralization of power from the Beltway. The election of this Chief Executive was a seizure of moral authority embodied in a man closer to his constituents, the people who work in the outlands where truth and steadiness are valued.

High minds, the theoretical geniuses who think they own politics, bear responsibility for the Somalian debacle and other political disasters like the marooning of the Shi'ites in the early nineties, the desertion of the Shah, the non-response to the first attack on WTC.

Typical of the overthinkers who still populate positions of sway at State and at Langley, the elite swapped out human indignation for transactional-lite management and containment. And Americans stood for it because the status quo was comfortable and non-invasive.

The Internet and proliferation of news sources forever changed that attitude when war came to our shores again, and again we were annealed and tempered into into the tough stock of an awakened people who will fight.

The President's staying power rests in the factories and fields of the country. If he is wise he will listen to that constituency.

Mr. Bush became the President of the People in a classroom on 9/11. His oath of office was sworn at WTC a few days later. He best not forget it.

He knows who we are, and we know who he is.

His detractors best not forget that, either.

Intelligence? Really.

2005-04-05T17:35:00.000-07:00

Get Down and Dirty

All this high-minded discussion of the intelligence failures and future deficits is really fun to read, and the Beltway midriff dithering sounds "oh, so important," but it obscures the real questions, ergo real answers about what to do.

Does anyone remember the treasure trove of information dredged up from beneath the fallen Iron Curtain? Specifically, does anyone remember that the Soviets were much further along in atomic weapons, space technology, espionage capability than we ever had a clue?

It's terrific that middle management hacks and ideologue caseworkers are leaving, but are other ideologues replacing them?

What is needed, besides a wise oracle to oversee and collate the information into something usable, is a team of dirty, rotten scoundrels who will figure out what the enemy will odds-on do, and get the horsepower to listen.

Contrary to congressional and bureaucratic opinion, espionage and intelligence are not Girl Scout merit badges.

CIA's real problem

2005-03-01T22:38:00.000-08:00

To find the problems in the intelligence gathering ability of the CIA, one need look no further than the vision and imagination of those in charge. The agency's decline began with the Kennedy administration, was accelerated under Carter, and was ultimately laid to rest under Clinton.

CPR was performed under the guidance and connections of Bill Casey, but the organization was already so terminally ill, it barely survived through Bush the elder. Congressional stupidity allowed the "Company" to wander around, trying to find itself, and in the end it was hiring practices that doomed the mission.

To borrow from vernacular, the people who work there are are so unhip, it's amazing they know what to do with a paycheck. I have seen and heard Mahle, and she actually said she believed some of the "brightest and best" were passed over and even let go in the latest purge. Where have we heard that phrase ere now? The "brightest and best" have not served us well.

Take a look at the recruitment-for-hire practices. Who gets hired but the products of a liberal arts education from American universities and colleges? These are the first tier types. Second tier are ex-military. Talk about trackable records.

In this arena, war dogs are better than academicians, but it is possible that because of high minded hiring parameters, the real champions lurk in more well rounded venues.

The hubris has been misidentified. It lurks not in the job mindset, it hides in the attitude of fairness and in a respect for book learning...education. The old boy network was so busy becoming an old everybody network, as long as everybody was educated in college or military, that the real job became secondary. Political correctness and an overripe reverence for upper level learning made the agency vulnerable.

The agency needs people smart in computers, literature, policy, but it could sure use some hard scrabble people reminiscent of Wild Bill's crew at OSS. Make no mistake, the terrorists are fairly sophisticated, but they are no match for the hip street fighters of the United States...if they're found, hired, and heard.

One good bad boy who belongs to us is worth twenty well intentioned school boys.

Maybe Porter Goss will figure this out, but it is doubtful. He is too well liked in Washington circles to kick this can down the road. Job requirement number one is a big imagination. After that, it's complete overhaul of field agent staff.

Time grows short, he'd better get a move on.

The real reasons for the Wilson/Plame affair

2005-02-22T22:57:00.000-08:00

The entire affair smacks of the kind of discrediting midlevel operatives once did under the previous administration. This thing looks more and more like an underhanded smear to get at White House staff.

It's an open secret that entrenched (read that tenured) careerists did not like the idea of a Bush presidency. It was, or is, the identical situation at State. How better to lock down an effective administration than to discredit a top and valuable advisor?

If the idea seems implausible, cast an eye toward the recent "fuzzy face" interviews currently floating in local media. Under the guise of self protection, unidentified desk personnel regret they cannot tell their names, but two in the last few days surfaced with tap lines so similar they appear to have come from the same laptop user. Since the Wilson/Plame affair didn't gain traction, it is believed an undercover and intense "concern for the agency" might not skid.

