The Friday Bacon: A Bonus Bacon!

If we can't send bacon to our congressmen as an insult, then the terrorists have won.

The video is less hilarious than it should be.

The office of House Minority Leader and Ohio Representative John Boehner was evacuated on Monday because of a box of bacon. Apparently an angry constituent sent this as a commentary on the pork laden Wall Street Bailout. I wonder how many more taxpayer dollars will be wasted on overreactions to imaginary threats.

Flag Burning

In this image you see President Bush defacing the American Flag in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 700 Destruction of the Flag of the United States. That is the same statute that forbids flag burning. The amusing thing is that flag burning is protected speach under the first amendment but being an arrogant jingoist and writing your name on the flag may not be.

Ben Franklin Report: Caturday Reading

With Ben Bernanke's newfound affinity for nimble and flexible policy, the comparison to a cat almost seems natural. However, in an effort to help you better channel your inner cat here is some reading and food for thought.

First, usaspending.gov is a really awesome website for policy addicts out there with some dynamic ways of looking at the way that the U.S. Government spends its money, with much potential for fun and blogging. For instance, in 2007, the Federal government spent less on traditional state spending than in previous years. This continues, despite record federal deficits. As one would expect the crumbling value of the dollar is being reflected in exponentially increasing federal spending. Unfortunately, for us, the War in Iraq and the Global War on Terror are contributing, if not causing, this problem.

Here is a handy slide show from the GAO about how the government is spending its money. The numbers are pretty terrifying, especially considering that these numbers don't reflect the quicksilver economic reality that we are currently faced with, aka the increased transportation costs of gas prices going up by 25% on average. Remember when it was serious when gas reached $2 a gallon? Not to mention the fuel inefficient vehicles the military relies on aren't going to see less use in the near future. Unlike the GAO, we here at the Fringe Element feel that more constructive advice is necessary, if for nothing more than general principle. My recommendation would be to move towards an asset-based financial system, perhaps similar to Islamic banking practices, in an effort to provide some stability to the dollar to try to halt its historical slide to worthless.

Whom We Serve

154,000, which is only a rough estimate. How many more veterans are just scraping by, living in the margins of our society? How many have been forced to impose upon the good natures of their family? How many of them are still battling demons from America's wars for empire?

There is a wide disparity in the quality of military service, as one might expect, almost correlated to the disparity of resources nations devote to their national defense. But, beyond the perceptions that the news media conveys, there is a further disparity within military ranks, between officer and enlisted. In professional military services, the enlisted soldier is treated with respect from his superiors and not commonly regarded as the piece of government property he or she is. In some countries, professional enlisted personnel serve as personal servants to the officer corps. In the worst examples, military service is little more than forced labor, where soldiers are beaten or worse, there is not much of an institutionalized retirement plan. Here, in the United States, we can take something of a moral high ground, compared to groups like the Interahamwe. Here, we grant our veterans education benefits and the like, if they are not rendered dysfunctional by wartime injury, such as amputation or post-traumatic stress disorder.

A look at the last hundred years of the wartime Presidents also reveals something of a trend. For instance, one of the key leaders in the foundation of the American Empire, Theodore Roosevelt, aside from the contempt he held for those not so blessed to be white, had never actually served in the military until the beginning of the war. Perhaps the reason he was not given the Congressional Medal of Honor until after his death was for having pushed into a military battle without having been ordered to do so. Just a thought.

Woodrow Wilson, who also brought us the Federal Reserve System, was an intellectual and academic, who also had never spent a day in a military uniform before leading the nation into WWI.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a corporate lawyer before entering public service, similar never served any kind of military service.

Harry S. Truman, who was a WWI Artillery Officer, also brought us nuclear warfare and the policy of containment. In addition to his role in the recognition of Israel and Pakistan, he laid the groundwork for the Cold War and tried to bring the whole of the Korean peninsula under Western influence.

Lyndon Baines Johnson, holder of the most disgusting example of a military award I've ever seen, brought us the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the subsequent escalation of the Vietnam War, which, in Vietnam, is known as the American War. Perhaps it should be known as Johnson's War.

Ronald Reagan, an actor before becoming a politician, brought a new type of escalation, spending billions of dollars fighting proxy wars and beginning a new arms race involving ballistic missile interceptors.

Which brings us to W. I don't really feel as though I need to say too much about his military record.

In summation, the leaders and defenders of the Free World, those most rabid about the defense and expansion of the U.S.' national sovereignty, almost without exception have never picked up a gun at a range and thought about how to justify to himself seeing the form of another human being in his gunsights and pulling the trigger. After all, a warrior seeks to conserve his strength and continue living, and thus should fight as little as possible. Unfortunately, the toll of these wars is paid by those who fight, either draftees or volunteers, who often seem to be tragically discarded by those for whom they served.

