Monday, May 05, 2008
Now I'm Glad Obama had to get rid of her--is he?
by Ken Houghton
The real Coalition-of-the-Willing(-to-sacrifice-their-citizens).
She then notes that the Canadian citizenry is Rational:
We now see why pictures of coffins are not broadcast in the United States.
So they have no national security interest—even if we are dumb enough (as Power apparently is) to conflate Al-Queda with Afghanistan and Iraq.*
But Power is thrilled because the Canadian government didn't listen to its voters.
Power disingenuously concludes that "When finally consulted in earnest, Canadians concluded that the financial and human costs of the mission were in fact worth bearing, at least for now."
And then she gets to her point, sort of:
I'm not generous enough to conclude that "alone" and "But" were added by an editor. So how does she plan to convince them?
Since Scott and Hilzoy want to get all hyper, again, about Clinton's 2002 vote—even though it's not so different from Obama's public positions—maybe they could explain the difference between Power's pitch and John McCain's Hundred Years War.
Via Rob Farley at LG&M, ousted Obama advisor Samantha Power discusses Canada's role in the Afghanistan/Iraq CF:
Canada has been quietly embroiled in one of the most revealing political and international-security debates since the end of the cold war. It's a debate critical to the future of NATO. And its outcome may tell us a lot about the fate of the U.S.'s struggle against terrorism.
At issue is Canada's military role in Afghanistan. Canada is one of 26 NATO countries in the International Security Assistance Force, which is attempting to stabilize Afghanistan and neutralize the Taliban and al-Qaeda. But Canada is one of only a handful of NATO countries that have embraced the task of actual war-fighting. The Canadians, who have 2,500 troops on the ground, have suffered 82 fatalities, a death rate that is higher than the U.S. military's in Iraq. In an increasingly two-tiered NATO alliance, Canada occupies the fighting tier, alongside the U.S., Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands.
The real Coalition-of-the-Willing(-to-sacrifice-their-citizens).
She then notes that the Canadian citizenry is Rational:
The Afghan war had broad public support in Canada in 2002, but is now seen as one front in George W. Bush's hugely unpopular "war on terror."...Having taken few casualties in the past half-century, Canadians have found it jarring to watch flag-draped coffins return to what can feel like a very small country. A public that has long seen its military as innocently patrolling the peace has had trouble adjusting to its forces engaging in a full-fledged, unconventional war.
We now see why pictures of coffins are not broadcast in the United States.
Perhaps most important, Canadians do not see the Afghan conflict as directly relevant to their own security. Al-Qaeda has never staged an attack on Canadian soil. And although 24 Canadians were among the victims of 9/11 and terrorists were planning to blow up two Air Canada flights in the British terrorism plot of 2006, Canadians worry that fighting alongside the U.S. will increase--not decrease--the risk that they will become a target.
So they have no national security interest—even if we are dumb enough (as Power apparently is) to conflate Al-Queda with Afghanistan and Iraq.*
But Power is thrilled because the Canadian government didn't listen to its voters.
A recent poll showed that 47% of Canadians wanted their soldiers to leave Afghanistan immediately, and only 17% supported maintaining a combat role....After a heated and long-overdue domestic debate, the Canadian Parliament last month voted to keep its soldiers in Afghanistan until 2011--with the provisos that Canadian forces be reinforced by 1,000 troops from elsewhere and that Canadian forces concentrate less on combat and more on training Afghan security forces.
Power disingenuously concludes that "When finally consulted in earnest, Canadians concluded that the financial and human costs of the mission were in fact worth bearing, at least for now."
And then she gets to her point, sort of:
The U.S. alone can't succeed in Afghanistan. But Canada's example shows that even our closest allies need to be convinced that the fight is theirs too.
I'm not generous enough to conclude that "alone" and "But" were added by an editor. So how does she plan to convince them?