These people are not kidding. They may be operating out of real concern, but a more accurate appraisal might be that they are just angry at the loss of a corporate ideology that no longer works. Whether it's one or the other, or something more malevolent, the situation imperils all of us.

The idea that the same old ways and same old people were good enough was disproven on a bright September day in 2001. It is said that "some of the best and brightest" have left Langley because politics have entered into the way business is done, but a clearer picture might be that the politics were always there, as was hubris.

Too bad the press isn't up to speed on it.

California Dreams On

2005-02-22T20:11:00.000-08:00

When California became the "Mommie State," it ceased to be a market for free ideas, and worse, the state murdered its own free enterprise system on a slow drip of counter-productive regulatory measures.

It didn't happen overnight. I was here. I witnessed the death of a thousand cuts.

It started with the constant hand-out attitude in education, and we citizens of the Golden State, figured "what the hell, it's for the kids and for the future," so we said "okay" and let education milk off money for infrastructure. But that wasn't the end. Nope. The next venue was welfare. They said "hey, we can't let people walk around poor, for goodness' sake," and we said "y'know? You're right. We can't let people walk around poor," and a little more money was drained off like fat in a pot of gravy.

Then, medical care popped up its ugly little head. and they said "look, we can't let people walk around sick, for God's sake," and we said "right you are, we can't let people walk around sick," and a little more money got siphoned off.

It was actually all right with us, and it might have worked really well, but a curious thing happened on the way to a terrific system: somebody went to court and complained that the screening process that limited access to the programs to state residents was declared unfair, and voila' the system went to overload with out of staters.

Not only that, somebody else went to court and got a declaration that allowed illegal aliens access to the same privileges as residents. Funding then became a matter of deciding which of the three privileges got more, which got less.

Concurrent with the aforementioned moves, the political community had not ignored business, they simply milked the cow with a stronger hand, all in the name of the future and the kids...and objectors were shouted down, or worse, were ignored by power brokers and the news media. There was not one voice of reasoned objection and intelligently couched opposition. It just sort of seeped in like a slow motion mudslide.

This is not a rant against illegal aliens, I interpose, but it is a description of how we let the system fail.

If we look at the system as an economic model without the money clouding our view, we find California population in a condition of inflation....too many people seeking too few services that have no chance of funding.

Dr. Hansen is astute in his observations on the California decline, but his prescription is not wholistic in approach. Arnold notwithstanding, the corpus is close to dilecti, and this one needs heroic measures to bring it back to life.

Two of the problems can be solved at one time if the Governor issues simultaneously a directive and a challenge, and it will take ninety days to get it moving. The directive should order immediate higher fees to out of state, out of country applicants. It should order immediate study to build a total of three more medical schools with an educational capacity equal to UCLA's. The effect of more doctors, nurses and staff would be immediate. Even the prospect would be of value.

There are many qualified teachers for these institutions, but should there not be as many applicants as jobs, the out of staters and out of country-ers could be offered a trade of tuition decreases for service guarantees of six months' teaching per year of studentship. This could end up being the paradigm for the nation.

The co-ordinated challenge he might offer could be to a partnership of insurance companies and philanthropic bodies to come up with ways to produce tiered medical care facilities in a consortium of privately and publicly entities.

Adding this structure to the existing health care outlets would drive costs down and would enhance care.

If there are not enough hospials and care givers, then produce more. It's called free market mentality.

In re: welfare. This will take political and visceral courage, but it has to be done. The Governor should make it known that out of state, out of country applicants will be unable to apply after ninety days from his declaration. The words should be "don't even bother," but in this case, as well, he should issue a challenge to NGOs to prepare to take up the slack. He should work quickly to improve tax credits for donations to said NGOs.

Then, he should get out of the way.

As for infrastructure, the State should establish an open forum, staffed from the Governor's office, and start taking ideas and tossing meritable concepts back out to the public. The folks would dump the dumb ones and promote the good ones.

California, Los Angeles and San Francisco, in particular, are about as corrupt as they've been in sixty years. Apparently, this is the cycle of west coast life, but it doesn't have to be. Throw the doors and windows wide open, let the sunshine in to clean up the mold.

And by the way, it wouldn't hurt to have a less lazy press to ferret out the good guys, bad guys, good ideas, bad ideas, and provoke some discussion....or even down and dirty argument.

Pain is the only way out of this one.

Rethinker

CIA wonks on the offensive

2005-02-22T20:07:00.000-08:00

Just a note to let you know that the inept middle management, dismissed or frozen out with the advent of Porter Goss, is on the move in an ill advised attempt to denigrate Bush and current American policy in Iran.