For those who want a visual representation of America's War Dead, try this.

Geopolitics: What Goes Bump in the Night

What is a threat? Is it a lone suicide bomber or a million man army on a hair trigger? The basis for this thought exercise, of course, is the size and quality of one's own forces. The quality and status of the American Armed Forces is beyond the scope of this current exercise, though. Therefore, for our purposes, we will assume that the U.S. is indeed the hyperpower beyond compare. So what is the biggest threat to the national security of the United States?

Pentagon general counsel William J. Haynes II feels not obtaining convictions in the military tribunals of terrorist suspects held in Guantanamo Bay's Camp X-Ray would be a threat to our national security. Former head of the prosecution of these prisoners, Air Force Col. Morris Davis, on the other hand, feels that opaque justice is the only way to see justice done. Even if these men were released today, how much would they still believe in the cause after up to six years of the strictly regimented and austere lifestyle afforded by Camp X-Ray's accommodations. I would be willing to bet that most of them would just go home and try to live out the rest of their lives trying to cope with what they've been through.

While Iraq may not be our 53rd state yet, the presence of 140,000 American troops means that our government throughout our continued presence in country will be forced to consider the security ramifications of a country in the middle of the most dangerous region of the world. So what a twisted web we weave when one of our NATO allies, Turkey, is potentially threatening the viability of the state that we're trying to carve out of the remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime. While the Bush administration characterizes the actions of the Turkish government as being responsible, this escalation will invariably agitate other regional powers, and stoke fears that Turkey seeks to impose its own order over Kurdistan.

Another threat that the Bush Administration is keenly aware of is the potential legal ramifications of the application of the Bush Doctrine. Thus, while Iran is alleged to pose a very real nuclear threat, members of the Coalition of the Willing are meeting to write and produce the 'third strike' resolution against Iran, ala the prequel to the invasion of Iraq. This incident smacks of another leading problem in the administration of the American National Security strategy, the human element of information interpretation. Documents the U.S. is using as the "smoking gun" are, predictably, be denounced as complete forgeries by the Iranian government. Curveball told the administration everything that they needed and wanted to hear about Iraq's illicit weapons programs, the accuracy of this information was criticized at the time by German Intelligence, and later by every other respectable intelligence agency that was worthy of the name. Remember this? Perhaps the thinkers in the Administration aren't creative enough to come up with another method to draw the world into another conflict that will further destabilize the energy infrastructure the world economy relies on. At any rate, there probably will be a third UN Resolution denouncing Iran. The reason for this is that the UN Security Council is about the only organization in the world that can legitimately overrule Iran's right to a peaceful nuclear energy program under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

One of the most dangerous positions in the world, though, is to be without friends. Thus, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the best salesman for the Military Industrial Complex, is touring Asia, and is currently enjoying two days of talks with Indian leaders. While the stalled nuclear deal will only be tangentially discussed, one can be sure that the U.S. Military's involvement in Pakistan and India's recent sea-based missile test will be near the top of the agenda, beneath promoting weapon sales. While military relations may be the goal of this trip, see China's agreement to release information on American POWs, one has to wonder whether this will actually be realized with the white elephant of historical tensions between Pakistan and India in the room. The lingering question, though, is whether the United States can successfully balance punishing Iran for violating the NPT while at the same time rewarding India with a nuclear agreement that will allow it to continue to develop nuclear weapons and delivery platforms.

Russia's First Deputy Prime Minister and presidential candidate, Dmitry Medvedev, warned in a campaign speech that the U.S. is placing Europe in a difficult position by recognizing Kosovo, yet is not taking any of the risk because of the intervening ocean. Given Russia's long term plans for Serbia, expect this issue to remain prickly.

But, of course, everyone knows that killer robots will be the primary threat of the 21st Century.

Tons o' Guns

As always, there is a firestorm of news and protest surrounding U.S. foreign arms sales. And, of course, the countries involved are potential flashpoints for future conflicts.

From Iraq comes news that the Defense Department is bolstering its foreign military sales staff in Baghdad. In a program that was already plagued with problems of corruption and mismanagement, the problems were further compounded when the program realized the ridiculous leap in funding levels, from $200 million to $3 billion in only one year. The corruption in the acquisition process already has the potential to sour relations with our NATO ally, Turkey, as weapons bound for Iraqi troops have showed up in the hands of militant fighters fighting for an independent Kurdistan. However, due to the personnel shortage that accompanied the increased workload, the Iraqi government was forced to buy weapons from other countries. Now, members of Congress reportedly want to know whether American money was used to buy Chinese weapons for the Iraqi Army.

