Chad

No, we're not talking about Florida 2000. We're talking about the nation of Chad. These poor fucking people. Not only do they have a civil war raging next door in Sudan, thousands of refugees streaming over the border, but today The Head Heeb reports this:

Chadian farmers are now threatened by a plague of locusts that has already destroyed crops in Mali, Mauritania and Niger. If the locusts are not controlled, people and livestock may face starvation throughout the Sahel, and the affected countries lack both pesticides and the infrastructure to deploy them:

Mali has so far raised only one third of the US$3 million requested from donors to step up locust control measures.

“To date, we have been invaded by 63 swarms, but we only have a third of the resources we need to treat the area of nearly 650,000 hectares that is currently infested”, Brahima Koni, the deputy coordinator of Mali's locust control campaign, told IRIN by telephone from Bamako.

So far, he added, Mali only has 18 spray teams deployed on the ground.

Thus far, the majority of aid has come not from wealthy donor countries but from the Maghrebi states, which recently battled locust infestations and have delivered pesticides and crop dusting planes to the affected area. Morocco has been particularly speedy in delivering assistance. More money is on its way from the donor community, but United Nations officials estimate that "it takes about a month to get the goods on the ground" once the funds are approved. In the meantime, the food situation in the Sahel may become critical. [my emphasis]

So where are the Christo-Fascists in the U.S. government? Swarms of locusts? Genocide? By golly, this is a Biblical Event! All we need is a plague. This would be the perfect opportunity for them to show how Bush was doing 'God's work'. Oh yeah, silly me, all of our armed forces and treasure are being squandered in Iraq.

Hmmm

From ABC News:

Pakistani National Arrested After Videotaping Bank Skyscrapers in Charlotte, N.C.

(Charlotte, N.C.-AP, August 10, 2004) — A Pakistani citizen is in federal custody after being arrested by a police officer who spotted him videotaping the 60-story Bank of America headquarters and another skyscraper in downtown Charlotte.

[. . .]

So, if I'm standing on a corner with a video camera and I just happen to pan up to get a shot of a tall building (we got a lot of them in NYC, you know), I'm gonna get jacked up by a Hercules Team? I mean, this guy might be Al-Qaeda but man, this is still America. I mean, did he do something illegal? How much you wanna bet a good lawyer gets all the video tapes thrown out as evidence? They'll have to kick this guy loose and if he is a terrorist, he'll be free to keep on planning. Unless they 'disappear' him to Gitmo.

Note: This guy is an illegal alien, but they didn't know that until they grabbed him.

Bush in action

Via Kos:




What do you want to bet the other guy was French?

Details here.

Update: 11:30:

Lambert at Corrente has more on this here.

Previews

Lambert at Corrente has a preview of the next few months and the shit-splattering that will occur:

You know, so much shit is hitting the fan that it's not possible to keep track of what's flying where. Just today, Iraq is moving rapidly into failed state territory, the Plame Affair seems to be grinding toward some kind of hideous climax, the puppet Iraqi government is after neo-con man slut Ahmed Chalabi for murder and fraud...

And we still have 12 weeks to go before the election—assuming there is an election—so things haven't really started to heat up.

Of course, we're still waiting on the AP suit to (finally) reveal the microfilm of aWol's military records, and then Hersh's book is coming out in September....

Pass the popcorn!

Andrea Mitchell

Is it me or is she starting to look a bit worn out? You know, like an old hooker who's seen one too many tricks. Do you think she notices Ol' Al getting senile?

Goss, again

Bill at Whiskey Bar has an extensive look at the new DCI, Porter Goss. No surprise to me.

[. . .]

Well, the Democrats may feel politically compelled to pull their punches, but former CIA Director Stansfield Turner apparently does not:

"This is the worst appointment that's ever been made to the office of director of central intelligence because that's an office that needs to be kept above partisan politics."

If anything, that seems a bit of an understatement. When Richard Nixon decided to bang heads together at the CIA, and thereby stop the flow of Watergate-related leaks he suspected were originating there, he at least sent in James Schlesinger - an experienced bureacrat who'd already paid his dues in the national security state. Bush, on the other hand, is sending in a partisan hack congressman with absolutely no experience managing large organizations, and whose glory days as a CIA operative are more than three decades in the past.

[. . .]

Go read the whole thing.

Update: 08:40:

Kevin at Lean Left has more on Goss here.