Last night on KNBC 4 News Colleen Williams did a "fuzzy face" interview with a supposed ex section chief on the Iran desk at Langley who trashed the administration on intelligence from that country. The interview was followed up with a review of the vitaes of the case worker who apparently served with the spot's producer at the agency. She was not identified by name or image.

Over the weekend, a twenty-something caseworker ran on Booknotes, or its equivalent, on CSPAN.

Curiously, both women said exactly the same sentence which described the situation, saying that some of the best case workers had left the agency lately in disagreement with new policy.

Here's what I believe is happening:

The disgruntled, and probably, inept ex-agents are being managed. They are starting small and local to see if they can get traction ala the Swiftees.

If they get non skid, they'll go larger.

In a response to an Online Journal column, I called for a top to bottom clean out at CIA. Apparently, Goss and the Prez were way out front on the issue, and it is happening, but it ain't gonna be easy because of the egos and reps involved. It's a huge game of CYA at CIA that's being played out in local press.

I further believe these people are in on the Negroponte put downs.

Expect this one to go incredibly nasty in a week or so.

Prescience is usually based on history....these guys are good at it, and their learning curve is steep.

Rethinker

Re: The Incredible Shrinking Dems

2005-01-01T10:00:00.000-08:00

As delightful as Mr. Bush's victory, and so many Republicans' wins were, the problem of "political-speak" remains the primary impediment to real success. While the President connects on a visceral level, he still falls victim to the Democrats' ability to frame the issues to their benefit, hence he is foeced to respond with similarly couched rhetoric.

Mr. Bush allows himself the identical vehicles of speech when he should reframe the argument in his own common sense language. For example, abortion is not the issue, it never has been. The issue was always birth control, but no one asked the question properly. Another example, Irag's weapons of mass destruction was one sixth of the war rationale. Genocide of the Kurds, imprisonment of children, women's rights, regional war-fostering, international bribery, and general homicide were the real reasons, but did our Man in the White House hammer them home?

Mr. Bush's pick for DOD is pummeled right, left, and center, and once again, the response is short and resolute, but not set down in memorable terms. The same has happened with the court appointments and will continue until somebody in the White House resets the talk button on the main mike.

Border control is underway, as is illegal entrant foreclosure, but someone has to explain fully the hows and whys in Presidential terms. And now with the Tsunami induced awfulness and potential collapse of foreign markets, our national policies have a slender window of opportunity to press America's propensity for plain old goodness to the people of non-aligned and enimical regimes like never before in history. This could make pale any other humanitaran effort.

Mr. Bush is a terrific CEO. He decides, he acts, he follows through, but he consistently fails to beat America's drum loud enough for the world to hear it, either on the international front or in his own back yard.

A good job is always trumpeted and resold on a daily basis. After all, the guy we hired works for us, and we could sure use better reports. We're not ever going to get them from Old Gray Media. Every problem mentioned in this missive is a ninety day problem, save perhaps the Indian Ocean tragedy. Our President knows that, but unless he moves his home front ground troops into action, the Democrats and their allies in the press will keep hectoring until they find the niche they need to erode his support.

Mr. Bush needs to find a new venue from which to speak first. The standard way doesn't get the job done. Then, he needs to use his own voice to reframe the agenda, asking the right questions to Americans. If he wants a groundswell, he has to get right down on it...the ground, that is.

Re: God and Good Government

2005-01-01T09:57:00.000-08:00

How absurd it is that our military must parse from its conversation or reportage any reference to the Lord lest it be taken as a reference to the crusades. It does not appear that the followers of Allah were anywhere in sight to defend when the Taliban had its collective foot on the Afghani neck, nor did they deign to show up when Saddam, et al, were busy imprisoning ten year olds, tossing citizens into chippers, and stealing girls off the streets.

Why on earth should we worry about a simple statement of faith when these cowards can only rise to bullying of the weak and unarmed? Our people obey the Lord by daring to help when no one else will, and we find that many of our staunchest allies respond under the same rigeur.

There is no sense in masking it. We know, for fact, that eight Christians lived in Afghanistan prior to the invasion, unforgettably daring missionaries. Their reports stated clearly that they actively prayed on behalf of the nation. With the invasion, arguably two thirds of the force were believers, ergo the presence of Christians vaulted ten-thousandfold overnight. Pretty interesting. The current force in Iraq could number as many as 100,000 Christians who daily do the Lord's work.

Islamics are not stupid, they see it firsthand, and they must wonder why the boots aren't talking about it. The Lord said He would write His law on men's hearts, should we not state what we so readily observe?

Maybe the Iraqis will ask. What then?

In warfare, nothing is what it seems...

2004-12-12T14:21:00.000-08:00

It's always something else.

Are you wondering if there's more than meets the eye in the current ground conflict in Iraq?

I know I am.

