Quantum Kitty

Bailouts, Handouts, and Screwing America.

2008-11-15T20:06:00.008-07:00

When a majority of people are receiving a handout from their government, they will vote for the candidate that continues the gravy train. This constituency will continue to exist as parasites on their host country and will never rise above sustenance level. Of course sustenance level in the West means that you have a car, cable, a house, and enough food to become obese...

Americans who get the goodies don't want to notice the flaw because they're the comfortable with the American dream version of poverty. Those in the Democrat party rely on the humanity's innate laziness and recognize that exploiting that human trait makes people dependent on he who offers the most goodies. A dependent constituency will continue to vote in favor of the gravy train and that, in turn, gives job security to the powers-that-be!

Just for some perspective:

During the presidential election campaign many were dumbfounded upon hearing for the first time that at least a third of Americans pay no income taxes whatsoever. The Tax Foundation notes that in 2006, 45.6 million filers (33%) paid no income tax whatsoever. Under current law, in 2009 47 million filers--representing approximately 96 million individuals-- will pay no income tax.

The Foundation maintains that under Obama's tax plan 63 million filers-- representing 44% of all returns-- will pay no income tax. In contrast, in 1985, just 16.5% of filers paid no income tax.

It appears Obama wasn't kidding about redistributing the wealth, although he appears to be somewhat late to the game.

At the other end of the spectrum, IRS data show that in 2006 the top 10% of all filers ($109,000 and above in taxable income) paid 71% of all income taxes. The top 25% ($65,000 and above) paid 86% of all income taxes.

So, 44% of the population will not pay a dime and will actually get money back with Obama's plan...The top earners and virtually every small business will be taxed at 39% (from 36%) until 2010. In 2010, everybody's taxes will go up another 3% minimum, totaling 42% on every business or individual making more than $109k. With a tax rate like that, I think we can kiss a lot more jobs goodbye! Obama's tax break of $1000 for every job a company keeps in the US doesn't even come close to covering the minimum of $7500 increase on a company's existing tax obligation. Every smart business will relocate to a more tax friendly country.

That's bad, but worse comes when you start to realize the rest of the agenda being pushed by congress and Obama. The card-check legislation will be pushed through giving the unions the power to intimidate employees into voting them into existence in previously non-union shops. That will increase corporate costs exponentially and scare any new foreign investors and companies from coming to the US to do business. It will also be added incentive for existing companies operating the the US to move out ASAP.

Unions are a poison to business and kill a company's viability. For example, look at what the unions have done to Ford.

According to the latest calculations, the gap between Japanese and American carmakers' profits average out to about $2900 per vehicle, and the home team does not have the advantage.

A big reason is the cost of labor. As analyzed by Harbour-Felax, labor costs the Detroit Three substantially more per vehicle than it does the Japanese.

Health care is the biggest chunk. GM (Charts), for instance spends $1,635 per vehicle on health care for active and retired workers in the U.S. Toyota (Charts) pays nothing for retired workers - it has very few - and only $215 for active ones.

Other labor costs add to the bill. Contract issues like work rules, line relief and holiday pay amount to $630 per vehicle - costs that the Japanese don't have. And paying UAW members for not working when plants are shut costs another $350 per vehicle.

Here's one example of how knotty Detroit's labor problem can be:

If an assembly plant with 3,000 workers has no dealer orders, it has two options. One is to close the plant for a week and not build any cars. Then the company still has to give the idled workers 95 percent of their take-home pay plus all benefits for not working. So a one-week shutdown costs $7.7 million or $1,545 for each vehicle it didn't make.

Talk about a good gig! In addition to the paid vacation the company gives you when they have to shut down the plant, if you're ever laid off or have your position eliminated, you get to join the 'Job Bank.'

The Jobs Bank was set up by mutual agreement between U.S. automakers and the United Auto Workers union to protect workers from layoffs. Begun in the mid-1980s, the program is being tapped by thousands of workers. Many of those receiving checks do community service work or take courses. Others sit around, watching movies or doing crossword puzzles -- all while making $26 an hour or

The Big Three automakers agreed to the system to protect union workers from outsourcing and technology. But with Ford and General Motors losing money in North America -- and contract negotiations due in 2007 -- the future of the unique program is uncertain. [THANK GOD!]

Now, don't forget, congress is currently trying to use the $700 billion tax dollars (finance sector's bail-out cash) to bail these horrendously run companies out...Government sponsored corporate welfare.

Pelosi said any aid to the automakers would come with conditions. She didn't specify the level of assistance she supports, but said it should come from the $700 billion Congress authorized the Treasury to use to help stabilize the financial services industry. Pelosi said she is tapping House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank to write the legislation that may be considered as early as next week.

I can guarantee you that the 'conditions' will be to make cars that suck and nobody wants to buy. Further, I can guarantee you that if congress invests that much money into the automotive manufacturing industry, then you can bet they'll start taxing and regulating the foreign cars -cars manufactured in the US and making a profit like Toyota- and force them out of business. New legislation will artificially inflate the prices of cars Toyota makes and ultimately create thousands more jobless Americans as Toyota et al are forced to close down (more people added to the dole constituency).

The lack of availability and competition will force us to buy some piece of crap car; manufactured with sub-par labor, to government specification. Forget about buying a car that's built to the specifications in demand (SUV's: bye, bye). I'm sure CAFE standards will come into play and manufacturers will be forced to build light weight cars with more plastic and aluminum than steel and highway deaths will sky-rocket (gotta love unintended consequences of Democrat policies).

Then, we have Barney Freakin' Frank in charge of the legislation...the guy most responsible for preventing oversight into Freddie and Fannie is in charge of writing the legislation distributing billions of dollars to the automotive manufacturing industry. This is the same guy that was
screwing a male lobbyist working for Fannie Mae. So the ever-ethical Frank was on the House Banking Committee and screwing their lobbyist. I think that qualifies as a conflict of interest!!! Meanwhile, Fannie was giving him boatloads of cash for his campaigns and together, they were screwing America.

Meanwhile, the WoT goes on...What will Obama do?

2008-11-15T19:29:00.007-07:00

Now that the US elections are over, Islamic Militants can get back to business as usual.

Bomb attacks kill 8, wound dozens across Iraq

Spate of Iraq attacks leaves 23 dead

These stories don't qualify as anything: 'Test' worthy; rather, they are more along the lines of 'wear on the will of the American People.' Stories like this (especially when US casualties are kept to a minimum and can be used in favor of the "leave 'em to their civil war" narrative) will serve to confirm Obama's policy of withdrawal -regardless of conditions on the ground. An Obama friendly media - "I want to do everything I can to make this thing work"; Chris Matthews- will cover for any atrocities that may be committed once the troops are pulled out. Sixty percent of the American population won't even know if a genocide ensues after we pull out. Of course, that makes it all the more disgusting to think of the 40% of the population who are informed and vote Democrat. They'll be aware -at least on a base level- of their complicity in any atrocities committed as a result of our pulling out before Iraq's fledgling government was deemed capable of handling the combined influence of Iran and Syria. They'll know just like they knew about the killing fields and the slaughter of the Vietnamese Boat People after Democrats forced a premature pull-out of Vietnam following a horrendously run war.

Now, for context, you should remember our President Elect's former adviser Rob Malley was forcibly retired from the campaign just prior to news releases regarding his meetings with Hamas. Malley's job was "to meet with all sorts of savory and unsavory people and report on what they say." He's never denied who he's met with; it's just what he does...

The more things change, the more they stay the same...Recently,
Hamas says they've met Obama advisors in Gaza:

smail Haniyeh's political advisor says Islamist group met with US president-elect's aides in Strip following online correspondence; 'they told us not to come out with any statements so as not to harm Obama's campaign,' Ahmad Yousuf says. "We were in contact with a number of Obama's aides through the Internet, and later met with some of them in Gaza, but they advised us not to come out with any statements, as they may have a negative effect on his election campaign and be used by Republican candidate John McCain (to attack Obama)," Yousuf said in an interview with London-based Arabic-language newspaper Al-Hayat, published Tuesday

Now, I like to remain critical of stories like this, and indeed, there is a report of a report I was able to find in WND's article: Hamas 'in crisis' after report of Obama-aide meetings

in a well-circulated but false report, the Xinhua-China news agency claimed Hamas released a statement yesterday denying it held any meetings with Obama advisers.

I couldn't find the original Xinhua-China news agency story...

Barack has a history of shady associations
Barack is tight with Khalidi -who served as a mouthpiece for Yassar Arafat.
Barack has reversed positions on Israel multiple times.
Barack tried to negotiate a delayed pull out of Iraq -despite his immediate pull out rhetoric to his base.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.

Obama may come out and tell us what he's going to do, but I don't think we can trust him...

NYT Releasing State Secrets...Again...

2008-11-10T19:34:00.003-07:00

When it comes to undermining US national security for a story, nobody brokers secrets like the New York Times...

WASHINGTON — The United States military since 2004 has used broad, secret authority to carry out nearly a dozen previously undisclosed attacks against Al Qaeda and other militants in Syria, Pakistan and elsewhere, according to senior American officials.

To which I reply: GOOD!!!!! Followed up with: If the US hadn't been carrying out covert attacks against Al Qaeda, then our administration has been derelict in their duty to protect (preemptively) the US.

I haven't looked for the left's reaction to this story, but I'm sure I don't really need to...I'm quite certain there will be hand wringing, general condemnation, a reinvigorated impeachment movement, and a continued loathing for the methods and tactics necessary to fight terrorism that has kept us free from attack for seven years.

I can't wait until we hear Obama's response to this program and his spin...I can guarantee you that he's gritting his teeth -pissed- that this story even came out. I am 100% positive that he would have liked to continue this program and would have preferred for it to be kept on the Down Low...Now, he's going to have to find a scape-goat that can be properly crucified for his bases' consumption. My bet is on Gates once it becomes known that he agreed to the deal after taking over for Rumsfeld.

Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa

2008-11-10T17:40:00.003-07:00

It has been a long time since I posted due to political disillusionment, burnout and a general dissatisfaction with the Republican candidate selected for us by the media and party elitists -who believe more in winning than standing on principle. It is very difficult to fight the ideological battles that I am compelled to fight when my 'Party Leader' has more in common with the opposition than with me.

It was a true struggle for me to pull the lever in McCain's favor -the lesser of two evils- but I did though I struggled mightily to do it. Palin's pragmatism and lack of political insider taint is what actually brought me over from write-in to pulling in favor of the McCain / Palin ticket. The funny thing is, the argument Liberals used in an attempt to harm McCain ('she's a heartbeat away from the presidency') was the greatest incentive for me to vote McCain!

When PA went blue, I predicted McCain would lose. It was bizarre, because I thought I should feel disappointed, or angry, or something...crazily, I felt relieved. I was relieved he didn't win and I don't have to feel guilty for anything he might have done -as president- in my name. I was relieved because I didn't want responsibility for the legalization of 10-20 million illegal immigrants. I was relieved that the devastation of our economy through Cap & Trade legislation would not be realized by a Republican president. I was relieved that the march to socialism would not continue under a Republican leadership. I am discouraged and afraid of our future under Obama and his leftist, rubber-stamp congress; but I have hope that the kernel of conservatism will live on and, with reform, it can still have a home in the Republican party.

Our nation has diverged from the principles laid down by our founding fathers. Despite their prescience and understanding of human nature codified and put down in the Constitution, we have managed to weasel around their safeguards and are quickly approaching a society that is an anathema to their original plan. We are well on our way to serfdom and if the majority of Americans don't wake up to the realities of collectivist ideology and and where it inevitably leads, we will find ourselves slaves to the state.

I'm going to make a sincere effort to post more often and will attempt to put into words all of that which has led to my own disillusionment. I'm making this commitment in the hopes that we, as a nation, can forestall or prevent the bleak future that I foresee. I'm going to do this as an outlet for me to vent my angst, form and understand my philosophy (and how it relates to conservatism in general), and to regain and share hope in our nation's resilience in the face of a massive and concerted effort to resign our freedom in favor of a perceived security.

Googlebombing Obama: First Wave [shamelessly stolen from RWN]

2008-02-26T07:43:00.003-07:00

* Guess whose mentor is a Communist? Obama, that's who!

* Why isn't Obama patriotic enough to hold his hand over his heart for the Star Spangled banner?

* What has Obama got against flag pins?

* Obama wants to give away 845 billion dollars of your money to ungrateful Third World countries.

* Who loves to hang around with terrorists? Obama, that's who!

* Do people even know why they're voting for Obama?

* Che Guevara and Obama.

* Texas state Senator Kirk Watson can't name a single thing Obama has ever achieved.

* Obama wants to waste 850 billion dollars of your money.

* Here are 8 things you need to know about Obama and Rezko.

My Fellow Americans...

2008-02-06T10:10:00.000-07:00

Anger brings out my fatalistic side...

The party has spoken and conservative ideals along with capitalism are finally about to be slain! This cruel and vicious system promoting a meritocracy will finally die in favor of a more sensitive system -needs testing America.

Illegal immigrants, come join the party. You deserve the fruits of American prosperity as it was created with your hard work and at the expense of your home countries. You are welcome to come work in the American Breadbasket to bring the world food. We have roads that must be built, children needing care, ditches to be dug and lawns in need of trimming. Come work in our gardens and receive free education, health care, and social services. Your honorable work shall be the backbone of our new America. Your needs at the forefront of our mind as the epitome of a working class immigrant scratching out a living with nothing more than the strength of your body and the pureness of your spirit.

Entrepreneurs and small business owners, you need to close up shop and join with the nationalized version of your enterprise. The unfair atmosphere of competition you have engendered in this country is now at an end. It's time for you to give up your windfall profits to those in need. You can replace that profit with a sense of patriotism and relish the good will of your fellow man as you help to pick up those less fortunate or less ambitious, or less able, or less industrious, or less motivated, or less intelligent, or less driven, or less talented basically less rich than you...

Middle Class workers, if you curry favor and toe the new line, you can move up in society and pick the fruits of high society. We're going to raise your taxes, but we'll be providing you with so many more services. You should think of it as helping out the poor with every extra dollar you give. You will be required to stay with your job and your company will be required to keep you...you'll never have to worry about being unemployed again! Unless, of course, work has become too stressful and is deemed hazardous to your overall mental health. In that case, you'll still be able to receive the care that is your right...

America is a rich nation and we shall use that wealth to cure all the ailments capitalism has created and will strive to level the playing field here at home and abroad. Together, we will solve poverty, feed the hungry and cure the sick. No child will ever be without equal medical coverage.

No person will be forced to live with the crippling effects of old age. Euthanasia sites will immediately be opened in conjunction with drive through abortion clinics so no elderly or children need to live without love or in suffering. Mandatory euthanasia will be implemented for all terminal disease to ease the burden of suffering and to free up medical resources for those with greater need and the ability to be rehabilitated.