NATO rules should be rewritten to ensure that countries that invest disproportionate military and financial resources (as Canada has done) should have some of their costs subsidized by the alliance. If a government does not want to send its troops to fight, it should still be obliged to contribute funding and civilian expertise, which remains in short supply.
Since Scott and Hilzoy want to get all hyper, again, about Clinton's 2002 vote—even though it's not so different from Obama's public positions—maybe they could explain the difference between Power's pitch and John McCain's Hundred Years War.
Labels: Afghanistan, My home not native land, terrorism
Thursday, March 06, 2008
The Econ Major and the Bomb
by Ken Houghton
Turns out that wasn't the only problem with explosives last night (via the Chronicle of Higher Education):
Dodged a bullet there, as it were. And apprehended a suspect, too:
And that one would have done some damage:
Yet another case of reputational risk? Good thing there aren't many of these...
Woke up this morning to the news that there was an explosion in Times Square. A bicyclist is being pursued, and the whole thing was apparently done on a shoestring:
The bomb consisted of some kind of "low-order explosive" contained in a military-style ammunition box, [Police Commissioner Ray] Kelly said.
"This was not a particularly sophisticated device," he said.
Turns out that wasn't the only problem with explosives last night (via the Chronicle of Higher Education):
Normal class schedules are under way at UC Davis on Thursday following the arrest of an 18-year-old student after two pipe bombs were found in his dormitory room Wednesday night, authorities said.
The discovery about 9 p.m. Wednesday resulted in the evacuation of 455 freshmen from seven dormitory buildings in the Tercero complex. The students spent the night in the common dining area at the complex and are expected to be allowed to return soon. No one was injured, and classes were not disrupted by the incident.
Dodged a bullet there, as it were. And apprehended a suspect, too:
Officers questioned four students and released three, the Bee reported.
The fourth student, Mark Christopher Woods, a freshman economics major, has been arrested on two felony charges, possession of chemicals to make explosives and possession of explosive materials on school grounds, the university said in a written statement. [emphasis mine]
And that one would have done some damage:
Police said bomb-making materials were found on a table in the dorm room, along with two empty pipe bomb shells, and police Capt. Joyce Souza said she could not reveal what materials were found but that it was "bad stuff...."
"At first glance, it looked like pretty serious and volatile material," Souza said. "Once they did an evaluation, they were able to determine the way all the materials were sitting, it wasn't as serious because it wasn't mixed."
Yet another case of reputational risk? Good thing there aren't many of these...
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Does Anybody Remember White Powder
by Ken Houghton
When will rounding up of California's "compulsive Republican voters" begin?
Or is this going to be presented as another case of IOKIYAR?
For anyone who has forgotten:
The New York Post on the "powder puff" spooking "Keith."
One Good Move posts Keith's great response.
The Smoking Gun has the details on the "terrorist" who powdered Olbermann, Stewart, and Pelosi, to name three.
When will rounding up of California's "compulsive Republican voters" begin?
Or is this going to be presented as another case of IOKIYAR?
For anyone who has forgotten:
The New York Post on the "powder puff" spooking "Keith."
One Good Move posts Keith's great response.
Labels: Politics, Republicans, terrorism
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
TNH Performs a Public Service
by Ken Houghton
Now, as a public service, Teresa Nielsen Hayden Explains It All to You. In one place, everything you need to know about "America's mayor."
Yesterday at Angry Bear, I apparently started and ended the comment thread for this post. The absurdity of the claim that Rudy G. had in any way done anything to defend NYC after the 1993 WTC bombing—that is, for his entire term as mayor—was beyond the pale.
Now, as a public service, Teresa Nielsen Hayden Explains It All to You. In one place, everything you need to know about "America's mayor."
Labels: NYC, Politics, Republicans, terrorism, theother11sep
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Half an Hour in the Life
by Ken Houghton
Ca. 5:55 pm: The sound of rocks hitting a window is distracting in the best of times. When the rocks are coming up and hitting a seventh floor window, distraction is the least of the possible worries.