Arms sales, in fact, also provide one of the main sticking points between the United States and China, mainly weapons sales to the island of Taiwan. The economic problems that are the most prominent in the domestic, national discourse in U.S. relations with the PRC have been "underlined by the U.S. for years." However, the issue of Taiwan and the foreign arms sales are the basis for the other point of contention between the two superpowers. In fact this year, Section 1206 in the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2007, the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee establishes some pretty firm policies. Emphasis has been added by author.

More importantly, the committee believes that
maintaining a balance of power across the Taiwan Strait is critical
to ensuring deterrence and preserving peace, security, and stability
in Asia. China’s National People’s Congress adopted an anti-secession
law that essentially authorizes China’s Central Military Commission
to use non-peaceful means against Taiwan if the latter declares
independence. The committee is concerned that this law, in
conjunction with an excessive military build-up by China, may signal
a weakening of deterrence across the Taiwan Strait. The committee
believes that the exchange program, by helping to strengthen
Taiwan’s defenses, would help preserve and strengthen deterrence,
thereby encouraging China and Taiwan to resolve their differences
peacefully.

Considering that Chinese military spending is growing to make the PLA one of, if not the, strongest land forces in the world, the logic of the policy is almost self-defeating. The amount of equipment and money necessary to maintain the vision of deterrence expounded by this doctrine is well beyond the means of the United States. Look for this policy to cause problems in the future, as the U.S. is left groping for a new tact to maintain the stability in the region that is so vital to the international shipping lanes. The real question that would help one in thinking of this problem is, what event could happen that would leap the PRC's political elite to abandon the current Nash Equilibrium enjoyed by all parties in the region, in favor of a military strike? To which, the U.S. is bound under law to look upon with "grave concern," as per the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act.

There is a new arms race brewing in South Asia, although not the usual type. In this case, the developed countries of the world are falling over themselves to provide India with the next generation of military equipment. Looking at potential spending reaching $40 billion dollars, it's not hard to imagine why countries would feel interested in the competition. Nicholas Burns, the Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs feels so strongly about the subject of U.S.-Indian ties that he wrote an article for the current issue of Foreign Affairs. I particularly enjoy who he actually tries to make the article sound sincere in believing that ideology trumps the buying power of the Indian rupee. Again, the subtext to the entire discussion is long-term ties with India, in the fact of a emerging threat from China in Asia.



Before going onto the next topic, enjoy a little video goodness.
















Now, the JDAM is going on sale to countries in the Gulf region, specifically Saudi Arabia, which has caused quite a bipartisan reaction on Capital Hill. One should consider, though, that Israel and its lobby aren't protesting the sale in and of itself, only the fact that sales of this type reduce the strategic and technological edge enjoyed that enforced deterrence and brought stability to the region. The sale is practically dead on arrival.

Finally, in Pakistan, an assassin has taken the life of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, but that shouldn't stand in the way of ever-stronger ties developing between the U.S. and Pakistan. In particular, this event will not interfere in anyway with the proposed $2.1 billion arms deal in progress. Pakistan is slated to purchase 18 F-16s of the C and D variants.

The end result of all of this is that American foreign policy, especially in the case of Pakistan, is being pulled into a cycle of arming one side to counter another threat that may or may not be of its own creation. And while arms sales and military relations reach new highs, things such as civil society and rule of law tend to be left by the way side. The Military Industrial Complex isn't exactly a democratic institution, after all. Those who are in a strong position to regulate this very important facet of foreign policy are focusing on other priorities, to say the least. Instead of controlling the number of arms distributed internationally, they are worried about the transfer of sensitive information, and the ramifications of Globalization on the MIC, but more on that later.

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/MEDIA_OWNERSHIP?SITE=RIPAW&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

There is already too much media consolidation resulting in poor news coverage. There is too much group think among media sources when important stories get ignored because CNN is covering a skiing squirrel or cat fashion show. Or for that matter a human fashion show. You're fucking CNN for fuck's sake! The group think has almost completely ignored the candidacy of viable candidates like Ron Paul.

The old media fucked up big time in the run up to the war in Iraq and during the 2000 presidential election. If they want trust and respect back they better start fucking earning it with real hard hitting investigative journalism, instead of the kind of fluff that bloggers can fill the world with. They like to assume they are more ligitimate than us but I say the burden of proof is on them now. And that burden is one of the preponderance of evidence.

For entertainment purposes I am not so sure media consolidation is that bad. I may be confusing correlation with causation but market saturation and a vast empire seems to have given those like Ted Turner and Disney the freedom to create specialised networks for a narrow audience that would sink a network like NBC who has to stick with bland "entertainment" that appeals to noone but at least doesn't offend most. The increased venues for creativity may also simply be a result of the managment style of the Turner corporation.