Thank you my fellow Americans for finally seeing the evils of capitalism and the damage it and free market economics have caused. America will be a beacon to the world showering all with her beatific light and benevolent spirit. Together, we shall make and treat all as equals regardless of the size of one's bank account.

-Madam Presidente Hillary Clinton
and the Unifier: Co-Presidente John McCain.
-excerpted from the letter of John to the Clintonians

Iran 'hoodwinked' CIA over nuclear plans?

2007-12-10T13:48:00.000-07:00

I know I'm obsessed, but liberals usually settle for rewriting history which will hurt future generations, but can be corrected. In the case of the NIE, I believe Left leaning policy makers and the willing press cabal are attempting to rewrite the present and are putting us in grave danger by underestimating Iran.

From the linked article:

British spy chiefs have grave doubts that Iran has mothballed its nuclear weapons programme, as a US intelligence report claimed last week, and believe the CIA has been hoodwinked by Teheran.

The timing of the CIA report has also provoked fury in the British Government, where officials believe it has undermined efforts to impose tough new sanctions on Iran and made an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities more likely.

I would be crushed to see Israel launch an attack on Iran...crushed I tell ya!

More:

The security services in London want concrete evidence to allay concerns that the Islamic state has fed disinformation to the CIA.

good luck with that...conventional wisdom suggests that the CIA buried and destroyed all evidence contrary to their current conclusions...

Cot'd:

The report used new evidence - including human sources, wireless intercepts and evidence from an Iranian defector - to conclude that Teheran suspended the bomb-making side of its nuclear programme in 2003. But British intelligence is concerned that US spy chiefs were so determined to avoid giving President Bush a reason to go to war - as their reports on Saddam Hussein's weapons programmes did in Iraq - that they got it wrong this time.

Huh. Ya think?

UPDATE

Here is another perspective on the NIE report:

Iran may have resumed
nuclear arms program

"Intelligence Brief: NIE Report on Iran's Nuclear Weapons Program"

2007-12-10T06:44:00.000-07:00

Huh...This doesn't sound anything like the spin you hear on the news when they're talking about the NIE...

09 December 2007

he latest U.S. National Intelligence Estimate, released on December 3, confirmed PINR's analyses from 2003 that Iran was likely seeking to acquire nuclear weapons. As PINR stated in 2003, Iran's interest in acquiring nuclear weapons lies in its goal of becoming the dominant state in the Middle East. By gaining a nuclear capability, Iran would have more leverage when dealing with rival countries, such as the United States, Israel and, previously, Iraq. Nuclear weapons would help to solidify regime survival in Tehran, and prevent outside states, such as Israel, from responding effectively to Iranian encroachment in the region.

The NIE, however, also provided information that somewhat contrasted with PINR's 2003 analyses. PINR assessed that the U.S. interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan would hasten Iran's attempts to acquire nuclear weapons, since Tehran would consider itself at an increased threat of a U.S. attack and would want to demonstrate itself as a nuclear power to ward off U.S. attempts at "regime change," one of the Bush administration's policies at the time.

Instead, if the intelligence of the NIE is correct, it demonstrates that Iran halted its program in 2003, likely because it perceived a U.S. attack highly probable and did not want to provide Washington with evidence of a nuclear weapon gambit. Furthermore, in 2003 and early 2004, the situation in Iraq was still relatively stable, and Tehran probably perceived a U.S. attack on its nuclear facilities or government a possibility.

Despite these developments, it is clear that Iran has not shelved its goal of acquiring nuclear weapons. In fact, Tehran may be waiting for an outcome in the Iraq and Afghanistan interventions before deciding on whether to continue its weapons program.

In fact, as PINR stated in October 2003 after Iran responded to international pressure and suspended its uranium enrichment program temporarily, suspending its weapons program does not mean that the country will be unable to acquire nuclear weapons; instead, it allows it to continue upon a nuclear research program, ostensibly for civilian purposes, and at a certain point in the future "could quickly weaponize its nuclear energy program and become a nuclear-armed state." In similar language, the NIE found that "Iranian entities are continuing to develop a range of technical capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons, if a decision is made to do so."

Ahmadinejad declares victory in nuclear dispute

2007-12-05T09:45:00.000-07:00

Update

John Bolton has an op-ed in the Washington Post that's very insightful.

Coulda toldja this would happen!

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad greets his supporters in Ilam province in western Iran

(Mehdi Ghasemi/AP)

President Ahmadinejad was in celebratory mood in Ilam
Nico Hines, Tom Baldwin in Washington and Sheera Claire Frenkel in Jerusalem

President Ahmadinejad declared victory over Washington today after a US intelligence report concluded that the Iranian regime had halted its nuclear weapons programme four years ago.

The White House insisted that the report would not alter the international community’s policy on Iranian nuclear ambitions, but Moscow was quick to point out that there was never any proof Iran was trying to create nuclear weapons.

Mr Ahmadinejad responded to the publication of the report by holding a triumphant rally in Ilam, western Iran, where he addressed the US directly.

“Today, the Iranian nation is victorious but you are empty-handed,” he said.
Related Links

* Iran is still a nuclear threat, says defiant Bush

* Relax? Don't. Iran can still build a bomb

* Neighbours still fear Tehran threat

“If you want to start a new political game, the united Iranian nation will resist you and will not retreat one step from its programme . . . We will continue our nuclear programme and we will not give it up.”

The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) released on Monday appears to have removed the casus belli for an American airstrike against Iran. But President Bush yesterday refused to rule out the prospect of military action and insisted that Iran remained a genuine threat to world peace

In a White House press conference, where he was bombarded with questions about the implications for his own credibility, Mr Bush declared he had seen nothing to change either his own mind or Washington's policy on Iran's nuclear ambitions.

“Iran was dangerous, Iran is dangerous and Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon,” he said.

At his last press conference on October 17 Mr Bush said that anyone “interested in avoiding World War III” should back his efforts to prevent Iran developing a nuclear weapon.

Yesterday, he struck a defiant note, claiming that this week's National Intelligence Estimate should be regarded as a vindication of - and a reason to continue taking - a tough stance towards Tehran.

“I view this report as a warning signal that they had the programme, they halted the programme,” said the President. “The reason why it's a warning signal is they could restart it.”

He has record low approval ratings and increasingly appears a marginalised figure in US politics with his name being mentioned only twice in a two hour Republican presidential debate last week.

STRATFOR BRIEFING

2007-12-04T11:08:00.000-07:00

I'll be writing about and excerpting this very soon...

The NIE Report: Solving a Geopolitical Problem with Iran
By George Friedman

The United States released a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Dec. 3. It said, "We judge with high confidence that in the fall of 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program." It went on to say, "Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005." It further said, "Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to international pressure indicates Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs."

With this announcement, the dynamics of the Middle Eastern region, Iraq and U.S.-Iranian relations shift dramatically. For one thing, the probability of a unilateral strike against Iranian nuclear targets is gone. Since there is no Iranian nuclear weapons program, there is no rationale for a strike. Moreover, if Iran is not engaged in weapons production, then a broader air campaign designed to destabilize the Iranian regime has no foundation either.

The NIE release represents a transformation of U.S. policy toward Iran. The Bush administration made Iran's nuclear weapons program the main reason for its attempt to create an international coalition against Iran, on the premise that a nuclear-armed Iran was unacceptable. If there is no Iranian nuclear program, then what is the rationale for the coalition? Moreover, what is the logic of resisting Iran's efforts in Iraq, rather than cooperating?

In looking at the report, a number of obvious questions come up. First, how did the intelligence community reach the wrong conclusion in the spring of 2005, when it last released an NIE on Iran, and what changed by 2007? Also, why did the United States reach the wrong conclusions on Iran three years after its program was halted? There are two possible answers. One is intelligence failure and the other is political redefinition. Both must be explored.

Let's begin with intelligence failure. Intelligence is not an easy task. Knowing what is going on inside of a building is harder than it might seem. Regardless of all the technical capabilities -- from imagery in all spectra to sensing radiation leakage at a distance -- huge uncertainties always remain. Failing to get a positive reading does not mean the facility is not up and running. It might just have been obscured, or the technical means to discover it are insufficient. The default setting in technical intelligence is that, while things can be ruled in, they cannot simply be ruled out by lack of evidence.

You need to go into the building. Indeed, you need to go into many buildings, look around, see what is happening and report back. Getting into highly secure buildings may be easy in the movies. It is not easy in real life. Getting someone into the building who knows what he is seeing is even harder. Getting him out alive to report back, and then repeating the process in other buildings, is even harder. It can be done -- though not easily or repeatedly.

Recruiting someone who works in the building is an option, but at the end of the day you have to rely on his word as to what he saw. That too, is a risk. He might well be a double agent who is inventing information to make money, or he could just be wrong. There is an endless number of ways that recruiting on-site sources can lead you to the wrong conclusion.

Source-based intelligence would appear to be the only way to go. Obviously, it is better to glean information from someone who knows what is going on, rather than to guess. But the problem with source-based intelligence is that, when all is said and done, you can still be just as confused -- or more confused -- than you were at the beginning. You could wind up with a mass of intelligence that can be read either way. It is altogether possible to have so many sources, human and technical, that you have no idea what the truth is. That is when an intelligence organization is most subject to political pressure. When the intelligence could go either way, politics can tilt the system. We do not know what caused the NIE to change its analysis. It could be the result of new, definitive intelligence, or existing intelligence could have been reread from a new political standpoint.

Consider the politics. The assumption was that Iran wanted to develop nuclear weapons -- though its motivations for wanting to do so were never clear to us. First, the Iranians had to assume that, well before they had an operational system, the United States or Israel would destroy it. In other words, it would be a huge effort for little profit. Second, assume that it developed one or two weapons and attacked Israel, for example. Israel might well have been destroyed, but Iran would probably be devastated by an Israeli or U.S. counterstrike. What would be the point?

For Iran to be developing nuclear weapons, it would have to have been prepared to take extraordinary risks. A madman theory, centered around the behavior of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was essential. But as the NIE points out, Iran was "guided by a cost-benefit approach." In simple terms, the Iranians weren't nuts. That is why they didn't build a nuclear program.

That is not to say Iran did not benefit from having the world believe it was building nuclear weapons. The United States is obsessed with nuclear weapons in the hands of states it regards as irrational. By appearing to be irrational and developing nuclear weapons, the Iranians created a valuable asset to use in negotiating with the Americans. The notion of a nuclear weapon in Iranian hands appeared so threatening that the United States might well negotiate away other things -- particularly in Iraq -- in exchange for a halt of the program. Or so the Iranians hoped. Therefore, while they halted development on their weapons program, they were not eager to let the Americans relax. They swung back and forth between asserting their right to operate the program and denying they had one. Moreover, they pushed hard for a civilian power program, which theoretically worried the world less. It drove the Americans up a wall -- precisely where the Iranians wanted them.

As we have argued, the central issue for Iran is not nuclear weapons. It is the future of Iraq. The Iran-Iraq war of 1980-1988 was the defining moment in modern Iranian history. It not only devastated Iran, but also weakened the revolution internally. Above all, Tehran never wants to face another Iraqi regime that has the means and motivation to wage war against Iran. That means the Iranians cannot tolerate a Sunni-dominated government that is heavily armed and backed by the United States. Nor, for that matter, does Tehran completely trust Iraq's fractured Shiite bloc with Iran's national security. Iran wants to play a critical role in defining the nature, policies and capabilities of the Iraqi regime.

The recent U.S. successes in Iraq, however limited and transitory they might be, may have caused the Iranians to rethink their view on dealing with the Americans on Iraq. The Americans, regardless of progress, cannot easily suppress all of the Shiite militias. The Iranians cannot impose a regime on Iraq, though they can destabilize the process. A successful outcome requires a degree of cooperation -- and recent indications suggest that Iran is prepared to provide that cooperation.

That puts the United States in an incredibly difficult position. On the one hand, it needs Iran for the endgame in Iraq. On the other, negotiating with Iran while it is developing nuclear weapons runs counter to fundamental U.S. policies and the coalition it was trying to construct. As long as Iran was building nuclear weapons, working with Iran on Iraq was impossible.

The NIE solves a geopolitical problem for the United States. Washington cannot impose a unilateral settlement on Iraq, nor can it sustain forever the level of military commitment it has made to Iraq. There are other fires starting to burn around the world. At the same time, Washington cannot work with Tehran while it is building nuclear weapons. Hence, the NIE: While Iran does have a nuclear power program, it is not building nuclear weapons.

Perhaps there was a spectacular and definitive intelligence breakthrough that demonstrated categorically that the prior assessments were wrong. Proving a negative is tough, and getting a definitive piece of intelligence is hard. Certainly, no matter how definitive the latest intelligence might have been, a lot of people want Iran to be building a nuclear weapon, so the debate over the meaning of this intelligence would have roared throughout the intelligence community and the White House. Keeping such debate this quiet and orderly is not Washington's style.

Perhaps the Iranians are ready to deal, and so decided to open up their facility for the Americans to see. Still, regardless of what the Iranians opened up, some would have argued that the United States was given a tour only of what the Iranians wanted them to see. There is a mention in the report that any Iranian program would be covert rather than overt, and that might reflect such concerns. However, all serious nuclear programs are always covert until they succeed. Nothing is more vulnerable than an incomplete nuclear program.

We are struck by the suddenness of the NIE report. Explosive new intelligence would have been more hotly contested. We suspect two things. First, the intelligence on the Iranian nuclear program consisted of a great number of pieces, many of which were inherently ambiguous and could be interpreted in multiple ways. Second, the weight of evidence for there being an Iranian nuclear program was shaded by the political proclivities of the administration, which saw the threat of a U.S. strike as intimidating Iran, and the weapons program discussion as justifying it. Third, the change in political requirements on both sides made a new assessment useful. This last has certainly been the case in all things Middle Eastern these past few days on issues ranging from the Palestinians to Syria to U.S. forces in Iraq -- so why should this issue be any different?

If this thesis is correct, then we should start seeing some movement on Iraq between the United States and Iran. Certainly the major blocker from the U.S. side has been removed and the success of U.S. policies of late should motivate the Iranians. In any case, the entire framework for U.S.-Iranian relations would appear to have shifted, and with it the structure of geopolitical relations throughout the region.

Intelligence is rarely as important as when it is proven wrong.

Surging Interests - Updated -

2007-08-08T09:13:00.000-06:00

Here is the latest Stratfor Geopolitical Intelligence report. It is a great write-up with positives and negatives that can be drawn from the events surrounding the surge. John Hawkins at RWN has commentary on the NYT article that stemmed from this report here.

The Major Diplomatic and Strategic Evolution in Iraq
By George Friedman

U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker met Aug. 6 with Iranian Ambassador to Iraq Hassan Kazemi Qomi and Iraqi National Security Adviser Muwaffaq al-Rubaie. Separately, a committee of Iranian, Iraqi and U.S. officials held its first meeting on Iraqi security, following up on an agreement reached at a July ambassadorial-level meeting.