Ca. 5:56 pm: The dust is coming higher as well. The sixty-some people who are on the floor are all headed for the fire exit. The one that goes onto the street. I suggest this is not the best of all ideas as I grab the laptop and follow the crowd.
Ca. 5:58 pm: We are outside, with hundreds of others dong the same. The building is presumably North and East of us. I move South and West.
Interlude: When I walked into work on 11 Sep 2001 (a Disaster Recovery project started the day before), my cohorts said that a plane had hit the World Trade Center. A B-25 once hit the Empire State Building. Once is an accident.
Ca. 6:01 pm – I’m walked several blocks away; others doing the same. There is a large cloud of dust obscuring the Pan Am Building.* Otherwise, the rain has cleared the air fairly well. The dust is white.
My mobile finally gets a signal through. I tell Shira to turn on the television to find out what is happening. Four channels of news later (CBS, ABC, NBC, and Fox), there is nothing being reported but the earlier flooding. This is reassuring. Fire trucks are moving up Park Avenue.
The woman next to me on the street is covered with dust and dirt.
Ca. 6:03 pm By coincidence, I meet two others from my building, from higher floors. None of us is inclined to go back; the smoke frames our building, and several people on the street have said that they assumed it was our building that had the problem.
Interlude: I presume our building is very safe. Not only was it recently built, but the owner of the property lives on the two floors above. I don’t know if his pool is directly above my head, but it could be.
Ca. 6:05pm: Another block or two. A man with a Blackberry has found out that it was a transformer and a gas explosion. We understand why the smoke is white.
Ca. 6:06 pm. Shira calls to tell me what I have just found out. I think she says something about having scared them, but there are a lot of people and noise and cameras and fire trucks, so I’m probably wrong.
6:15ish, walking across 32nd Street. Young woman on her mobile, talking to someone, clearly Very Worried. At her third panic, two of us interrupt her to reassure her that it was Con Edison- not al Queda, related.
6:22 Greeley Square. A man with a microphone is asking passers-by, “Are you ready to meet G-d?” Clearly, it is a canned schpiel. He wants to talk fire and brimstone; I’m thinking more about asbestos.
6:25: Almost at Penn Station. Stop to ask the Q32 bus driver if he is still taking the bus's regular route, up Madison Avenue from 32nd to the mid-50s. He clearly knows what has happened, and confirms that everything is normal as far as the MTA is concerned.
Context.
POSTSCRIPT:
I end up on the 6:43 train, by coincidence sitting next to John Schwartz, a Science writer for the NYT. By the time I get off the train (having left the car keys at the office, along with my coat), I have been interviewed, edited, and quoted.
From the comfort of home, it is much easier to read:
Tom's PPS: Big Media Ken is quoted here. As glad as I am to read that this was apparently an accident, I'm not sure how reassuring Michael Bloomberg is in saying (per the NYT), “There is no reason to believe this is anything other than a failure of our infrastructure.”
*All right, it's now the MetLife, building (200 Park). But it's still best known as the home of Quetlzalcoatl.
**Vanderbilt, of course, starts on 42nd Street. But I suspect it means that the Pershing Square Restaurant so beloved by Little Blue PD will be closed for a while.
Hubris is still followed by ate, and the exception proves the rule:
Ca. 5:55 pm: The sound of rocks hitting a window is distracting in the best of times. When the rocks are coming up and hitting a seventh floor window, distraction is the least of the possible worries.
Ca. 5:56 pm: The dust is coming higher as well. The sixty-some people who are on the floor are all headed for the fire exit. The one that goes onto the street. I suggest this is not the best of all ideas as I grab the laptop and follow the crowd.
Ca. 5:58 pm: We are outside, with hundreds of others dong the same. The building is presumably North and East of us. I move South and West.
Interlude: When I walked into work on 11 Sep 2001 (a Disaster Recovery project started the day before), my cohorts said that a plane had hit the World Trade Center. A B-25 once hit the Empire State Building. Once is an accident.