Jim Hightower

From Jim Hightower's Weblog:

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Throughout his first term in the White House, President Bush has consistently rewarded his biggest financial supporters with special favors, insider access and prized federal appointments at home and abroad. Last Friday, Bush quietly appointed major fundraisers as ambassadors to the Bahamas and Estonia as well as to two positions on the board of directors of the Inter-American Foundation.

[. . . ]

Entire Post.

Bush Administration=Cronyism incarnate.

Garrison Keillor

Via Corrente here and here:

[St. Paul, Minnesota is] a city of yellow-dog Democrats, so there is a high value placed on public services. If you call 911 in St. Paul, the cops or the EMTs will arrive within four minutes. In the Republican suburbs, where No New Taxes is the beginning and the end of politics and emergency services depend on volunteers, the response time can be anywhere between ten or fifteen and thirty minutes.

This is the difference between Democrats and Republicans in 2004, when it comes right down to it: Republicans are all about Old Glory and school prayer and the sanctity of marriage and the Fatherhood of God but when it comes down to actually needing help from them, you shouldn't get your hopes up. They might send an ambulance or they might just send a Get Well card.

Because we Democrats feel that the people of St. Paul are entitled to the best when it comes to what's crucial. You can be a Christian, athiest, Buddhist, nudist, and the rescue squad will be there for you within four minutes.

Republicans have perfectly nice manners, normal hair, pleasant smiles, good deoderants, but when it comes down to cases, you do not want them to be monitoring your oxygen flow: they will set it to the minimum necessary to sustain basic brain function, and then they will recite a little prayer for you. They are a party that is all about perceptions, the Christian party that conceals enormous glittering malice and is led by brilliant bandits who are dividing and conquering the sweet land I grew up in. I don't accept this.

We Democrats are deciduous. We fade, lose heart, become torpid, languish, then the sap rises again, and we are passionate. This is a year for passion.
(Garrison Keillor's Homegrown Democrat. pp. 11-12)

Inner Frenchmen

Since Jesus' General, Gen. J.C. Christian, Patriot, talks about his Inner Frenchman all the time, I figured I'd show you mine. Maybe, if you're all good, I'll show you my Little Soldier someday.



Yes, that's really me, back when I had more hair.

More details on my book deal here if you're interested.

And yes, I'm still hoping a guest blogger will surface for the first 2 weeks in September. Details here.

Treason?

From Wampum:

It is a word impossible to say. Congressional Committees. Angry men in dark suits and narrow ties.

Someone is burning US intel assets. An al-Qaida regional communications officer (Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan). Two Federal moles in Arab upstate New York (Yassin Muhiddin Aref and Mohammed Mosharref Hossain). An al-Qaida operations officer (Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani). NSA intercepts and national technical capabilities. CIA covert officers and HUMINT/I capabilities.

I'm concerned that there may be agency in these acts. Agency beyond incompetence, the normal signature of this administration. Agency beyond managing the news cycle, the normal responsive media ploys of many administrations. Agency beyond institutional friction, a normal problem even without the "Homeland Security" re-org [1].

The net effect is hardening al-Qaida, and softening the United States. Perhaps it is just a series of coincidences, the weekly media gaming of a regime to dumb and venal to govern with consent or campaign on the issues, and not a planned covert reduction of defense, but that appears to be what is in fact happening.

[. . .]

[1] Suggestion to the K/E campaign. That re-org may have passed its sell-by date, and two paragraphs on unscrambling the bureacratic omlette may resonate in the standard stump. Try it in a focus group.

Entire post.

Okay, so maybe I got my tinfoil hat on, but we've been lied to so many times, how can you believe anything that comes out of the White House anymore? How long can you just chalk it up to the concentration of stupid per square foot at 1600?

Your tax dollars at work

Fomenting fear. And also getting votes, it seems. Via The American Street from Tom Tomorrow:

I haven't seen any news stories about it, but I just got tipped by a guy who works in Washington, and this GSA page confirms: September is about to become "National Preparedness Month."

Heck, this Red Cross page flatly states that Tom Ridge will make the official announcement on September 9th.

Whoa.

(Why September 9th? That's awfully late, if it's supposed to be the entire month. My guess, thinking like Karl Rove: this year's 9/11 anniversary falls on a Saturday, so an announcement on the date or even Friday would only get a burst of free media on a weekend. But by timing it for the 6 pm news on Thursday, it'll reach the Friday papers, and thus be fully-injected into all of the emotion-laden anniversary coverage, plus the Sunday morning talk shows.)