The U.S. team was headed by Marcie Ries, counselor for political and military affairs at the embassy in Baghdad. Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, who handles Iraq for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, led the Iranian team. A U.S. Embassy spokesman described the talks as "frank and serious," saying they "focused, as agreed, on security problems in Iraq." Generally, "frank and serious" means nasty, though they probably did get down to the heart of the matter. The participants agreed to hold a second meeting, which means this one didn't blow up.

Do you suppose their 'Frank and Serious' conversation was 'focused' on a security problem like this:

Captured Video Shows Iraqi Insurgents Firing Sophisticated Iranian-Made Rockets at U.S. Positions

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

Dramatic video produced by Iraqi insurgents and captured in a raid earlier this week by U.S. troops clearly shows a battery of sophisticated Iranian-made rocket launchers firing on American positions east of Baghdad, Pentagon officials said Wednesday.

We need to be figuring out a new strategy in dealing with Iran. Whatever we're attempting covertly isn't working fast enough...maybe it's time for another wave of squirrels. This time, lets arm them with pork packs and IED's!

Washington Post, July 20, 2007

According to the Iranian newspaper Resalat, "A few weeks ago, 14 squirrels equipped with espionage systems of foreign intelligence services were captured by [Iranian] intelligence forces along the country's borders. These trained squirrels, each of which weighed just over 700 grams, were released on the borders of the country for intelligence and espionage purposes.

Jokes aside, the time for diplomacy with a nation actively working to undermine our efforts in Iraq is about over. A nation supporting, training, arming, and providing safe havens for terrorists needs to be brought in line. Swift and severe actions need to be taken...an embargo (yes, I know it's an act of war) would be a great first step, along with some sorties over the Iranian border on the training and rearming camps would be a solid second. If Iran continues on their current path despite direct action against them, then perhaps a tactical strike on their gas infrastructure crippling their military and country's ability to distribute men and supplies. We could bring the entire country to a stop in a matter of days.

Somehow, I don't think the American people, or our politicians have the stomach for escalating the conflict with Iran. Unfortunately, if we leave them to their devices, the situation will only deteriorate...

I don't believe we have the fortitude or collective willpower to fight the Jihadists in the manner they demand to be fought. We can barely muster the political weight necessary to keep the troops in Iraq without turning and running home...I don't know how we can even think of abandoning the Iraqi military in the face of an Iranian backed insurgency and terror campaign forsworn to destroy Democracy and Western Civilization. The military we have trained in Iraq are the Freedom Fighters who recognize what freedom means to their country and that they have to fight for it. They are the underdogs and the ones fighting for freedom and a just cause. As the protectors and champions of Democracy, it is our duty to stand up for the people of Iraq and give the people the power to control their own destiny. Helping the Iraqis in their quest to be free from the oppression of radicalism and fascism is the right and just thing to do. Our voice is the only voice for the women oppressed in the misogynistic society demanded by Shari'a and we are their only hope of freeing themselves from a future under that cruel yoke. They can not speak for themselves without fear of reprisal and neither can a moderate father who might stand up to men debasing his daughter because he did not force her to wear a head scarf.

A success in accomplishing the noble goal of stabilizing Iraq and enabling the Iraqis to sustain the peace means we have an ally in the War against radical Islam. A defeat means a slaughter of those potential allies and a breeding ground for our enemies.

And now...Back to the briefing -hopefully without further developments in Iranian 'diplomacy,' or further tangential rants by me...

Longtime Stratfor readers will recall that we have been tracing these Iranian-American talks from the back-channel negotiations to the high-level publicly announced talks, and now to this working group on security. A multilateral regional meeting on Iraq's future was held March 10 in Baghdad, followed by a regional meeting May 4 in Egypt. Then there were ambassadorial-level meetings in Baghdad on May 28 and July 24. Now, not quite two weeks later, the three sides have met again.

That the discussions were frank and serious shouldn't surprise anyone. That they continue in spite of obvious deep tensions between the parties is, in our view, extremely significant. The prior ambassadorial talk lasted about seven hours. The Aug. 6 working group session lasted about four hours. These are not simply courtesy calls. The parties are spending a great deal of time talking about something.

This is not some sort of public relations stunt either. First, neither Washington nor Tehran would bother to help the other's public image. Second, neither side's public image is much helped by these talks anyway. This is the "Great Satan" talking to one-half of what is left of the "Axis of Evil." If ever there were two countries that have reason not to let the world know they are meeting, it is these two. Yet, they are meeting, and they have made the fact public.

The U.S. media have not ignored these meetings, but they have not treated them as what they actually are -- an extraordinary diplomatic and strategic evolution in Iraq. Part of the reason is that the media take their cues from the administration about diplomatic processes. If the administration makes a big deal out of the visit of the Icelandic fisheries minister to Washington, the media will treat it as such. If the administration treats multilevel meetings between Iran and the United States on the future of Iraq in a low-key way, then low-key it is. The same is true for the Iranians, whose media are more directly managed. Iran does not want to make a big deal out of these meetings, and therefore they are not portrayed as significant.

It is understandable that neither Washington nor Tehran would want to draw undue attention to the talks. The people of each country view the other with intense hostility. We are reminded of the political problems faced by Chinese Premier Chou En-lai and U.S. President Richard Nixon when their diplomatic opening became public. The announcement of Nixon's visit to China was psychologically stunning in the United States; it was less so in China only because the Chinese controlled the emphasis placed on the announcement. Both sides had to explain to their publics why they were talking to the mad dogs.

In the end, contrary to conventional wisdom, perception is not reality. The fact that the Americans and the Iranians are downplaying the talks, and that newspapers are not printing banner headlines about them, does not mean the meetings are not vitally important. It simply means that the conventional wisdom, guided by the lack of official exuberance, doesn't know what to make of these talks.

There are three major powers with intense interest in the future of Iraq: the United States, Iran and Saudi Arabia. The United States, having toppled Saddam Hussein, has completely mismanaged the war. Nevertheless, a unilateral withdrawal would create an unacceptable situation in which Iran, possibly competing with Turkey in the North, would become the dominant military power in the region and would be in a position to impose itself at least on southern Iraq -- and potentially all of it. Certainly there would be resistance, but Iran has a large military (even if it is poorly equipped), giving it a decided advantage in controlling a country such as Iraq.

In addition, Iran is not nearly as casualty-averse as the United States. Iran fought a war with Iraq in the 1980s that cost it about a million casualties. The longtime Iranian fear has been that the United States will somehow create a pro-American regime in Baghdad, rearm the Iraqis and thus pose for Iran round two of what was its national nightmare. It is no accident that the day before these meetings, U.S. sources speculated about the possible return of the Iraqi air force to the Iraqis. Washington was playing on Tehran's worst nightmare.

Saudi Arabia's worst nightmare would be watching Iran become the dominant power in Iraq or southern Iraq. It cannot defend itself against Iran, nor does it want to be defended by U.S. troops on Saudi soil. The Saudis want Iraq as a buffer zone between Iran and their oil fields. They opposed the original invasion, fearing just this outcome, but now that the invasion has taken place, they don't want Iran as the ultimate victor. The Saudis, therefore, are playing a complex game, both supporting Sunni co-religionists and criticizing the American presence as an occupation -- yet urgently wanting U.S. troops to remain.

The United States wants to withdraw, though it doesn't see a way out because an outright unilateral withdrawal would set the stage for Iranian domination. At the same time, the United States must have an endgame -- something the next U.S. president will have to deal with.

The Iranians no longer believe the United States is capable of creating a stable, anti-Iranian, pro-American government in Baghdad. Instead, they are terrified the United States will spoil their plans to consolidate influence within Iraq. So, while they are doing everything they can to destabilize the regime, they are negotiating with Washington. The report that three-quarters of U.S. casualties in recent weeks were caused by "rogue" Shiite militia sounds plausible. The United States has reached a level of understanding with some nonjihadist Sunni insurgent groups, many of them Baathist. The Iranians do not want to see this spread -- at least not unless the United States first deals with Tehran. The jihadists, calling themselves al Qaeda in Iraq, do not want this either, and so they have carried out a wave of assassinations of those Sunnis who have aligned with the United States, and they have killed four key aides to Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, a key Shiite figure.

If this sounds complicated, it is. The United States is fighting Sunnis and Shia, making peace with some Sunnis and encouraging some Shia to split off -- all the time waging an offensive against most everyone. The Iranians support many, but not all, of the Shiite groups in Iraq. In fact, many of the Iraqi Shia have grown quite wary of the Iranians. And for their part, the Saudis are condemning the Americans while hoping they stay -- and supporting Sunnis who might or might not be fighting the Americans.

The situation not only is totally out of hand, but the chance that anyone will come out of it with what they really want is slim. The United States probably will not get a pro-American government and the Iranians probably will not get to impose their will on all or part of Iraq. The Saudis, meanwhile, are feeling themselves being sucked into the Sunni quagmire.

This situation is one of the factors driving the talks.

By no means out of any friendliness, a mutual need is emerging. No one is in control of the situation. No one is likely to get control of the situation in any long-term serious way. It is in the interests of the United States, Iran and Saudi Arabia that the Iraq situation stabilize, simply because they cannot predict the outcome -- and the worst-case scenario for each is too frightening to contemplate.

None of the three powers can bring the situation under control. Even by working together, the three will be unable to completely stabilize Iraq and end the violence. But by working together they can increase security to the point that none of their nightmare scenarios comes true. In return, the United States will have to do without a pro-American government in Baghdad and the Iranians will have to forgo having an Iraqi satellite.

Hence, we see a four-hour meeting of Iranian and U.S. security experts on stabilizing the situation in Iraq. Given the little good will between the two countries, defining roles and missions in a stabilization program will require frank and serious talks indeed. Ultimately, however, there is sufficient convergence of interests that holding these talks makes sense.

The missions are clear. The Iranian task will be to suppress the Shiite militias that are unwilling to abide by an agreement -- or any that oppose Iranian domination. Their intelligence in this area is superb and their intelligence and special operations teams have little compunction as to how they act. The Saudi mission will be to underwrite the cost of Sunni acceptance of a political compromise, as well as a Sunni war against the jihadists. Saudi intelligence in this area is pretty good and, while the Saudis do have compunctions, they will gladly give the intelligence to the Americans to work out the problem. The U.S. role will be to impose a government in Baghdad that meets Iran's basic requirements, and to use its forces to grind down the major insurgent and militia groups. This will be a cooperative effort -- meaning whacking Saudi and Iranian friends will be off the table.

No one power can resolve the security crisis in Iraq -- as four years of U.S. efforts there clearly demonstrate. But if the United States and Iran, plus Saudi Arabia, work together -- with no one providing cover for or supplies to targeted groups -- the situation can be brought under what passes for reasonable control in Iraq. More important for the three powers, the United States could draw down its troops to minimal levels much more quickly than is currently being discussed, the Iranians would have a neutral, nonaggressive Iraq on their western border and the Saudis would have a buffer zone from the Iranians. The buffer zone is the key, because what happens in the buffer zone stays in the buffer zone.

The talks in Baghdad are about determining whether there is a way for the United States and Iran to achieve their new mutual goal. The question is whether their fear of the worst-case scenario outweighs their distrust of each other. Then there is the matter of agreeing on the details -- determining the nature of the government in Baghdad, which groups to protect and which to target, how to deal with intelligence sharing and so on.

These talks can fail in any number of ways. More and more, however, the United States and Iran are unable to tolerate their failure. The tremendous complexity of the situation has precluded either side from achieving a successful outcome. They now have to craft the minimal level of failure they can mutually accept.

These talks not only are enormously important but they also are, in some ways, more important than the daily reports on combat and terrorism. If this war ends, it will end because of negotiations like these.
Contact Us
Analysis Comments - analysis@stratfor.com
Customer Service, Access, Account Issues - service@stratfor.com

Groundhog's day?

2007-07-15T15:45:00.000-06:00

I think my life and that of every conservative who hangs out at RWN mirrors that movie...So I was stuck in the comments of RWN (just like every day) and ran into these comments that I couldn't let go. There was another comment as well that summed up groundhwg or groundhog's (depending on the day I guess) stance better, but it must have qualified as trolling as the post is no longer there. I was in the process of responding, when I realized that I was in full-blown, rant mode and it was going to take more time and space than I intended! Since I didn't really want to clog up a comment section with another particularly long rant, I thought I would post a blurb there and the remainder here...just tryin' to be polite!

The comments came in the Q&A Friday #69: Why No "Payback Project" Over The War?

GH:

Its not just the moonbats and Bush haters anymore. Even Bill O'Reilly of Fox News has thrown in the towell on Iraq. Like he points out, when less than 25% of the Iraqi people themselves support continued US presence in their country, informed minds should get a clue. The majority of the Iraqis are ungrateful. Why continue to spill the blood of our US troops under that scenario?

I don't hate Bush. I disapprove of Cheney who got snookered by the Iranians on this Iraq issue.

and

So, our soldiers dying for their [Iraqi's] cause (actually Iran's cause per my theory on how we actuylly got there in the first place) is like throwing our pearls before swine. Let's put it another way. I care more for the lives of our troops and their families than I care for the legacy of BushII's (actually Cheney's) foreign policy.

My response-cum-rant:

Groundhog,

It's obvious that you had preconceived notions and a heavy bias when you formulated your opinions and completed your analysis. While you correctly perceive some of the potential outcomes, they are tainted with your personal hatred of Cheney and your desire to see America fail so you can play the 'I was right' game. Therefore, I'm not surprised that your analysis is based on 'best case result' for Iran...your empathy for them emanates from that one-sided analysis.

It's petty, but predictable. A large segment of the Democrat party thinks in the exact same way - ready and willing to watch and even help the US fail in order to prove they were right and 'war doesn't solve anything'. Most here have taken to calling those people the 'Peace at all costs crowd.' Others here call them traitors. I don't think you fit into either of those categories, I think you just want to be right...and want Cheney and Republicans to look bad by blaming them for our enemies’ actions and motivations.

If we bail out of Iraq before they have a sustainable democratic government in place, then you are correct Iraq will fall (again) and Iran will take over and create a puppet state. Iran will then control a quarter of the world's oil reserves and will tighten their stranglehold on the gulf. If this becomes the case, I would look for Iran’s first nuke to hit the Saudi oil fields so Iran will control over a third of the world’s oil…and they will have removed their last close rival in the region.

Iran never wanted us to invade Iraq (read Jawbreaker and Atomic Iran). The thought of the full might of the American military camped-out on their doorstep gives them cold sweats. No one in the world will ever doubt the prowess or destructive capability of the US military and nobody in their right mind would ever want that combat power within easy striking distance of them.

Our decision to go to Iraq had nothing to do with Iran's wishes and I guarantee you that they don't and didn't have any desire to have such an enormous US presence in the region...Iranian intransigence is, after all, one of the main reasons we invaded Iraq in the first place. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Pakistan all contain and harbor the ideologies that we are at war with. With a major presence in the region and a democratic ally in Iraq, we would be in the middle of the mess and able to influence events and effect change –directly, or indirectly- at the wellspring of the Islamic Fascist ideology. We would also be in a strong strategic location to protect the global interest in the most precious resource on the planet.