Ca. 6:01 pm – I’m walked several blocks away; others doing the same. There is a large cloud of dust obscuring the Pan Am Building.* Otherwise, the rain has cleared the air fairly well. The dust is white.
My mobile finally gets a signal through. I tell Shira to turn on the television to find out what is happening. Four channels of news later (CBS, ABC, NBC, and Fox), there is nothing being reported but the earlier flooding. This is reassuring. Fire trucks are moving up Park Avenue.
The woman next to me on the street is covered with dust and dirt.
Ca. 6:03 pm By coincidence, I meet two others from my building, from higher floors. None of us is inclined to go back; the smoke frames our building, and several people on the street have said that they assumed it was our building that had the problem.
Interlude: I presume our building is very safe. Not only was it recently built, but the owner of the property lives on the two floors above. I don’t know if his pool is directly above my head, but it could be.
Ca. 6:05pm: Another block or two. A man with a Blackberry has found out that it was a transformer and a gas explosion. We understand why the smoke is white.
Ca. 6:06 pm. Shira calls to tell me what I have just found out. I think she says something about having scared them, but there are a lot of people and noise and cameras and fire trucks, so I’m probably wrong.
6:15ish, walking across 32nd Street. Young woman on her mobile, talking to someone, clearly Very Worried. At her third panic, two of us interrupt her to reassure her that it was Con Edison- not al Queda, related.
6:22 Greeley Square. A man with a microphone is asking passers-by, “Are you ready to meet G-d?” Clearly, it is a canned schpiel. He wants to talk fire and brimstone; I’m thinking more about asbestos.
6:25: Almost at Penn Station. Stop to ask the Q32 bus driver if he is still taking the bus's regular route, up Madison Avenue from 32nd to the mid-50s. He clearly knows what has happened, and confirms that everything is normal as far as the MTA is concerned.
Context.
POSTSCRIPT:
I end up on the 6:43 train, by coincidence sitting next to John Schwartz, a Science writer for the NYT. By the time I get off the train (having left the car keys at the office, along with my coat), I have been interviewed, edited, and quoted.
From the comfort of home, it is much easier to read:
The authorities have established a “frozen zone” between 40th and 43rd Streets, from Vanderbilt to Third Avenues.**and wonder whether it will be possible to enter the building tomorrow, face mask and all.
Tom's PPS: Big Media Ken is quoted here. As glad as I am to read that this was apparently an accident, I'm not sure how reassuring Michael Bloomberg is in saying (per the NYT), “There is no reason to believe this is anything other than a failure of our infrastructure.”
*All right, it's now the MetLife, building (200 Park). But it's still best known as the home of Quetlzalcoatl.
**Vanderbilt, of course, starts on 42nd Street. But I suspect it means that the Pershing Square Restaurant so beloved by Little Blue PD will be closed for a while.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
A Much Better Title than "Bin Laden Determined to Attack United States"
by Ken Houghton
Who you gonna believe, me:
Or the people paid to know such things?:
Condi's "history lessons" just keep on coming:
[President George W. Bush] played down media coverage of a US intelligence report called Al-Qaeda Better Positioned to Strike the West.
Who you gonna believe, me:
Speaking at a news conference, President Bush said: "There is a perception in the coverage that al-Qaeda may be as strong today as they were prior to September 11.
"That's just simply not the case."
Or the people paid to know such things?:
The classified report was from the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) and was being discussed at the White House on Thursday....
Al-Qaeda is "considerably operationally stronger than a year ago" and has "regrouped to an extent not seen since 2001," an official told the AP news agency paraphrasing the report.
"They are showing greater and greater ability to plan attacks in Europe and the United States."
"I'm really fed up with my government doing its best to terrify me and my fellow Americans."
by Ken Houghton
In other news, Harriet Miers violates the law. (Pick your own link)
Steve Gould reminds us that Wil Wheaton is smarter than Wesley Crusher.