The idea, obviously, is to throw a large amount of focus, possibly for weeks on end, on the only issue on which Bush outpolls Kerry. And of course this will come on the heels of the GOP convention. So where the Democrats' post-convention media got blitzed with terror warnings based on years-old intelligence, the Republicans' afterglow might well be favorably extended, implied message being:

"Why, with George Bush and enough shovels, we'll all be just fine."

[. . .]

This is transparently a continuation of the Bush campaign by other means, financed with everyone's tax dollars, out of funds that could be used, say, to hire more actual first-responders, Pushtun translators, or troops to replace the exhausted guardsmen.

Bush should be called out on this, and now, by journalists, by the Kerry campaign, and by everyone who prefers actual security over campaign propaganda.

Our tipster said something I want to share:

Those of us who actually work on this sort of thing, in addition to wondering what the other 35 months since 9/11 have been, are of course not thrilled that this is so obviously being politicized.

Yes. Exactly.

It's three years after 9/11, and less than three months before an election, and now we get a National Preparedness Month.

And yes, let's ask Bush and Tom Ridge the simple question: what the hell do these people think the previous 35 months were?

[. . .]

Entire post.

That's the problem. Nobody's called Bush on anything, at least not the Washington press corps. Whores.

Reform

Why is it that when the Republicans use the word 'reform', I begin to wonder what kind of rights I'm about to lose?

Goss

Word is, Porter Goss will be the new DCI. Yawn. Another crony.

Update: 08:30:

President Nutless Wonder is on now, telling us what a great DCI Ol' Porter's gonna be. Please, spare me.

My thoughts exactly

I was saying the same thing to Mrs. F this morning. From TBogg:

Laura Bush: No, I'm not a scientist, but we had lots of science books when I was a librarian....

Laura Bush takes a stand...and shows why she probably shouldn't be allowed to take a stand:

First lady Laura Bush defended her husband's policy on embryonic stem cell research Monday, calling Democratic rival John Kerry (news - web sites)'s criticism "ridiculous" and accusing proponents of overstating the potential for medical breakthroughs.

"We don't even know that stem cell research will provide cures for anything — much less that it's very close" to yielding major advances, Mrs. Bush said.

So...we don't know if research will pay off so we should limit the research to ensure that it won't pay off.

Maybe we should put that money into research to cure stupidity...

Yup, stupid's a family trait here in Bush World.

Keyes, again

From Pandagon:




I nearly peed myself laughing.

Outing

From Kevin at Lean Left:

Why, exactly, am I supposed to trust the Bush Administration with the security of the United States? Over the weekend, Condi Rice admitted that the Bush Administration outed Kahn -- perhaps the deepest undercover agent we have ever had in al-Queda -- to the New York Times. The Bush Administration has been facing scepticism about it's most recent terror warning. COnsidering that the last terror warning was based on no new information, and considering that Tom Ridge used the announcement of this warning to stump for the Bush campaign, and considering that the Bush Administration has a history of releasing warnings on the heels of bad news for the Bush Campaign, the skepticism doesn't seem completely unwarranted. In the face of that skepticism, the Bush Administration has been strenuously defending the alert -- despite the fact that Laura Bush attended a campaign event in one of the buildings listed as under threat the day of the warning. Some have suggested that the outing was done as part of the campaign to convince the press that the alert was not based on political considerations. If true, the Bush Administration would have endangered national security in the hope of limiting the political damage of the impression that they damaged national security. The parallels to the Valerie Plame affair are almost sickening.

[. . .]

Entire post.

Why is everyone so surprised? The security of the nation means nothing to the current administration if it can't be used for political gain. They've already neutralized two important intelligence assets. It's sad when the majority of the public doesn't believe what their leaders are telling them with regard to their personal security. November can't come soon enough,

Yeesh

From Kos:

President Dim Bulb:

Bush also said high taxes on the rich are a failed strategy because "the really rich people figure out how to dodge taxes anyway." [my emphasis]

Dems:

Asked about that comment, Jonathan Beeton, spokesman for Kerry's campaign in Virginia, said "George Bush can speak with authority about really rich people. ... That's his base, so I'm sure he knows what he's talking about. But that doesn't make it right."

[. . .]

Update: In the comments many of you make the point that this [Bush's] line isn't a gaffe, but a standard part of his stump speech.

Unbelievable.

Entire post.

So, do you really think President C-student is running the country?