It is in our country’s interest to be in Iraq and to have a very heavy presence in the region in general. The Middle East accounts for over thirty-three percent of the world’s oil reserves. Oil is the most strategic resource in the world. It is the lifeblood of the world’s economy and the means to ensure the world is fed, clothed housed and entertained. Most products manufactured are, or have petroleum based or petroleum derived components. Without a healthy supply and continual flow of oil, the world would literally shut down and millions upon millions would starve as economies and countries shut down and fail. Our civilization and way of life are but a thin veneer suppressing the base nature of a greater society. Take, for example, the NYC blackouts thirty years ago and all of the looting and pillaging that went on in our nations’ largest city. Look at all of the rioting and looting in New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina. Now imagine that scenario replayed in every city in the world if the oil supply was suddenly cut off and getting food was no longer a given…

The strategic location and easy justification to invade Iraq are the primary reasons we invaded. If you think someone's been played like a fiddle, you need look no further than your own party leadership; their media allies, and through their influence, a large segment of the US population. The Neo-Con strategy, or Cheney’s strategy as you’re now putting it is and was simple…project American will and influence on the region through a democratic proxy state -realized in Iraq- and start to reform the region from the inside out.

Iran's greatest fear and the greatest threat to an Islamic/Sharia state is an America friendly, democratic nation sitting on their border. The Iranian people are screaming for reforms; a voice in their government and a move towards democratization. Seeing a democratic nation on their border; proving freedom works and free nations provide higher standards of living for all would be one of the greatest threats imaginable to the Mullahs in charge.

From that perspective, it should be obvious that the powers that be in Iran -whether your talking about nut jobs like Ahmadinejad, or the power hungry Mullahs- have every interest in ensuring the US does not succeed. They will stop at nothing to ensure we fail in our mission. Iran will spend themselves broke to ensure Iraq never has an operable democracy…They can’t afford to let another predominantly Muslim country rule itself in any other way than by Shari’a law.

Our continued unwillingness to confront Iran has emboldened them and as a result, they are arming, training and offering safe haven to terrorists and militias in Iran. Iranian Special Forces and terrorist groups lead attacks inside Iraq and are intrinsic part of the daily, body-count-media-campaign that leads to the recruitment of more jihadi’s and drains the average American’s will to support the fight. Middle Easterners only follow the strong and will only jump in on a winning side. If Al Qaeda and the Jihadists represent the strong horse with the perceived winning hand, that is who the people will follow. It’s a remnant of their tribal culture and won’t change since their religion is derived and formed around that culture. This provides another reason we can’t leave the job unfinished. We will be portrayed as failures and the weak in the conflict and our way of life will be determined to be weak and not blessed by Allah – weakness and meekness are met with ferocity and atrocity and every victory and news blip is spun to show the will of Allah prevailing over the infidels.

Regardless of how our media reports it, or how our politicians spin it, we are a nation at war with radical Islam. Though our casualties are infinitesimal compared to past wars, the sensationalist coverage applied to every car bomb and homicide bomber magnifies the impact of every terrorist strike.
We are in a global conflict and we are invested heavily on the side of Western Civilization and freedom. During the Cold war, we were at war not only with the Soviet Union, but also with Communist ideology and the slavery it brings. We fought the two everywhere they reared their heads. The Cold War was fought in foreign lands through proxies just as this one is being fought – the difference being we must nation build and show that our way of life and the individual freedom it represents is superior to the fascist and misogynistic ideology we are fighting. Most trapped behind the iron curtain didn’t require the same lesson. They were too busy waiting in line for their daily bread; and lacked an all encompassing, controlling religion with convenient scapegoats. This made the communist ideology easier to combat as the people were not brainwashed and damned if they strayed from their ideology.

Our enemies in this war sanction any means of fighting through their religious doctrine. Any tactic is acceptable and a ‘good Wahabi’ will lie, cheat, steal, and murder innocents to intimidate, hide, or attack us. The most dedicated and deadly are the Mujahadeen. Battle tested, experienced and highly trained, it is far preferable for us to keep the Mujahadeen fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan than to allow them to focus their efforts here in the continental US. If we do not occupy these highly trained agitators, terrorists, and holy warriors, they will focus their sights on the US. They will follow us home and we will be fighting them in our streets and paying with US civilian casualties instead of just military casualties. It is especially beneficial for us to fight these hardened foreign fighters in Iraq due to the terrain; the large middle class and percentage of moderates and secularists among the Iraqi people. Together, they have a much better chance of creating and sustaining a democratic system with the people invested in the future and freedom of their country.

If we are able to realize this goal and prove to the Muslim world at large that Freedom works and while contrary to Shari’a law, it is not contrary to human law. The only way to win the greater battle is to effect change in the belief systems of the individuals who follow Islam. The only way that change will ever take place is if we give these people the freedom and security to think contrary to their religion and their fascist leaders basically, we have to give them the experience of living free.

Musings, W.A.G.’s and Pontifications on Iran

2007-07-04T14:49:00.001-06:00

Maybe once Terrorism starts to mess with the American Idol schedule, Americans will sit up and take notice of the global conflict raging throughout the world...I think we have a few years before that happens, but I do believe the day will come when there’s an open war of epic – or biblical proportions.

The Jihadists are still in their lulling, quasi-hidden agenda phase...countries like Iran still have a little plausible deniability while Americans and the rest of the world think there is a schism between hardliner and moderate mullahs. The Mullahs and Ahmadinejad’s government can obfuscate their intentions and their hegemonic ambitions by playing up the different factions within their government and population. ‘Reforms’ come through when their backs are up against a wall and they need a show of good faith. Our PC culture and moral equivocators want to believe the best about a foreign nation’s intentions, and so they buy into Iranian rhetoric (propaganda) developed with the sole intention of fooling Peace-at-any-cost-Liberals and war-sick Americans.

The Democrat leadership and the complicit press choose only to acknowledge the cynicism and factious infighting in the Iranian power circles and offer vague platitudes and lame justifications in response to the Muslim cries of “Death to America!” Most of America finds it easier to deny the single-minded fanaticism of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the power he wields preaching the 12th Imam prophesy. Regardless of his sanity, he represents the most sophisticated military nation in the Middle East with the largest armies of conventional and terrorist forces.

His travels and travails throughout Asia were designed to attack Democratic societies in general and America specifically. He was also spreading his 12th Imam brand of radicalism at universities, mosques and public forums. His charisma is recruiting fanatics and inspires devastating attacks in the wake of his passing. We’re fighting an ideological war at the same time as a shooting war. Our conflict is global and our enemies can be doctors, lawyers, or paupers. Their only similarity is their belief in Jihad and the belief in their own ideological superiority and divine sanction. We can’t win this ideological war with negotiation. We can’t defeat their ideology or their culture with our own when they view ours as demonically inspired. If we want to defeat the scourge of Islamic Fascism, we must have the stomach for a long drawn out fight – a global war of attrition.

We aren’t engaging or willing to engage Iran directly, but Iran is arming, and training Iraqi militia in Iranian terrorist camps and then sending them back to Iraq to reinforce the terrorists fighting us. They are directly leading attacks against our allies in Iraq as well as our own forces there. For example, Remember the kidnapped Brits?

Here is the story about Iraqi militia groups training in Iran.
According to U.S. spokesman Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, Iran is actively engaged in training insurgents:

"They do receive training on how to assemble and employ EFPs," Caldwell said, adding that fighters also were taught how to carry out attacks that use explosives followed by assaults with rocket-propelled grenades and small arms.

Further, Caldwell acknowledges the Iranians are giving the insurgents weapons to kill our troops:

"We know that they are being in fact manufactured and smuggled into this country, and we know that training does go on in Iran for people to learn how to assemble them and how to employ them. We know that training has gone on as recently as this past month from detainees' debriefs,"

Here is the story about the Iranian led kidnapping mission.

When I originally heard this story reported I only recall hearing this:

General Petraeus said that Britain and the US had suffered at the hands of the group he blamed for abducting the British hostages. He identified it as a secret cell of al-Mahdi Army, a Shia Muslim militia loyal to the firebrand cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.

I don’t recall the original story I saw about this including this part of Petraeus’ analysis (emphasis mine):

“We think that it is the same network that killed our soldiers in Karbala in an operation back in January,” he said. “We killed the head of that network less than a week before the operation that detained those British civilians. It was already planned and carried out by his followers. It is a secret cell of Jaish al-Mahdi [al-Mahdi Army] not all of which are under control of Moqtada al-Sadr.”
Of the cell responsible for the kidnap, he said: “They are not rank-and-file Jaish al-Mahdi. They are trained in Iran, equipped with Iranian [weapons], and advised by Iran.

Here’s a summation by the NYT (emphasis mine):

WASHINGTON, Nov. 27 — A senior American intelligence official said Monday that the Iranian-backed group Hezbollah had been training members of the Mahdi Army, the Iraqi Shiite militia led by Moktada al-Sadr.
The official said that 1,000 to 2,000 fighters from the Mahdi Army and other Shiite militias had been trained by Hezbollah in Lebanon. A small number of Hezbollah operatives have also visited Iraq to help with training, the official said. Iran has facilitated the link between Hezbollah and the Shiite militias in Iraq, the official said. Syrian officials have also cooperated, though there is debate about whether it has the blessing of the senior leaders in Syria.

This cabalistic triumvirate is fighting to ensure that we fail in Iraq. They are supplying munitions, training and sanctuary for terrorists. Their very involvement proves our case that the situation in Iraq is much more complex than a simple civil war being fought between two opposing, internal powers. The powers involved aren’t fighting a civil war for the sake of the Iraqis’ freedom; they’re fighting for the right to enslave people through a hideous ideology of misogyny and religious fascism enforced through fear. We are the only nation with the means to combat this global ideology and to confront the outbreaks of radical Jihad throughout the world. Our world view in America is diametrically opposed to the ideology that has produced the chaos in the Middle East and no amount of procrastination is going to make the problem go away or want to live in peace with us. If it’s not dealt with and continues to grow at its current rate, there will be no safe haven in the world.

This wave of the ancient struggle against radical Islam is still in its early stages. I don't think our Jihadist enemies have enough people in place here in the states or enough inertia worldwide to start their campaign against mainland USA. Their plan and path to victory has to include the game plan that has proven effective in defeating the US in the past. They will work to win their US campaign in the same way they are winning their Iraqi campaign – through our media. They only need to follow the model of Viet Nam and use our weaknesses (peace at any cost liberals, PC Junkies, sensationalist media, power-hungry / soap-box politicians, etc) to defeat us from within.

In order for any Jihadist plan to succeed in the US, they will need to saturate our media with daily attacks on our soil and create feelings of hopelessness and ineffectiveness in our responses. The PC types are currently fumbling all over themselves to kowtow to CAIR and assure the peaceful Muslim community that we don't blame them for the war their religion is waging on our way of life. Our government continues their policy of not profiling and doesn’t look too closely at the 'charitable' contributions by the Muslim community. We don’t know how many Jihadists we have in the US, but left to their own devices and given free reign in our country’s anonymous 12-20 million illegal alien residents you can be sure, provocateurs, agitators, propagandists and actual terrorists will fight in solitude diverting public scrutiny, manipulating public opinion, and breaking down the American Psyche. They will attack our culture with everything available to them whether they’re using bombs, or a PC message of moral equivocation. Nothing is sacred to them if it helps deliver the caliphate and destroys all opposition to Islamic assimilation.

If we don't wake up to the dangers posed by radical Islam, my only hope is that the American culture is too amorphous for them to assimilate and our psyche too slippery for fear to get a grip on our people...

Good News in the War on Terror?

2007-06-27T21:30:00.000-06:00

I can't direct you to this article on their site since Stratfor requires membership to view it there, but they state in their disclaimer it can be republished so long as with attribution, so...

I would recommend at least signing up for their e-mailing list. They do have great pieces like this:

Gunning for Al Qaeda Prime
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart

Al Qaeda's media branch, As-Sahab, released a statement by Ayman al-Zawahiri to jihadist Internet forums June 25. In it, al Qaeda's deputy leader urges Muslims to support Palestinian militants by providing weapons and money, and by attacking U.S. and Israeli interests. Although al-Zawahiri's message is interesting, especially the fact that he urges support for an organization he has criticized heavily in the past, perhaps most telling about the release is that it contains no new video footage of al-Zawahiri himself.

In the 25-minute statement, al-Zawahiri discusses the importance of al-Quds (Jerusalem) to Muslims, and urges Muslims to unite with the "mujahideen in Palestine" (Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, etc.). Al-Zawahiri also calls on Hamas to establish a government based on Islamic law in Gaza, noting that, "Taking over power is not a goal, but a means to implement God's word on earth." The release begins with a snippet of an October 2001 video of al-Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden, but the bulk of the release consists of a still photograph of al-Zawahiri placed over a thin banner containing a small photo of the al-Aqsa Mosque.

The fact that al-Zawahiri chose this format rather than the more engaging and visually powerful video format suggests al Qaeda's apex leaders are feeling the heat of the campaign to locate and eliminate them. Although many people believe the al Qaeda leadership operates as it pleases along the Pakistani-Afghan border, evidence suggests otherwise.

Quantifying the Campaign

Last week's Terrorism Intelligence Report discussed the campaign conducted by the United States and its allies against al Qaeda's regional and local nodes. Though these efforts have been under way in many parts of the globe, the United States and its partners have been pursuing a concurrent campaign against al Qaeda's apex leadership, al Qaeda prime. Like the campaign against the regional nodes, the effort against the prime node employs all of the five prongs of the U.S. counterterrorism arsenal: military power, intelligence, economic sanctions, law enforcement operations and diplomacy.

The overall success of this campaign against al Qaeda prime has been hard to measure because there are few barometers for taking al Qaeda's pulse. By its nature it is a secretive and nebulous organization that, in order to survive, has taken great pains to obscure its operations -- especially since the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 that flushed its leaders from their comfortable and well-appointed refuge inside the Taliban's Islamic republic.

While bin Laden and al-Zawahiri have escaped U.S.-led efforts to locate them, a large number of second-tier leaders and operatives have been captured or killed. This means the group's organizational chart has been altered dramatically below the top rung, making it difficult to determine the quality of the individuals who have been tapped to fill in the gaps. Publicly, al Qaeda has appointed Azzam the American as a major spokesman. If the prime node has been forced to promote others of his caliber to operational leadership positions, the group could be in big trouble. However, with so many unknown players filling critical positions, it is difficult to determine precisely how much the attrition has affected the prime node's ability to plan and execute attacks.