In other news, Harriet Miers violates the law. (Pick your own link)
Labels: Eat Our Brains, sf, terrorism
Friday, June 22, 2007
A Tale of Two Realities
by Ken Houghton
So why is NATO asking Canada to extend past two years from now?
Many the reason is the final 'graf of the first piece, in which Karzai's declaration is put into some context.
In the long run, we are all stable. It's just those pesky pre-equilibrium moments that the Afghanis are worrying about now. Such as this one:
I guess this means we can get our troops out of Afghanistan now:
The Taleban do not pose a threat to long-term stability in Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai has said.
So why is NATO asking Canada to extend past two years from now?
Nato Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer has urged Canada to keep its military mission in Afghanistan beyond the planned 2009 pullout date.
Canada was playing a vital role in helping Afghanistan to rebuild, he said during a visit to Montreal....
Canada has 2,500 troops deployed in southern Afghanistan as part of the 40,000-strong International Security Assistance Force.
Many the reason is the final 'graf of the first piece, in which Karzai's declaration is put into some context.
The south of the country has this year seen the worst violence since the Taleban were ousted from power in 2001 by US-led troops.
In the long run, we are all stable. It's just those pesky pre-equilibrium moments that the Afghanis are worrying about now. Such as this one:
Three Canadian Nato soldiers have been killed by a roadside bomb in southern Afghanistan, military officials say....
A Nato spokesman said that the soldiers were in a small open-top all-terrain vehicle[!!] when the bomb went off.
About 90 foreign troops have been killed in Afghanistan this year, most in combat for the Nato-led military force Isaf in the country's south.
Labels: Afghanistan, terrorism
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
"Someone Has to Say It" Interlude Post: Everything Old is New Again
by Ken Houghton
It's not that it's incorrect; it's just incomplete. Watch the way the snake eats itself, Ragnarok-like:
Kevin states the conclusion, leaving the rest as an exercise to the reader. Let's tell the whole story.
It's not Kevin Drum's fault. (Or Dr. Black's, for linking to him.) But I'm getting tired of seeing half of the story told, so let me lay out what's wrong with simply stating this:
There is, at this point, simply nothing more we can do in Iraq. The only sensible course of action is to leave. Completely.
It's not that it's incorrect; it's just incomplete. Watch the way the snake eats itself, Ragnarok-like:
- The United States established permanent bases in Saudi Arabia
- Several prominent Saudis took offence at that, among them members of the Bin Laden family
- After "learning the ropes" with some (arguably limited) U.S. support in Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden worked to develop a network of operatives loyal to him, with one stated goal being to get the United States to remove its bases from Saudi Arabia.
- Many of Mr. Bin Laden's followers were volunteers from Saudi Arabia; one may reasonably assume that his Vision Statement ("U.S. out of Saudi Arabia") was contributory to his ability to draw Saudi volunteers.
- Fifteen (15) of those volunteers were on hijacked planes on 11 September 2001. None of those fifteen was an innocent bystander.
- In the two years after 11 September 2001, the United States invaded Afghanistan, withdrew its military personnel from Saudi Arabia, and invaded Iraq.
- In the aftermath of the end of "major combat activities" on 1 May 2003, the United States is establishing permanent bases in Iraq.
Kevin states the conclusion, leaving the rest as an exercise to the reader. Let's tell the whole story.
Labels: history repeated, Iraq, sovereignty, terrorism
Monday, June 11, 2007
The Unusual Suspects, Part 2: Fourth Circuit puts Citizens First
by Ken Houghton
First the WSJ Editorial page, now the Fourth District. Perhaps, eventually, the truth does set you free.
I leave the details to Scott, but the Fourth Circuit is not traditionally the least "liberal" (read: believing in civil rights) District Court. So this one comes as a Very Pleasant Surprise:
The Bush administration cannot legally detain a U.S. resident it suspects of being an al-Qaida sleeper agent without charging him, a divided federal appeals court ruled Monday.