Resources

From IntelDump:

Jess Bravin reports in this morning's Wall Street Journal (subscription required) that the JAG attorneys detailed to defend detainees at Guantanamo before pending military tribunals are suffering from a lack of resources in several key areas. Among other things, they are being forced to mount a defense with just a few weeks of prep time since their assignment, and without sufficient staff support or translator support. Here's an excerpt from the article:

... Army Maj. Mark Bridges and Navy Lt. Cmdr. Philip Sundel, say they lost their first Arabic interpreter months ago and haven't received a replacement.

"Without being able to communicate with our client, how can we possibly represent his issues?" says Maj. Bridges.

That problem, one of several affecting four Guantanamo defendants facing potential life sentences for war crimes, hasn't deterred the Bush administration from pressing forward with the proceedings, defense attorneys say. Col. Peter Brownback III, a retired Army judge, was named in June to head the first U.S. military commission to try foreign prisoners for war crimes since the end of World War II. Col. Brownback has set initial hearings at the Guantanamo naval base for the week of Aug. 23, imposing a breakneck timetable on a process that has been stymied by legal and policy debates inside government and a diplomatic dispute with Britain over the possible prosecution of British nationals held at Guantanamo.

[. . .]

Analysis: Mr. Bravin's article reports on a litany of other issues plaguing the upcoming tribunal prosecutions, such as potential conflicts of interest between the attorneys on the government side and the judges. But the real meat of the story is this lack-of-resources problem. And here's why: the President has pledged to make these "full and fair" trials, notwithstanding their departures from well-settled military and civilian criminal law. Few scholars believe that's possible, given the way the tribunal rules and procedures are currently written. So far, the best hope for the administration has been these defense attorneys -- whose zealous pursuit of justice has lended an air of legitimacy to the tribunals which they would otherwise not have. By hobbling the defense attorneys in this case with a lack of resources, the Pentagon has undermined the most important and most visible source of legitimacy for these tribunals. Men like USMC Maj. Michael Mori, detailed to defend Austrailian prisoner David Hicks, have become literal folk heroes around the world for their stand on this issue. Their ability to continue the fight on behalf of their clients may well save these proceedings from being seen as "kangaroo courts", to borrow Bill Safire's phrase. Thus, if the Pentagon and the White House really want these proceedings to be fair, and to be perceived as such, they will rectify these resource shortfalls quickly.

Why do we even bother? If these trials are going to be ANYTHING but kangaroo courts, the defense needs a level playing field. If we're not going to do it right, we shouldn't do it at all. It'll only come back to bite us in the ass later on,

Guest Blogger(s)

As you know, I'll be heading to London in the beginning of September for a couple weeks. I'll be bringing my laptop so the Mrs. and I can keep in touch with our world (I also got a book to finish), but I wouldn't mind a guest blogger or two while I'm gone. Yes, I'm talking to YOU Encino Lady, but there's no pressure. It'll just be for 2 weeks or so. If anybody's interested, email me or leave a message in 'comments'.

Go see the Heeb

Jon's got an update on the political situation in Sudan. From The Head Heeb:

The Sudanese Foreign Minister has accused the leaders of the Justice and Equality Movement, one of the main rebel factions in Darfur, of "making regular visits to Israel." Both the JEM and Israel deny the accusation, and its timing is, to say the least, suspicious. There have been no previous reports of Israeli involvement in Darfur, and Khartoum's announcement comes at a time when it is trying to rally Arab support against Western intervention, and playing the Israel card seems calculated to do just that.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if Israel were backing the JEM. Israel has connections to Uganda, Eritrea and the SPLM, all of which oppose Khartoum, and it has often followed a strategic policy of allying with non-Arab peoples on the fringes of the Arab world. It would be entirely in character for Israel to support the Darfur rebels - and if so, there are plenty of worse things Israel could do than offer aid to people facing ethnic cleansing and mass murder.

[. . .]

I don't approve of this sentiment - in fact, I disapprove in the strongest terms - but it does exist and it's something that has to be taken into account in planning interventions in the region. There's a reason why Israel hasn't been asked, for instance, to participate in the reconstruction of Iraq, and that reason may be morally unsound but it's very sound realpolitik. I wish this were a world in which Israel could do the right thing in Darfur without leading to adverse political consequences for its people, but unfortunately we're not living in that world.

As always, Jon has good insight into the situation. But in the meantime, the atrocities continue. Could you imagine what a hundred thousand troops could do in Sudan instead of being squandered in Iraq? We'd need a tenth of the manpower required in Iraq and we could have actually saved thousands of people instead of killing them.