Anecdotal evidence, however, suggests that their operational ability has been diminished. The group has not launched an attack using an al Qaeda "all-star team" since 9/11. Meanwhile, outside of Iraq and Afghanistan, the attacks conducted by its regional nodes, or by regional nodes working with operational commanders sent from al Qaeda prime, have decreased in frequency and impact over the past several months. The first six months of 2007 have been quieter than the first six months of 2006 and far more peaceful that the last six months of 2005. And, not to downplay the loss of life in London, Madrid, Bali and other places, but in terms of numbers, the death tolls and financial impacts of all those attacks do not hold a candle to the 9/11 attacks -- even when many of them are combined.

Beyond the personnel losses al Qaeda has suffered, the loss of its dedicated training facilities in Afghanistan also has changed the way the prime node works. It is less autonomous and far more dependent on the largesse of Pakistani and Afghan feudal lords who control training camps along the border -- and who are key to the security of al Qaeda prime. However, it is still difficult to pinpoint the impact this has had on al Qaeda's ability to operate.

Occasional glimpses into the organization made possible by intelligence efforts, however, have provided some information as to its health. For example, the seized July 2005 letter from al-Zawahiri to then-al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, in which al-Zawahiri asks for financial assistance, demonstrates that al Qaeda's prime node was hurting for cash at the time. This state of affairs, a key objective of U.S. economic sanctions, likely was exacerbated by the Saudi government's action against al Qaeda supporters inside the kingdom, action prompted by attacks by al Qaeda's Saudi node.

Another way to gauge the health of the organization, or at least the comfort level of the group's apex leadership, is by looking at its public relations efforts and the statements it releases to the public. Al Qaeda prime has produced a steady supply of messages in order to keep local nodes -- and perhaps more important, grassroots jihadists around the world -- motivated. These releases, however, reveal a change over the last several months in the way al Qaeda communicates to the world.

As the numbers in the chart illustrate, the number of messages from al Qaeda's two top leaders has fallen, while the use of video has dropped dramatically. Before the October 2006 missile attack in Chingai, Pakistan, 14 out of 15 messages were released in video format; since then, only three of the nine have included video. The switch to an audio format indicates concern about operational security. It also is noteworthy that bin Laden has not been heard from in any format, audio or video, since July 1, 2006 -- nearly a year now. All these factors considered, it is apparent that the apex leadership feels threatened.

The Campaign on the Border

Al Qaeda leaders hiding along the Afghan-Pakistani border have good reason to be cautious. On June 19, an explosion killed at least 32 militants in Pakistan's mountainous Datta Khel district. Pakistani intelligence officials said 10 to 15 Arab and Turkmen militants were among the dead. According to sources, Abu Laith al-Libi, al Qaeda field commander in Afghanistan, was the target. DNA tests reportedly are being performed on the victims' remains in an effort to determine whether al-Libi is among them. If in fact he was killed in the strike, history suggests al Qaeda will release a statement confirming the death between June 29 and July 6.

The Datta Khel strike highlights the gravity of the threat faced by al Qaeda leaders hiding out in the area along the border for the past several years. Other notable strikes include:

Jan. 16, 2007: Pakistani Army Aviation units launch a predawn airstrike against a suspected militant camp near Zamzola in Pakistan's South Waziristan, killing 25 to 30 militants, including eight to 10 foreigners.

Oct. 30, 2006: A missile strike against an Islamic school in Chingai, Pakistan, near the Afghan border, levels the building and kills at least 80 people. Sources say al-Zawahiri was the target.

Jan. 13, 2006: A hellfire missile hits a home in Damadola, Pakistan, killing 18 people, including four senior al Qaeda operatives. The attack's intended target, al-Zawahiri, is not present.

Dec. 4, 2005: Pakistani authorities say Hamza Rabia, reportedly al Qaeda's director of operations, is killed when a hellfire missile fired from a predator drone strikes a house in Haisori, North Waziristan.

May 7, 2005: Haitham al-Yemeni, an al Qaeda operative who reportedly replaced Abu Farj al-Libi in al Qaeda's hierarchy after al-Libi's May 2, 2005, capture, is killed in a hellfire missile attack in North Waziristan.

While not in the same region, al Qaeda's then-military chief Mohammed Atef also was killed in a hellfire missile strike by a CIA predator drone in eastern Afghanistan in November 2001.

Predator drones cannot be seen or heard by those on the ground. This means that a target's first indication that he is being attacked is the arrival of one or more supersonic, highly accurate and very destructive hellfire missiles. To those being targeted, the psychological impact of a weapon that can kill without warning is intense.

The Safe Bet

Shortly after the Chingai strike we noted a difference between al-Zawahiri's reaction to that strike and the Damadola strike. At the time, we said the Chingai strike hit very close to home, sent shockwaves through al Qaeda's operational security system and likely forced al-Zawahiri to go deeper underground. The numbers above appear to confirm that analysis.

We also speculated that the Damadola and Chingai strikes damaged As-Sahab's capabilities. One of those killed in the Damadola strike, Abdul al-Maghribi, not only was al-Zawahiri's son-in-law, but also a senior As-Sahab manager. Despite these strikes, however, As-Sahab has released at least 13 video statements by al Qaeda leaders since the Chingai attack. Only three of these videos featured al-Zawahiri; the other 10 featured al Qaeda spokesmen such as Abu Yahya al-Libi, Azzam the American and the now possibly deceased Abu Laith al-Libi. As-Sahab also has released several other videos showing operations under way against U.S. forces in Afghanistan.

Regardless of these videos from Afghanistan, things have not been going well for the Taliban and their al Qaeda allies recently. Their much-touted spring offensive has largely fizzled and they have suffered many casualties on the battlefield against NATO forces in the south (the Canadians appear to have completed their learning curve). The loss of charismatic, experienced battlefield commander Mullah Dadullah also will have an impact. Meanwhile, the Taliban have broken from traditional insurgent tactics with such things as suicide bombings, roadside bombings and attacks with vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices. This deviation suggests desperation on their part -- which also would increase al Qaeda's angst.

Given that As-Sahab continues to release several videos each month, the lack of appearances by al-Zawahiri, and even bin Laden, is not the result of some scarcity of camera gear or video technicians. Indeed, there must be some other compelling reason for them to change their behavior -- and fear that the forces hunting them are drawing close is a safe bet.

Contact Us
Analysis Comments - analysis@stratfor.com
Customer Service, Access, Account Issues - service@stratfor.com

Was this forwarded to you? Sign up to start receiving your own copy - it's always thought-provoking, insightful and free.

Go to Stratfor.com to register

Distribution and Reprints
This report may be distributed or republished with attribution to Strategic Forecasting, Inc. at Stratfor.com. For media requests, partnership opportunities, or commercial distribution or republication, please contact pr@stratfor.com.

Trent Lott...You make my blood boil!

2007-06-22T19:34:00.000-06:00

I can't take it anymore. I have to write another letter for another Senator to ignore...

Senator Lott,

After studying the bill and listening and reading all the analysis I could, I have come to the conclusion along with 70% of the US population that this Bill you're working so fervently to pass is the worst possible thing you could do to your country.

Here's one unintended consequences if this bill passes: Heritage foundation estimates this bill will cost 2.6 trillion dollars to the taxpayers over the lifetime of the 12 million illegal immigrants currently here.

2.6 Trillion dollars is far too much money for us to have to shell out for something we don’t want. Perhaps your goal in trying to ram this through is: The greater need for social services will in turn lead to bigger government and a greater role for government…are you looking for job security? You certainly won’t have it if this passes.

Another consequence: By arbitrarily granting a legal citizenship status to the 12 - 20 million people this bill accounts for you will immediately instill the belief in that entire group of people that they are entitled to live in the USA. This action will damn a very large portion of this group to live in society expecting the government to provide for them as they are entitled to their portion of the American Dream. Wherever large groups of z-citizens settle, I will expect to see another Katrina nightmare.

If growing the government; importing a working poor, and instilling our newly legalized z-citizens with an instantaneous sense of entitlement is what you're working for, then you should immediately step down as the minority whip and consider resigning from the senate for betraying the people who elected you. I defended the gaffe you committed at Strom Thurmond's birthday party, and felt it was wrong that you were forced to step down then, however this abomination that you are working to pass is against every conservative principle your constituents hold dear.

Mr. Lott, Please put this bill down…
Sincerely,

S

RWN Q&A Friday

2007-02-05T21:53:00.000-07:00

John Hawkins of Right Wing News received the following question on Q&A Friday last week:

Will The Democrats And Republicans Ever Put Partisanship Away?

I felt the need to answer the question in the comments there, and then to repost it here...as to why this is my first post in four months, suffice it to say our computer died and has now (finally) been replaced. Further, there are no holidays or parties in the immediate future for me to use as and excuse to shun the computer...it helps that there are no more football games that I will be forced to watch as the Bears' and Broncos' seasons are now at an end...sniff. There's always next year [hopefully]!

Will The Democrats And Republicans Ever Put Partisanship Away?

No. Never. We think and make decisions in completely different ways and can either compliment each other when working on the same team, or be the most bitter adversaries (like now) when we see things in fundamentally different ways.

For example, I can't understand the Democrat's point of view on Iraq. I don't see how leaving Iraq will reduce the violence. I don't see how our "strategic withdrawal from Somalia" prevented or helped solve anything! After all, our failure to respond to the Khobar Tower bombing, the attack on the USS Cole, and WT1 bombing all happened prior to 9/11. Withdrawals and limited responses have led to the escalation of our enemies' attacks in scope and destruction. It seems obvious retreating and appeasing only emboldens terrorists. Coincidentally (or not), it didn't work with the brutal dictator-to-be Hitler when he was being courted by Neville Chamberlain. I know I'm not a history scholar, but it seems there is a pretty clear pattern when dealing with power hungry men and cultures and religions...What am I missing?

At the very least, Republicans/Conservatives and Democrats/Liberals have completely different world views and different ways of coming at the same issue. Republicans tend to be logical (even to a fault) whereas liberals go with their gut and how they feel about an issue. Whoopi Goldberg said it straight out on the O'Reilly Factor the other night:

O'REILLY: And I respect that point of view. But if you're going to go out and say to millions of people we got to get out of there now, then, I'm going come in and say, "Well, what happens if we do that? Do we put America in more danger?" And it doesn't matter how you feel, you need to — you need to think about that.

GOLDBERG: If you are asking my opinion...

O'REILLY: Yes.

GOLDBERG: Then it does matter how I feel.

O'REILLY: No, you need to think about it.

GOLDBERG: No, Bill. You need to think about it. That's how you do it. I don't do it that way.

O'REILLY: So you don't have a responsibility to back up how you feel?

GOLDBERG: No. I have a responsibility to answer your question.

The full transcript is here so you can see the whole thing in context. She bases her opinion on how she feels. Forming your opinion based solely upon how you feel is a sure fire way to create some serious and deadly unintended consequences (like pulling out of Vietnam and cutting off funding to our allies we left behind).

I "feel" McCain thinks more like the typical Democrat than the typical Republican. I can't for the life of me understand his bench-mark proposal. It gives our enemies - the enemies of Democracy and civilization; our time-line so they can coordinate their attacks to do the most damage and and make the largest impact. They only need to look at the Tet Offensive for a historical example of American winning a battle, losing the war. All our enemies have to do is plan a major attack or series of attacks during our planned withdrawal to steal a victory. Al Qaida's propaganda machine and their helpers in our own media will be sure to show the grisly scenes as they unfold as our troops retreat having not accomplished our stated goal...the portrayal of a complete rout will be insured with opportunistic al Jazeera capturing the mass celebrations of our enemies and the casual murder of our allies. Don't worry, though, we won't see the mass cleansing of the Sunni...that kind of t.v. might lead to liberal guilt and people regretting the decision to abandon a cause because it was too hard.

When examining the Democratic position on Iraq and the WoT in general, I have to believe that they are a) naive; b) pursuing policy for personal gain or power with no regard to consequences; c)generally un(mis)informed; or d) evil and simply want America fail in general. I would like to believe it's mostly a combination of 'a' and 'c' considering the average attention span of the American public and general lack of understanding and general knowledge of world events, but that is not the excuse of those in power in the Democrat party. They have access to all of the information available and have an obligation to know and understand the situation. Therefore, they should be coming to the conclusion: Jihadists want us to die. Just ask any Israeli what they face on a day to day basis...Islamic schools teach and preach to hate and blame the Israeli's and they preach to hate and blame Americans. It doesn't matter whether you sympathize with them or if you actively hate them. They want you dead either way. They hate our hedonism and our decadence- what we call being free...

It's our own responsibility to be informed.

2006-09-02T10:54:00.000-06:00

The Counter Terrorism Blog has a great piece written by Walid Phares and Behrooz Bahbudi that tells us it is our responsibility as individuals to educate ourselves on the threats to our civilization as represented by "Jihadism". That's one of the major problems we face as I said yesterday:

Many (most) Americans don't take time out of their prime time t.v. to actively seek out what is going on in the world beyond what they see in an hour of news every day. By and large, we trust in our politicians and military to track world events for us and keep us in our cozy (and oblivious) lives. We trust the media to deliver the news relevent to our lives and leave it at that.

Alphabet soup news alone doesn't cut it.
On the Axis of Jihadism

Because for 11 years years, the American public wasn’t informed about the threat that lead to September 11 and because the classrooms and newsrooms of the United States were not educated enough about the global threat of “Jihadism,” we feel it is incumbent on individual citizens to educate themselves about this danger and mobilize to prevent a Future Jihad looming around the world and at home. It is important that American citizens understand who the “Jihadists” are, what they want to achieve, and how they are proceeding. Without this knowledge, the American public will be unable to be part of the political debate about national security and the War on Terror. And if deprived from the support of an informed public, the US Government, now and in the future, cannot sustain difficult decisions pertaining to the defeat of the Terrorist enemy.

By Walid Phares and Behrooz Bahbudi
Read the rest here: On The Axis of Jihadism

In these times, the more informed you are, the better prepared you will be in the event of a crisis. Here are some sites that offer free news letters to help you keep informed. It is incumbant upon each of us to get our own news...

The Cato Institute
Homeland Security Institute
Council on Foreign Relations
The Brookings Institution
The Power and Interest News Report

Are we winning the war?

2006-09-01T10:30:00.001-06:00

This article was written by John Lehman who served as secretary of the Navy in the Reagan administration and later served as a member of the Sept. 11 commission. This is a condensed version of an article appears in this month's issue of the U.S. Naval Institute's Proceedings magazine. The article is not yet available on line, so I don't know if he included any strategies for combating the global war on Islamic Fascism.

While I agree with much of John Lehman's assessment, I think that he might have been a bit too harsh in his overall criticism of the Bush administration and pessimism in regards to winning the war. Unfortunately, we as a nation simply can't form a consensus to do what needs to be done. Hindsight is 20/20, and the Bush administration had to react in real-time to evolving threats all across the globe. Escalating and engaging in more conflict around the world is not popular policy whether it is necessary or not. It's especially not popular with an American population which isn't informed of the full extent of the war on terror and the US role in combating it worldwide. Our War on Terror is definitely a misnomer and I agree with the administration it should be replaced with the war against Islamic Fascism. It offers the scope and definition to our mission and states exactly what we are dealing with. MSNBC's Keith Olbermann disagrees...strongly. I don't think Keith has done very much research into the subject.