"To sanction such presidential authority to order the military to seize and indefinitely detain civilians, even if the President calls them 'enemy combatants,' would have disastrous consequences for the constitution - and the country," the court panel said.
In the 2-1 decision, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel found that the federal Military Commissions Act doesn't strip Ali al-Marri, a legal U.S. resident, of his constitutional rights to challenge his accusers in court.
It ruled the government must allow al-Marri to be released from military detention.
First the WSJ Editorial page, now the Fourth District. Perhaps, eventually, the truth does set you free.
Labels: terrorism
Monday, June 04, 2007
Why Don't I Feel Safer?
by Ken Houghton
The scariest thing about the above is, of course, that it's in the context of an article praising the FBI's new "counterintuitive" methods. For instance:
And if I had the financing, I'd be running a firm that installed free, ad-model-based wireless service in the NYC subway system.
Alexandra Marks knows this is a nonsense story. And she makes it clear she's not the only one:
The response appears to be the "it's how they got Al Capone" defence:
Otherwise known as charges you might be able to substantiate, when your "suspects" make Pinky and the Brain look organized.
In the wake of the brilliance of the Fort Dix Six, the Christian Science Monitor reports on "the JFK plot":
Had the defendants carried out their plan, it could have resulted in "unfathomable damage, deaths, and destruction," said US Attorney Roslynn Mauskopf in announcing the charges. Yet the plans were never operationally feasible, and the public was not at risk. "We remain unwavering in our commitment to stop terrorist plots before they become terrorist acts," she said. [emphasis mine]
The scariest thing about the above is, of course, that it's in the context of an article praising the FBI's new "counterintuitive" methods. For instance:
The FBI and NYPD learned of the plot at the start of last year. By July, they had an informant working with the reputed mastermind, Russell Defreitas, a native of Guyana who's been a US citizen since the 1960s. Although officials have referred to him as a "terrorist wannabe," they also said that if he and his group had obtained financing and explosives, the plot could have had devastating consequences. [emphasis mine]
And if I had the financing, I'd be running a firm that installed free, ad-model-based wireless service in the NYC subway system.
Alexandra Marks knows this is a nonsense story. And she makes it clear she's not the only one:
A study of Justice Department data, done by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University, found that in 2006, US attorneys declined to prosecute 87 percent of the international terrorism cases brought to them by FBI agents. The report concludes that this raises "troubling questions about the bureau's investigation of criminal matters involving individuals the government has identified as international terrorists."
The response appears to be the "it's how they got Al Capone" defence:
FBI officials say those statistics are misleading and are in part a result of the agency's cultural shift. For instance, if some agents have thoroughly investigated a suspected terrorist group, they often bring other charges against them, say immigration violations or document fraud.
Otherwise known as charges you might be able to substantiate, when your "suspects" make Pinky and the Brain look organized.
Labels: Journamalism, terrorism
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
Security is one thing, campaign contributions quite another
by Ken Houghton
The CBS version of this story downplays his affiliation with the Republican Party and the Administration.
I haven't seen a NYT version yet, but it's likely I just missed it, since he is from Westchester and the indictment was three days ago. (UPDATE: The Times has the AP feed.)
Via my local community forum comes this piece fromWonkette:
GOP moneybag Abdul Tawala Ibn Ali Alishtari was indicted Friday for trying to send $152,000 to terror-training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Alishtari is a member of the White House Business Advisory Committee and a “U.S. National Republican Senate Inner Circle Member for Life.” He’s aDoD/Homeland Security contractor, obviously, and he claims to be best buddies with Dick Cheney!
The CBS version of this story downplays his affiliation with the Republican Party and the Administration.
I haven't seen a NYT version yet, but it's likely I just missed it, since he is from Westchester and the indictment was three days ago. (UPDATE: The Times has the AP feed.)
Labels: Al Qaeda, Republican Party, terrorism