Why are so many foreign fighters filtering into the country to become cannon fodder? Are they so stupid that they actually believe in jihad? Granted, some do, but there's more going on there than misplaced duty to Allah and attempts to cast out the infidels. AQ and the rest are not idiots.

No, there may well be something else on their minds, and it involves a defensive tactic rather than an offensive strategy.

I'll say at the outset that I remain convinced there are weapons of mass destruction still in country. Aside from the huge caches of conventional arms, which indeed are of value to the jihadists, it defies wisdom to believe everything was a dream, everything was spirited out to Syria, or everything was a piece of an elaborate ruse to scare local enemies.

As they said in "X-Files," something's out there.

It can be postulated that the jihadists' real strategy has several long term missions. First, they want to engage on soil that has easy access to sympathetic nations. They want to hit and run, use local maleable, gullible talent as pawns to keep foreign eyes off other playing fields. Facing off the U.S. and allies is not a primary goal, but it is effective in keeping the cause alive on international television.

Second, the enemy needs time to fortify in other prospective battle theaters. This is probably being done, but it is only a continuation of existing policy. Nothing new here. The Phillipines, Indonesia, Iran, Turkey, even Spain, have become staging areas for future conflagration. But this plan was born over a decade ago.

Third, the jihadists are leveraging everything they have to spread their influence in Palestine. Far from current thinking, the death of Arafat is not an opening for peace overtures. It is the opposite. The nasty little murderer's passing only sharpened the appetite of the PLO and its offshoots for the destruction of Israel.

So, what has all this got to do with the astounding "defense of Fallujah, Tikrit, et al" in Iraq? As far as AQ is concerned, not much, because what they fight for is far more precious to them than the other issues above described.

They are fighting for the teeny-tiny little bunkers that contain the weapons which make them very large in the world arena.

An aide to Bibi Netanyahu, Dore (wish I could remember his whole name), showed up on CSPAN yesterday talking about weapons being developed by Saddam, and he coughed up some truly disturbing information about a chemical/biological weapon that has no immediate symptom when released, but it produced liver cancer in the target population as many as seven years down the road. He said they were producing it in Iraq for years.

How much storage space does it occupy? About the same volume as a '65 VW Bug. And it could take out a city the size of Des Moines. One lab the size of a furnitue warehouse could produce enough to equip 100 under cover agents for a year. If they brought it in Thermos bottles, in six months there would be adequate supply to launch a concerted attack in a year.

Remember, theses people are patient, methodical, and cunning. With our open borders, this tactic is literally a walk in the desert. (I intend a column on the border issue within a week.)

To return to the defensive manuevering of AQ in Iraq, it is almost a no brainer if you consider the real facts in country. There is simply no reason for the AQ to waste so much physical capital unless there were quantifiable assets to protect. None. Remember, they are patient, methodical, and cunning.

If one grants that, indeed, the weapons are there in Iraq, then how can they be found? Here is where the enemy made a mistake and continues to make it as days pass. They mass and defend near the point of entry.

We see today the re-infiltration of "insurgents" into Fallujah. The same goes for other areas where the enemy can ill afford casuaties, but they sacrifice many.

How do we find the bunkers short of a nuclear hole in the world?

To be sure, somebody's already thought of this, but let's say for the purposes of this column, they haven't, so there can be some over the top discussion.

We haven't yet found the right answer because no one's asked the right question. What's the right question? How do we find bunkers made before the advent of hi-rez satellite cameras?

The United States leads the world in its oil exploration technology. It's actually pretty neat. There is a process of sending a pulse into the ground, picking up its echo on geophones, feeding the data back into a computer thereby producing a three dimensional image of what exists far below the surface. They used to use it, probably still do, for spotting repository domes of crude as far down as two miles.

The technology exists, and the hardware can fit into a C133 hold with room to spare. Said hardware consists of a pulse truck and a data retrieval vehicle. The pulse truck houses a Mercury filled foot that taps the ground, creating the vibration that penetrates the crust to an enormous depth. It also carries the hundreds of geophones that listen for the bounce-back vibration apres surge.

The second truck houses the computer and printers that analyze the data from the pickups. It produces a solid geometry image of what's out of sight.

My view of this is ten or more years' old, so I am positive the engineering has jumped forward, but it existed before, why wouldn't it now?

There would be tremendous tactical implications, but the results would surely produce ancillary intelligence we need. Like, if the equipment got really close, it would be subject to interventional assault which is, of itself, good intelligence.

Discovery of weapons of mass destruction would show the world just how dangerous Saddam was, and it would put the lie to the efficacy of Islamic jihad.

Coming soon:
A border policy solution that would actually work in the current framework of political reality.
Is a contract a contract when applied to the National Guard and the Reserve?

Rethinker

-30-