Many (most) Americans don't take time out of their prime time t.v. to actively seek out what is going on in the world beyond what they see in an hour of news every day. By and large, we trust in our politicians and military to track world events for us and keep us in our cozy (and oblivious) lives. We trust the media to deliver the news relevent to our lives and leave it at that. The problems start when things go awry in one part of the world and grab all the headlines. American opinion is then formed based only on the events that make for sexy news stories. Suicide bombings in Iraq and military attrocities like Abu Grahib and Haditha make the news while the other side of pre-emptive doctrine against terrorist groups like the mission of The
Combined Joint Task Force-Horn of Africa, or CJTF-HOA and their doings in the Horn of Africa get missed.

The task force has had four commanding generals in four years. All were Marines, and all built the foundations of strategy from Small Wars Manual, the classic treatise on counterinsurgency warfare that was written in 1940 by veterans of the Banana Wars and dusted off again for the hearts-and-minds campaign in Iraq. Since 2002, CJTF-HOA has built 52 schools, 6 hospitals, and 21 medical clinics; dug 23 village wells; and vaccinated thousands of people—and the animals that support their livelihood—against disease. In January 2006, when a decrepit, inhabited four-story building collapsed in Nairobi, Kenya, the task force assisted with the recovery efforts.

Around the Horn by David J. Danelo illustrates the successful implementation of strategies learned from fighting insurgency in Iraq. The military is taking it's pre-emptive doctrine and running a humanitarian campaign and PR campaign. Their goal is to eliminate the environment where hatred spreads.

Why is this important? Because we are fighting The Long War and this war will be generational. These education focused heart and mind missions are our only counter to the propagandists. Battles fought with bull dozers, shovels and medical treatment are all part of the larger fight...the ideological one where we try to prove through deed we are not the Great Satan as we are referred to.

We believe the freedom to choose what is best for the individual. We cherish life and try to live this life to the fullest. It is very important that we understand our enemies will willingly surrender everything in this life to bring the world into Allah's hand. They do this because of their faith...their government-mandated faith. There is no other faith allowed by law and no other areas of religious study are allowed. This is the definition of Fascism. The limited media coverage of world events is doing us a great disservice. They report none of this and the American people are kept in the dark about this spreading ideology.

Americans are unaware of the overall context of the spreading Islamic Fascism view events in Iraq differently and fail to see them in the context of the international conflict against this radical Islam. The chaos in Somalia has coalesced into the ICC taking control of the government and implementing a Shari' a state governed by Shari’ a law. The creation of another theocracy in Iraq like the one forming up in Somalia or already in existence in Iran counters everything that we have strived for over there. We must stay until we are completely sure they will not regress into another Middle Eastern theocracy unable to control its radical citizenry and spawning jihadists who live for nothing other than the destruction of Israel and the United States.

I know the Iraq conflict is in the forefront of every American's mind, but it needs to be noticed by the American people what is going on in the rest of the world. Islamic Fascism is real and spreading. Our presence in Iraq is not the cause; the ideology predates our affiliation in the region and is designed to spread...by the sword or any other means available. This global problem cannot be contained if the world remains asleep to the problem and won't address it for what it is. One only needs to look at the effects of the totalitarian regime taking root in Somalia to see what this culture is about and what its designs for the rest of the world are. Somalia reflects the game plan to be used on the rest of the continent (assuming the ICC is ultimately successful there).

Since June 5, when the I.C.C. drove out the warlords who had controlled Somalia's official capital Mogadishu, the Courts movement has expanded its control throughout the country's south and has recently penetrated the central regions, setting up Shari' a courts, forming local administrations based on agreements with clan elders and militia leaders, and imposing civil order. Throughout its ascent, the I.C.C. has met with little resistance from local populations, has eliminated the few remaining strongholds of warlord power and has isolated the internationally recognized but impotent Transitional Federal Government (T.F.G.) in its temporary capital, the provincial town of Baidoa.

The I.C.C. is a whole hearted believer in blaming America and Israel for all of the world's problems, only they toss in Ethiopia as another group to wipe off the map...regional flavor difference I suppose:

Throughout the first two weeks of August, the I.C.C. continued its practice of mobilizing the population in mass demonstrations. The most important of them were a rally in Mogadishu on August 11 attended by 2,000 people in support of Lebanon and against the "enemies of Islam" (the United States, Ethiopia and Israel), and demonstrations on August 14 supporting the I.C.C. in the Mudug and Galguduud regions, where the Courts had recently extended their rule.

One of the primary objectives of the ICC was getting out their message. We build schools they take over media outlets:

On August 7, the I.C.C. gained its first mass-media outlet, taking over Radio Mogadishu, which was part of the facilities that came under its control when it ousted forces loyal to warlord and T.F.G. deputy prime minister and interior minister Hussein Aideed from his stronghold Villa Somalia on July 27.

Muslims worldwide are outraged when we call these groups fascists, but what else do you call people that stifle all other political or opposing viewpoints?

The I.C.C.'s strategy of imposing control over ideological and political expression was evidenced on August 17 when its forces broke up a meeting in Mogadishu of the moderate Muslim group al-Islah, which advocates dialogue between the I.C.C. and T.F.G., on the grounds that the organization had not applied for a permit. I.C.C. spokesman Abdul Rahim Ali Mudey explained that the Courts would license meetings so long and they are "not a threat to public safety or Islamic teaching."

This is exactly what we are fighting. This is what our forces in the horn are trying to oppose and control the spread of, however they are limited in their mission:

Challenges remain. For CJTF-HOA to carry out its strategy in the Horn, it must be permitted access to a country by the national government and the State Department. Eritrea does not allow Coalition forces, and the Yemeni government restricts humanitarian assistance and military training to a lower level than CJTF-HOA would like. The government of Sudan also has not granted access to the American military.

And significantly, CJTF-HOA is not allowed into Somalia. With no central government and no borders—the eastern boundary in Ethiopia's Ogaden Desert is called a Provisional Administrative Line—the lawless land is, according to CJTF-HOA, ripe for the spread of fundamentalism. However, the State Department, which is the lead organization on developing Somalia policy, restricts CJTF-HOA from officially operating in the region.5 "Somehow or another," General Ghormley said, "I have to affect what's going on in there. Because I am not allowed into Somalia, the best I can do is to surround it with U.S. forces."

This mirrors the situation we have in Afghanistan. While US special forces, intelligence groups and the marines had great success with the original campaign to defeat the Taliban and remove their strongholds, the Taliban was allowed to regroup and reform in the mountainous border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

It's also strikingly similar to the cross border rally points terrorists and insurgents operating in Iraq enjoy in Syria and Iran. Syria covers for Hamas when they kidnap prisoners and offers a place for the kidnappers to stay...if they can make it there. They also have time for Hezbollah and provide the final chain in the logistical train arming them with their rockets.

These are all parts of the same war. We must view it as the same conflict with the overreaching ideology. We can't fight these militants who enjoy the protection, funding and especially sanctuary of sympathetic nations.

Why we didn't pay attention to the lessons learned fighting limited warfare with measured responses in Viet Nam I don't know. I do know that as we continue to fight this war it is more and more apparent that we are not (willing) to fight the root cause, merely the symptoms. Handcuffed by PC paranoia, we as a country can't even agree on what to call it.

Response to President Bush's recent speech were predictable and negative. Dean dismissed the entire speech as fear mongering and the rest of the beltway merely brushed it off as politics as usual. It's not encouraging that politicians only interested in winning elections blow off the war on Islamic Fascism so easily.

So the question remains: Are we winning? I think we're currently at an impasse and are positioning for the next round. I think the better question is: Can we afford to lose?

Vote in a straw poll!

2006-08-24T22:06:00.000-06:00

Click here to vote in a Republican Straw Poll

2006-08-08T19:35:00.000-06:00

This interview is really sick To morally equivicate Hezbollah and Israel is sickening in the extreme...Here's the part I have the biggest problem with:

THOMAS RICKS, REPORTER, "THE WASHINGTON POST": I think it will be. But I think civilian casualties are also part of the battlefield play for both sides here. One of the things that is going on, according to some military analysts, is that Israel purposely has left pockets of Hezbollah rockets in Lebanon, because as long as they're being rocketed, they can continue to have a sort of moral equivalency in their operations in Lebanon.(emphasis mine)

-- notice the "some military analysts" quote. It's a nice anonymous source that we are supposed to take as uncontestable fact...also, did this yahoo miss the fact that Israel has a lot of video of Israeli bombs destroying launchers and rockets? What do they think the UAV's hovering up above are filming? Does this guy really think the Israelis are just wasting ammo? That's just crazy 'cause the bombs they're using - they're expensive!!!

here's Powerline's take

here's the analysis by Ace of Spades.

and This is the full transcript where the interview was transcribed. (just in case people tell you the WAPO reporter's quote was taken out of context!)

Islamic Crisis

2006-08-08T18:04:00.000-06:00

I caught an interview of Walid Shoebat on Hannity and Colmes last night and was interested enough to try to learn more about him. As I was going through his site, I came across this interview he did on CNN.

I thought my eyes were open to the danger of Islamic Facism. I'm kind of a paranoid guy who imagines a lot of worst case scenarios...I'm a bit of an alarmist, this I will admit. Sadly, I think I underestimated the breadth and scope of the current situation. If Mr Shoebat is to be believed (and I do believe him) and every Palestinian child is put through this controlled indoctrination program, and all of the Madrasas are just like this, then there are hundreds of thousands of highly trained, extremely disciplined soldiers all over the world simply waiting to be activated. This army may only enjoy support from a paltry 1% of Muslims world wide, but that 1% of 1.5 million is still 1.5 million people actively helping, organizing, supplying, and funding them. The entire infrastructure of oil rich nations like Iran and Syria support these militants and help to promulgate the ideology that spawns them.

How do you educate an entire region of the world after they have spent generations being indoctrinated with anti-semitic propaganda like this? If that sample is indicitive of the material children are being fed, it's no wonder the Palestinians don't want peace. This skewed history mated with Wahabist Islam has conceived an evil bastard with no other purpose but to kill Israelis, Americans and anyone else who gets in the way of its spread.

Senator Wayne Allard's response

2006-08-06T09:35:00.000-06:00

Well this is probably a form letter, but at least he sent me something. Platitudes are nice and all, but I would really like to see some action!

August 3, 2006

Dear Sean:

Thank you for your recent letter concerning our nation's energy policy and
use of renewable and alternative energy sources. I appreciate that you
have taken the time to write.

Like you, I believe that we should try to increase our use of renewable
energy sources. Solar, geothermal, biomass, hydro and wind power are
attractive energy sources for the future and I believe we should continue
to support the research, perfect the technology and expand their use.

As you may know, today 58% of all of our nation's oil is imported. These
imports account for 36% of the U.S. trade deficit. The investments we
make in renewable technology will enhance fuel choice, increase domestic
production, reduce our trade deficit and insulate the U.S. from oil price
shocks and threats from rogue nations. I am also a strong proponent of
using alternative fuels such as propane, natural gas, ethanol and
methanol; they are clean fuels and are largely free of the pollutants
regulated by the Clean Air Act.

You may be interested to know about some of my efforts on behalf of
renewable energy. I am a founding member and currently the Co-Chair of
the Senate Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus. With 36
Senators, the Caucus seeks to bring together industry representatives, the
Administration and Congressional interests to discuss and promote the use,
research and development of renewable energy and energy efficiency.

I believe renewable energy and energy-efficient technologies help offset
fuel imports, create numerous employment opportunities, develop our
domestic economy and enhance and create export opportunities. In
addition, renewable energy and energy-efficient technologies provide
clean, inexhaustible energy for millions of consumers.

Maintaining our liberty, our freedoms, and our way of life is dependant on
ensuring our safety. I will continue to be very supportive of renewable
energy use as one of many energy resources that we can rely on. For more
information regarding this and other important issues, please feel free to
visit my website at . I look forward to hearing
from you in the future.

Sincerely,
A
Wayne Allard
United States Senator

PINR - Escalating Conflict in the Middle East Could Spark a Global Recession

2006-08-02T21:52:00.000-06:00

I just read the PINR dispatch for 7/31. It's: PINR - Escalating Conflict in the Middle East Could Spark a Global Recession Grim reading...basically it touches on the very real possibility of further escalation in the current Israeli / Hezbollah conflict. Namely the author of the piece, Jephraim P. Gundzik analyses the potential economic effects if Syria (and by default Iran) get pulled into the conflict. Involved directly and militarily and or economically to be more precise. Iran could raise the price of oil and cause us great harm...as Gundzik pointed out it wouldn't take but a 20% reduction to severely impact the price per barrel. This would certainly benefit Russia (getting more money per barrel sold), since they continue to move towards an entirely nationalized energy industry. With their increased profits, they can funnel more money into arming and developing their proxies like Syria and Iran.

Well this reading got me worried enough to write my congressman and senator. I would encourage anyone who reads this to do the same. We the people have got to get involved and start to make our voices heard.

Here's the text of the letter I wrote to Wayne Allard and Tom Tancredo:

Mr. Allard and Mr. Tancredo,

I am concerned about the escalating violence in the Middle East and it's potential economic effect on the USA. My intent in writing is to stress the importance of energy independence to the survival (economic and general) of the USA and the continued growth of our nation, our people, and the human race. I think we are diametrically opposed to the ideologies arrayed against us in the world and we need to take steps, and precautions to ensure our continuation and hopefully our prosperity.

It has been reported and I believe the current conflict in Lebanon was basically manufactured by Iran - though I'm sure Hezbollah hardly needed any prompting to act against Israel. It might be more accurate to say Iran let go of the leash and Hezbollah tore into Israel like a mad pit bull. The point is Iran pulled their strings and Iran is diplomatically very close to Russia and has many trade agreements with them - especially oil, refined gas and other energies...

Who is to say that Iran won't ultimately be drawn into this conflict and if they are drawn in, it will be logical for them to cut back their oil production and blow up the cost per barrel on crude. This benefits Russia as the price per barrel goes up and they continue to make a killing...especially since they have nationalized all of the major oil and energy companies recently. Who is to say Russia isn't pulling (or pushing) Iran into acting. Feeding Ahmadinejad's ego and fantasies and manipulating his actions would not be very difficult. Hezbollah and Ahmadinejad see eye to eye as far as Israel is concerned. It certainly wouldn't take much prodding by Ahmadinejad to get the group (whose charter is the elimination of Israel) to launch some rockets and kidnap some soldiers...

Also of note is Iran's sudden coziness with Venezuela. Chavez is no friend of the USA and while we don't necessarily rely on the Middle Eastern oil to satisfy our continental energy needs, we certainly need Venezuelan oil on the market to keep our hemisphere's economy running.

We need to be more self-sufficient and need to start planning for the future when the other shoe finally drops. I would like to see more drilling in America. Whether it be ANWR, off shore, shale oil here in Colorado, or methane gas on the Atlantic shelf, we just need more programs providing our own energy while more technological and long-range solutions are researched.

Related, but on a different note, I would like to increase trade with nations like Brazil who are less dependant on oil and who can't be blackmailed by tin pot dictatorships who control the majority of the worlds' oil.

At home, there should be more tax cuts and tax incentives on green companies and green technologies. They're expensive, but no more expensive than funding the next round of rich extremists bent on destroying America. Shale oil isn't more expensive than the current price per barrel, and our economy can survive and grow with the current price. I don't know how much more our economy can take and continue to grow, but at current prices, it's still trending up.

Technology like molecular manufacturing can even eliminate our reliance upon international suppliers of goods lots of drawbacks and probably a little extreme(like hanging a picture with a sledgehammer) but still it's provocative and somebody's going to let this genie out sooner rather than later, so it may as well be us.

Events in the world are picking up pace, and the road ahead looks like it could be ugly. I want to know that there are plans for a strong energy bill and actions being taken. I would like to know what you are doing to help us deal with the current crisis and what's on the table for the future.

Thanks and best regards.

Ya gotta start somewhere...what's the alternative? Apathy? Death? The first step is raising awareness (not creating awareness like the man-made global warming folks)and that's the job of "we the people" to be aware and knowledgeable and to use that knowledge to work the system and form a consensus. We take that consensus and make law and policy through our representatives. After all, we elected them, their job hinges on our votes.

Why are there so many civilian casualties in Lebanon?

2006-07-29T14:51:00.000-06:00

Because Hizbollah is an organization that strikes from behind the skirts of the civilian population.
Here is a prime example and proof to the claim of Hizbollah hiding military targets in civilian homes. I know that they can't match up to Israel in a stand up fight, and this is their solution to make the maximum impact on world opinion, but they are betraying the people they are trying to help by getting them killed!

It is a brilliant ploy by Hezbollah, when you think about it. Once you take into account the fact that they really don't give a damn about the Lebanese people, it is quite clear that they are playing the propaganda game to the hilt. Their scheme rivals Hitler's when he convinced his Germany that the Jewish people were to blame for all of Germany's economic woes.

Hezbollah just has to poke the bear with a stick and leave the poor innocent civilians of Lebanon in the path of an angry bear. The Israelis can blow the crap out of the sticks, but they have to go through the civilian population of Lebanon to do it. By killing "innocent civilians" who happen to allow missile launchers in their garages, Israel looks like the bad guy and aggressor in a war that they didn't start.

Meanwhile, the world watches the plight of the civilian refugees - dead, injured or homeless. Muslims are enraged, Europeans are horrified, and the UN demands that Israel stop its disproportionate response to the kidnapping and rocket barrages.

What should Israel do? They have to find and eliminate Hezbollah's ability to strike them. That means they have to locate the rocket stockpiles and launchers. If the launchers are stored in the garages of houses, should Israel just pick up the phone and dial that person's number? Well that's apparently what Israel thought they should do.

Call me crazy, but this doesn't seem to be a winning strategy in the long run...Granted, they are letting any civilian in the house get clear (helping their PR a little), destroying the rockets and platforms, costing their enemy millions in destroyed munitions, but they allow the terrorists to get away and fight another day...

Since Hezbollah is being supplied by Iran through Syria, and Sheik Hassan Nasrallah the Hezbollah chief is Likely hiding out in the Iranian Bunker, how effective can Israel possibly be? Iran will gladly continue to pay the cost of Hezbollah's munitions and look at it as merely the cost of doing business. They are simply financing their Jihad against Israel and strengthening their control and influence in the region through their proxies. They accomplish their strategic goals and strike a blow against Israel in world opinion as well as in blood and treasure.

The light at the end of the tunnel is the rest of the Arab world's response to Iran's power grabThis Arabic News story clearly reveals the uneasiness of other Arab nations at the prospect of a growing Iranian influence.

Private Space Station???

2006-07-12T22:28:00.000-06:00

This is crazy!

Spacecraft launched in test of private space station technology

This fall, the company hopes to launch Genesis II. Over the next several years, the company plans to test larger prototype spacecraft, including a full-scale mock-up slated to launch in 2012.

Well if the world goes in the pot in 2012, here's the place to be when watching it happen...

Nanotechnology: Start Planning

2006-07-10T20:59:00.000-06:00

Nanotechnology: Start Planning

This is a good article. It illustrates one of the reasons I decided to start this journey and create this Blog. There's a lot of good information and some watchout markets. I didn't think of ALL of the implications of molecular manufacturing...if manufacturing a product means simply drafting it on a computer and "printing" out the finished good (perhaps that's a little simplistic, but you get the idea). That's going to represent a lot of lost jobs...manufacturing, transportation (it'll be cheaper to manufacture on the spot rather than move it), construction (most forms)...what does that leave us with? Lawyers, politicians, military, civil cervants, service industry, entertainment industry, video game industry, movie industry, etc. We're going to live in a hedonistic, Lawyer and bureacrat ridden society (with teeth).

The fact is, this technology will come...the building blocks are already there. The question is, how are we going to prepare for it. Think of your life now, and now picture it in 10 years...now 20. That is the estimated time frame. Once this revolution begins, it will bring on a new age, but there is always a price in blood and tears involved in any birth of a new age.

New Scientist Special Report on Quantum World

2006-07-06T22:53:00.000-06:00

New Scientist Special Report on Quantum World

This is my next challenge...I haven't buffed up on my quantum physics in a couple of years. Well it ought to be interesting in the full Chinese sense of the word!

NeuroTech...

2006-07-06T20:51:00.000-06:00

This New Scientist Tech News Item piqued my interest today...

Man and machine vision in perfect harmony
08 July 2006
Lakshmi Sandhana
Magazine issue 2559
SCANNING through large amounts of images or video footage can be time-consuming and laborious. Now a machine that taps into the processing power of your brain can help you do it much faster.

The device, called the cortically coupled computer vision system (C3Vision), was developed by Paul Sajda and colleagues at Columbia University in New York. It uses an electroencephalogram (EEG) to measure electrical activity in the brain via skull-cap electrodes, while the user scans through images. If the user sees an image that grabs their attention, such as a picture of a crime suspect, the EEG will pick up a spike of electrical activity in their brain 300 milliseconds later, something known as a P300 response. This occurs well before the user can click a button to say they saw the picture. A connected computer can then collect all the images associated with a P300 response.

I was interested in the subject matter, but didn't really want a subscription to their magazine, so I thought I would see what I could see about this little piece as it's another step towards human and machine integration.

1st Link
This was a completely random find, but it at least verifies the veracity of the New Scientist piece.

Associate Professor Paul Sajda of Biomedical Engineering has been awarded a one-year, $750,000 Phase 1 grant from DARPA/ NGA entitled ÂCortically-coupled computer vision.Â The goal of the project is to interface single-trial real-time neuroimaging with computer vision algorithms to improve object recognition and image search by humans. Columbia co-Investigators include Professor Truman Brown (BME and Radiology) and Postdoctoral Research Scientist Robin Goldman of Radiology. Outside collaborators include City College of New York, Oregon Health Sciences University and Siemens Corporate Research.

Oh look it's our friends at DARPA (wonder why NS left them out of their blurb?) funding more research that will benefit the private sector - after the Military gets their version of the interface linking man with drone capable of making instant decisions and capable of analyzing all visible terrain data at the speed of thought...

Second Link
I found the mini-article below and was pretty impressed with the entire Seeing With Sound website. There's a lot of in-depth information and access to even more information on the site.

Cortically coupled computer vision for rapid image search.

IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2006 Jun; 14(2): 174-9
Gerson AD, Parra LC, Sajda P

We describe a real-time electroencephalography (EEG)-based brain-computer interface system for triaging imagery presented using rapid serial visual presentation. A target image in a sequence of nontarget distractor images elicits in the EEG a stereotypical spatiotemporal response, which can be detected. A pattern classifier uses this response to reprioritize the image sequence, placing detected targets in the front of an image stack. We use single-trial analysis based on linear discrimination to recover spatial components that reflect differences in EEG activity evoked by target versus nontarget images. We find an optimal set of spatial weights for 59 EEG sensors within a sliding 50-ms time window. Using this simple classifier allows us to process EEG in real time. The detection accuracy across five subjects is on average 92%, i.e., in a sequence of 2500 images, resorting images based on detector output results in 92% of target images being moved from a random position in the sequence to one of the first 250 images (first 10% of the sequence). The approach leverages the highly robust and invariant object recognition capabilities of the human visual system, using single-trial EEG analysis to efficiently detect neural signatures correlated with the recognition event.

That's basically saying the same thing the NS article said, only using the technical jargon of the original publishing. Sometimes, I find reading these journal publishings really cause the experiment to sink in - this is a computer monitoring a human's thought process and recognizing a spike in his or her EEG as recognition in the human brain. The computer then grabs the image that caused the peak for later application...

also from the site, but unrelated to this article, was this little tid-bit:

IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2006 Jun; 14(2): 246-50
Wilson JA, Felton EA, Garell PC, Schalk G, Williams JC

Most current brain-computer interface (BCI) systems for humans use electroencephalographic activity recorded from the scalp, and may be limited in many ways. Electrocorticography (ECoG) is believed to be a minimally-invasive alternative to electroencephalogram (EEG) for BCI systems, yielding superior signal characteristics that could allow rapid user training and faster communication rates. In addition, our preliminary results suggest that brain regions other than the sensorimotor cortex, such as auditory cortex, may be trained to control a BCI system using similar methods as those used to train motor regions of the brain. This could prove to be vital for users who have neurological disease, head trauma, or other conditions precluding the use of sensorimotor cortex for BCI control.

To give you a better idea what Electrocorticography is and what they mean by "minimally-invasive", here's the wikipedia definition of Electrocorticography:

Electrocorticography
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Electrocorticography (ECoG) is the practice of using an electrode placed directly on the brain to record electrical activity directly from the cerebral cortex. By placing the electrode directly onto the cortical grey matter one can record signals from neurons much more effectively than through electroencephalography (EEG). One of the main limitations of EEG is the poor spatial resolution, because the skull acts as an attenuator of neural signal, thus filtering out high frequency signals and lowering the signal-to-noise ratio. The biggest drawback to ECoG is the requirement of surgery in order to place the electrodes under the dura mater directly onto the brain's surface.

YIKES!!!! Place an electrode directly ON the brain...That's minimally invasive?!? So what do you suppose invasive would be? Taking a silicone chip and planting it directly in the cerebral cortex? Nevermind...that's probably exactly what invasive would be. And probably the next step in this developing tech...

Mkay...

2006-07-05T22:11:00.000-06:00

Ok. I mentioned in the last post that I read voraciously...Well since I started this blog, I've made it a habit to visit random blogs also listed on blogger.com. There's this nifty little window on the blogger homepage that shows recently updated blogs. Well I just clicked on Glen's Weblog in the recent update window and found this as one of his posts:

Singularity Summit Writeups
ZDNet
Responsible Nanotechnology
Down the avenue
All found using Blogger Web Comments. Hooray, something I wrote was useful!

Glen is an English-born Australian (Melbourne) who works as a UI Software Engineer at Google. Pretty cool find as he has lots of cool updates to Goggle and the blogging software being developed

I was really glad I tumbled on this...The link ZD Net contains a lot of good stuff for bloggers and news hounds not to mention the write up on the Singularity Summit piquing my interest! Also looking first at Glen Murphy's site and then ZD Net, I realize how far I still have to go in learning web design and how much better connected I need to be. I would like to actually be writing about material as or before it happens (research is all fine and dandy, but I want a STORY!)

The Golden Ratio and the Mayan Calendar connection.

2006-07-05T18:13:00.000-06:00

While telling a friend at work today about QK, he brought up something I had forgotten about for a while. He was trying to remember something a friend of his was trying to explain and it had to do with mathematic ratios in nature. It triggered a memory and I knew I had read something about it. Those who know me know that's not a stretch...I read voraciously and I'll read almost anything. Anyway, I found it. The GoldenNumber.Net is a very nice site which breaks down the golden ratio and explains everything about it and its history. It also has some pretty cool tools and an interesting ad page to use the principles in the real world. The math is all there for any math buffs and it's definitely a cool curiosity. If this interests you, I would recommend the movie Pi. It's an interesting flick and tells the story of a paranoid schizophrenic who is desperately searching for a key number that will unlock the secrets of nature...And the Torah...And the stock market. I think I just identify too much with the main character, except I'm not Jewish, or schizophrenic, or well Never mind that!

Now, after that mostly unnecessary intro, I'm brought to the subject of this post (finally)(*shut up*)(what)(*I'm not schizophrenic!!!*) "Sorry...Ahem" I thought it would be fun for me to revisit the Golden Number reacquaint myself with our physical connection to mathematics. The proportional ratio is there throughout everything we see and connect with. The site also goes into the number's connection to most early cultures. It especially manifests itself in their architecture. Pictured on the site is an Egyptian Pyramid and that made me wonder if I were to cross reference the golden ratio or Phi with the Mayans and the Mayan Calendar. It seemed logical...I know the Mayans had pyramids like the Egyptians, so was the golden ratio involved in the Mayan Long Count calendar? I asked Google and got38,000 hits! Luckily, I immediately recognized one of the names near the top of the list John Major Jenkins who is in the forefront of 2012 research and is an authority on the astrology connected to the Mayan calendar...Here is his THE HOW AND WHY OF THE MAYAN END DATE IN 2012 A.D.' statement from 1994.

The first link I checked out in connecting Phi to the Mayan Calendar was a promo for one of John Major Jenkin's books: Tzolkin: Visionary Perspectives and Calendar Studies by John Major Jenkins.

His current site is worth a look, there will be a frenzy about the 2012 end date in a few years and his work will be in high demand...

There are coincidences in life, but the more mathematically ordered we discover the universe is, the fewer coincidences there will be. Looking at the golden ratio grants us an insight into some of the strangeness in the universe. It is bizarre, and for many conventional thinkers, it's uncomfortable, but all we can do is learn, critique, cross reference and continue to learn.

There are some potential hard times ahead for us and I think we're going to see earth shattering changes in the next forty years...The earth aligning with the center of the galaxy - still just a curiosity for now.

4th of July and Patriotism...

2006-07-03T10:39:00.000-06:00

HAPPY BIRTHDAY AMERICA!!!

I love this country and everything it stands for. Our freedoms and unlimited potential make Americans what we are.

America makes mistakes because people make mistakes. America isn't perfect because people aren't perfect. We still have the best system and the most representative system there is without going to a complete democracy - which could come with more technology and interpersonal connectivity.

I appreciate the ability for me to take part in the political process. I appreciate the ability to share my opinion with others and to gather others with a like mind to me to form a political unit. I respect the military who defends my rights and who fights and dies to give those same rights to others.

There is actually a sampling of people from the left who are not proud to be an American. They justify calling soldiers baby killers with sayings like "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism!" Likely, they will attribute the quote to Jefferson and truly feel patriotic. Well you can tell 'em "Jefferson never said it!" Hat tip to Volokhfor finding this gem from the Jefferson Library:

"There are a number of quotes that we do not find in Thomas Jefferson's correspondence or other writings; in such cases, Jefferson should not be cited as the source. Among the most common of these spurious Jefferson quotes are: 'Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.' "

Now I know any left leaning person with good intentions and some paving stones will bring up the attrocities that have occurred in Iraq. Just like them, I cringe every time there is a news story like Abu Grahib or Haditha. I cringe, not only because I hate to see a victim victimized by someone with power over them, I cringe also because I know that whatever happened it will be spun out of control and make the military look like it's rife with criminal behavior. Unlike many on the left who point and scream "See! See! I told you this would happen!!! We need to pull the troops out NOW!" - I would take the more thoughtful, more nuanced (if I can steal a term form across the aisle) approach and say there are bad apples in every sampling of humanity. So long as the military follows the law and does as it should: Punish criminals found guilty of crimes; Establish that the problem isn't systemic; and continue with the regularly scheduled program; Í'll continue to be happy with their overall performance.

We all enjoy freedom of religion (not freedom from religion). I don't have to be afraid to congregate in church or with others to share my religion. If we lived in the Middle East, we would be rounded up for being any religion other than Islam. Sharia law prohibits any religious display other than the particular sect of Islam practiced locally and approved by the local Imams. Granted, some sects of Islam are similar in this respect to our own secularists and Atheists who are offended and would like to see a banning of all public displays of religious nature...I personally think religion should be discussed everywhere. All forms of religion and philosophy should be rigorously discussed and debated in school and in the world in general. Human nature is more apt to be tamed when presented with philosophical critically thinking mind.

I Appreciate the fact that I can start in America with nothing and through plenty of hard work, I can be whatever I desire. The only limiting factor on my growth is my own desire and work ethic. The only excuse for me not succeding is I didn't try hard enough or smart enough or I didn't learn from my mistakes. When this happens, I pick myself up and try again...smarter.

I understand the Military Industrial Complex and support it. Because of it, we have the internet, Robots, Virtual Reality, night vision, fiber optics, innoculations, CD's, DVD's - toys, gadgets, and advanced human potential...more stuff has been researched and developed by the military or through military funding than any other organization can ever claim credit for. Our incredibly high standard of living is directly attributable to our military. The military and the technology behind it allows for the civilian population to feel safe. When we feel safe and secure, we can focus on leisure, home improvement, career, personal education and religion. Each activity feeds the machine we live within allowing society and civilization to continue to grow and advance whilst Entropy is held at bay.

Earth Changes

2006-07-02T22:28:00.000-06:00

I just read Earth Changes by Jonathan McGregor Bethel...It's interesting just because he simply sums up so many different therories that are out there right now.

It's crazy that the Mayans wrote a calendar that encompassed a 26,000 year cycle. It's crazy that the end of the 26,000 year cycle happens to be in the year 2012. It's strange that the Time Wave Zero or end of Novelty is estimated to occur in the year 2012. It's curious that there are so many breakthroughs in nano technology, AI, Bio-Tech and Cybernetics. It's interesting that there are so many things in life to worry about. It's frightening to think about the potential strife in our future if the house of cards were to ever collapse...

I like this sentiment though:

Whatever the facts are, we need to be creating spiritual ideals and treating the others around us with the kindness we would like to receive, creating a positive morphic thought field and influencing the course of events in a beneficial way. This way, we will be in the best frame of mind to meet any challenges that may arise. If nothing happens, wonderful, we’re all better off with our benevolent behavior!

For me, it's: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Cosmic Karma? Works for me. So long as that basic message is conveyed, the world is a better place. He says "positive morphic thought field?" That sounds like what I would call good vibes! Seriously, the power of positive thought might (is believed to) have an affect on the outcomes of experiments...think of the affects of a successful placebo and then picture that for the world. If simple observation can effect the outcome of a million flips of a coin, then think of what a billion shiny happy people carting around a Positive Mental Attitude could do for the world...

While I was looking for a link on the effects of directed thought on experiments, I came across this link. It illustrates a similar principle only in relation to the martial art of Aikido.

Once I find a link for the coin flipping experiments, I'll paste it in an update...worst case, I'll find the documentary and post a link to it.

Robotics - Another Cog in the Singularity Wheel

2006-07-02T19:21:00.000-06:00

This article is significant not for the fluff on the top amounting to: "Who wouldn't want a robot around the house to perform menial tasks?" Rather, it's significant because of the approach to building a robot that they are taking.

Developing intelligent behaviour
The key issue governing these tasks is intelligence and developing intelligent behaviour on a number of fronts, the corner stone and main work of COGNIRON.

organized around seven key research themes, the project studies multimodal dialogues, detection and understanding of human activity, social behaviour and embodied interaction, skill and task learning, spatial cognition and multimodal situation awareness, as well as intentionality and initiative. Finally, the seventh research theme, systems levels integration and evaluation, focuses on integrating all the other themes into a cohesive, cogitating whole.

Dr Chatila summarizes the purpose of the seven themes. "Research breaks down into four capacities required by a cognitive robot companion: perception and cognition of environment; learning by observation; decision making; communication and interaction with humans."

Basically, they're taking robot brains and teaching them the same basic way we would teach a child, or an animal will treat it's offspring. That's a significant advance in processing technology and an interesting turn of events...Once our machines start learning by themselves, where will the knowledge take them?

Kurzweil's Singularity theory needs for robotics and especially AI research to progress in this manner and for computers and machines to start learning on their own for his predictions / theories to come to fruition. A couple of other things that could come about with the progression of this technology: The Terminator was spawned by a very similar set of circumstances. Another sinister AI is our old friend Hal from 2001. Finally, you can't talk about AI villains without giving The Borg a mention...

Here's to Humanity...hopefully we don't accidentally create our own exterminator!

Lt. Dan you got new legs...

2006-07-02T09:17:00.000-06:00

Here's a something for me to spout off about...

Worcester Polytechnic Institute, CellThera collaborate on work aimed at regenerating limbs. The project, which will use the salamander as a model, is part of a multi-institution research effort funded by a one-year, $3.9 million award from Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
Worcester, Mass. – June 30, 2006 – Worcester Polytechnic Institute today announced that it has signed an agreement with CellThera Inc., a Worcester-based biotechnology start-up firm, to conduct joint research aimed at developing techniques for restoring tissue--including digits and limbs--damaged or lost due to traumatic injury.

At least the military has recognized their obligation to helping soldiers who have lost limbs in the line of duty! The Iraq war (as well as any other military conflict) creates a huge demand for prosthetics and it has and will force thousands of soldiers to retire or be discharged early with missing limbs. If losing a limb is temporary, a soldier's value to the military as an asset has just been increased as the soldier's military knowledge and experience won't be lost to a very common casualty discharge...and Lu-ten-ant Dan will get new legs.

Check out SoldiersAngels if you're looking for a place to help wounded soldiers today...

DARPA may be a great sinister organization in video games like the Metal Gear series; and conspiracy theorists love to pick on DARPA, but they have a long track record of technological breakthroughs that can be directly attributed to them. The technology passed on to the private sector has made our lives better and will continue to do so in the future...they may be getting it from the aliens, but I just hope they keep it coming!

From night vision to the internet, DARPA is continually developing new technology for the military to use. While they're testing it, invariably, some genius realizes how cool VR goggles would be if we used them to play video games...with our friends on base...in Germany...while we drive the tank." a quick google search and Voila: the private sector gets a new toy and we all get to benefit from the technology! Fresh meat for the economy and a new toy for Mom's and wives to buy...

A breakthrough for the Nanites!

2006-07-01T17:30:00.000-06:00

I was just checking out EurekAlert! and found this interesting article about a breakthrough with nano-scale electronics...The days of the RFID chip are actually here...This little baby will enable complex micro processing chips to be placed in pretty much everything (including us). It will connect people to everything in their environment and boost all human capabilities. For some interesting analysis check out the entire Kurzweil AI net web site. He foresees a singularity event (an event after which we can no longer predict what comes next) within the next 40 years or so and nano-technology is one of the necessary major breakthroughs (similar to industrial and the information revolutions) for this singularity to foment.

Public Release: 30-Jun-2006
Journal of American Chemical Society
Jumpy electrons make chromophores semiconductors suitable for nanoscale electronics.
The future of high-speed electronics might very well be defined by linking together small, "electrically jumpy" molecules called chromophores. Electrical charges can zip along chains of linked chromophores faster than any electrical charge yet observed in organic semiconductors, beating the previous benchmark in this regard by a factor of three. Chromophore-based circuitry that could create nano-sized electronic components that can do anything that organic semiconductors currently do, only much faster.
National Science Foundation, US Department of Energy

Contact: Greg Lester
glester@pobox.upenn.edu
215-573-6604
University of Pennsylvania

Theomatics

2006-06-30T23:29:00.000-06:00

This is a really cheesy site, but it is an interesting concept especially in light of the other Bible Code which has gotten so much publicity.

Photo Essay - Amazing pictures

2006-06-30T20:45:00.000-06:00

Just stumbled across this site...there are some amazing pictures on there. I'm adding defendamerica.mil to my news links...

Corporate Sponsored Proofs for the Existence of God

2006-06-30T19:44:00.000-06:00

The Big Jewel has a funny article written by Justin Kahn I like this bit:

Now when you look at the universe what do you compare it with? A common rock or the timepiece worn by Eric Clapton? When the Rolex Corporation looks at the universe the answer is clear: just as elegant timepieces require Rolex, so the universe requires a Maker, who is most likely Swiss.

check it out...

Connectivity I - Are we creating our own reality?

2006-06-30T18:56:00.000-06:00

I know this is a strange title for a post, but this entry represents the first real entry and the general direction of this blog. If you decide to stay for a bit and check out some of the things I'm pointing out, I think you'll see where I'm going with it. I'm going to take a meandering course in hashing out the meaning of this simple question. This will be one of the basic and underlying themes of this weblog. Often, it's going to seem like some of the things I'm posting are random and unrelated, but I promise after you read some of the same things I've read and seen some of the things I've seen, you too will start seeing the connectivity of ideas and how YOUR own personal observation of events leads to other related events and discovery.

The Meme

Have you ever read a word in a book, and not known what it meant so you looked it up? After learning its meaning did it seem like you then heard or read that word everywhere you looked? That's been the story of my life. Everything I hear, read or watch on TV ends up connecting in some way or another.

If this hasn't happened to you, let me be the first to give you this experience. Here's a word for you to learn now and some time later, you will see it everywhere.

Memetics is a curious theory regarding the spread of ideas (like a virus). This definition as given by dictionary.com has changed from the original, but it still provides the basic concept of this field.

I learned about memes from a fiction novel and honestly thought the author made it up. I was literally shocked when I saw the word turn up on a news broadcast. The word and the concept were once again active in my frontal lobe. I started researching memes on the internet and found there were a few different interpretations and a bunch of examples of them (many of the science and info site links to the right have great sections on memes). A classic political meme is "Bush lied and people died." This short sweet sentence conveys no factual or provable information, but the intent and catchiness of the phrase are perfect for sticking in the mind, so the message is successful and promulgates.

The Wikipedia definition of a meme is good and sets the stage for you to look for this word or examples of memes in your everyday life. Watch for the word and watch for memes...They're a virus!

When will progressive leftists grow up? - d_brit

2006-06-30T16:18:00.000-06:00

I just read this in the comments section of RWN. This sums it up for me!

it never occurred to me to cry "foul!" for eight years. When will they grow up? by Anna_Venger

I know its a grim assessment but the answer is NEVER. At least for 90% of them anyway.

For greater insight into our left, just look at the left's behavior in Israel and what it psychologically reveals about that mind-set.

After 50 years of attacks, Israel's left still refuses to face the reality of what they are dealing with and the necessity of using overwhelming force to end the threat.

In a fair democratic election, Palestinians elected Hamas, an organization committed to the complete destruction of Israel. Thus the majority of Palestinians support Hamas and their mission.

We ALL know this, yet Israel's left refuses to consider any alternative to their failed beliefs.

What makes us think our left will behave any differently?

Just look at the liberals that post on this blog. In the 2+ years that I have frequented this blog, I would estimate that perhaps 10% of them have modified their thinking even somewhat, much less fully acknowledged the logical contradictions in their positions.

9/11 didn't change their minds. Nor will any successful future attacks, for many of them, a Nuclear holocaust wouldn't sway them.

That sounds insane, but just look at the DU, Daily Kos, etc. they are frequented by people out of touch with reality, which in essence is insanity's definition, and the most committed would rather die than give up their world-view.

The number of elected politicians posting on these sites demonstrates the correctness of the proposition that the common views expressed at the DU and D Kos are becoming the majority view within the Democratic party.

Consider what psychologically the intentional exposure of the SWIFT program implies about the liberals in charge of the media. What is revealing proven and effective methods in fighting the WoT to our sworn enemies, people sworn to destroy all that we hold dear, if not a death wish?

THAT is what we are dealing with and only consistent exposure of that mind-set and all that it implies will alert the American public to the internal danger we face.

Most liberals are loyal Americans who love our country just as much as any conservative.

They are just completely out of touch with the degree of danger we are fighting and just how dangerous for all of us their mind-set is when faced with committed evil intent upon destroying all that we hold dear.

by d_Brit on 2006-06-29 17:16:48

Coming soon

2006-06-30T15:30:00.000-06:00

Quantum Kitty is new and still under construction. Please check out the links on the right so you can see what this site will be about! I am researching and composing more material now and working on some book lists (fiction and non fiction).

I would love to have conversations with anyone with similar interests! As I research and go about my day to day routine, I will post some tidbits I find interesting along with some analysis and things to watch.

thanks for taking the time to stop by if you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know!

this was interesting...

2006-06-30T14:59:00.000-06:00

While setting up my bookmarks, I was looking for a really cool site I found about a year and a half ago. I was googling memetics (which had 619,000 entries on something I'm willing to wager had only a few hundred entries five years ago) well I found the site, it's: fUSION Anomaly.net, but in the process of finding the website, I noticed 1st, how many more sites there are about memetics; 2nd, how many of the sites I already visit have sections on memetics; and 3rd, how peculiar it is that the study of memetics has now become a meme all it's own.

One of the sites I found during the above google search, was already in my bookmarks...not entirely strange in and of itself, but I had a friend send it to me for a great article on nano technology. I had yet to have the time to read anything on the site, but you can bet I'll be reading it now! I was amazed to find this entire archive on memetics. Check it out! Nanotechnology - Foresight Institute.

2006-06-24T09:06:00.000-06:00

So Kim Jong Il is having a missile test, well we're having a ocean based missile shield test complete with full fleet operations basically in his back yard...anyone want to place any bets on who wins this contest?

http://www.pacom.mil/exercises/vs2006/index.shtml