Walk of Shame

http://blogs.tampabay.com/schools/2007/12/in-support-of-i.html?cid=939948141

Deafening Silence

Like Major General Jalil Khalaf, I find myself wondering, "Where are the intellectuals? Why is everyone silent?" In Basra, General Khalaf's charge, the question has more violence associated with it. However, here in the United States, the question, though perhaps not as serious in consequence on an individual level, is just as serious. Where is the opposition? Why are most of those who oppose the W regime quietly submitting to ever-greater governmental intrusions and controls into the lives of the individual citizen? Why are our legislators not more forcefully opposing the degradation of our freedom? Why is the mainstream news media complicit in the militarization of American society and the reduction of the federal bureaucracy and branches of government into a fascist dictatorship?

If we keep compromising submitting to a bully, he'll keep taking whatever he can until there is nothing meaningful or worthwhile left.

Loss of International Good WIll

During the initial phases of the feigned outrage in congress over the use of torture on those in U.S. custody, then Attorny General nominee Alberto Gonzales said in responce to criticism that even if we torture people Americans can never be as bad as the terrorists. It has also been remarked with dismay that the whole way in which the Bush administration has been treating detainees is one of the main reasons we are loosing all of our good will internationally.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002170340_gonzales04.html

For example, Russia has been throwing obstructions infront of international election monitors that they had origionally invited to oversee their current round of national elections. They dont take kindly to any criticism that they might not be behaving like a democracy should and impugn the recent American human rights record and voting irregularities stating that we are not ones to talk down to them about democracy.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iyBfqwTaolA0ETVWNlYycSzVpn8wD8SV0H3O0

Pakistan is less subtle when it points out the speck in our eye to divert criticism from the plank in their own. General/President Pravez Musharrif declared a state of emergency and imprisioned political opponents, and today installed a "caretaker government." Musharrif justifies all this under his countries anti-terrorism laws and points to the U.S. when he justifies locking up dissodents. He says he is doing this to protect his country from radical islamists, but the people he is throwing in jail are the legitimately elected moderates he ousted from power in a military coup. His recent behavior and comments are reminicent of the attitudes of the types of people we have been forced to team up with in Bush's global, generational, war on terror. We have to deal with tribal warlords who see the way we behave and missapprehend it as anti-islam. They say they are also against the Islamists and say they are on our side. Once they have our support they proceed to be corrupt, violent, crime lords.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a2GeoguY159A&refer=home

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071107/Malalai_Joya_071107/20071107/

Another Big Fuckin Suprise

This is one of those things that is actually news of the situation being worse than previously known. However, noone will take any notice because everyone already assumed it was this bad. Basically, ATT was tapping EVERY FUCKING CALL, EMAIL, OR BIT OF INFORMATION you transmited over their lines.

Thats really fucking important!

The question being tossed around in the courts and the legislature is weather the government can tap calls involving foreigners because its pretty fucking clear that tapping the calls of a US citizen is illegal. But thats exactly what they have been doing.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004001159_spying08.html?betterheadline

Get to know Iran

Take a look at thees beautiful pictures of the country of Iran before our warmongering government decides to destroy that beauty and its people.

http://picasaweb.google.com/aatrvash/Iran02?authkey=WHfBV-cDZ2E

Rage for Breakfast

In a case of trying to have one's cake and eat it, too, the Bush Administration, through the Departments of Justice and State (re: more political interference in the federal bureaucracy) is pushing Congress to not adopt the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act, which appears to be the brainchild of savedarfur.org . As loathesome as the conduct of the Bush Administration may be at times, this is by far the worst case of hypocricy and ineptitude that has been demonstrated thus far. I mean, it may not seem like the most pressing issue in the world to some, and I'm not going to touch upon the obvious question that this viewpoint raises. However, in this situation, even a little practical U.S. support in the form of even an AWACS or two tasked to administer a no-fly zone to support the UN Peacekeepers, could go a long way toward bringing about a sustainable resolution to the issue. Given the strong response that the crisis drew from the administration in the past, notably in the speeches of former Secretary of State Colin Powell and current Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, one would think that they might consider more than just their political backing. Which brings me to, perhaps, the most important question raised by this entire affair, just who is the administration protecting? Whose stock price stands to take a tumble after retirement funds and pension boards all over the country divest themselves of corporations doing business in the Sudan?

Rage is clinically proven to be a better stimulant than a morning cup of coffee.

Election Reform

I just want to point out an issue that is only tangentally related to this article. Election reform is a real issue. The Republican party in Ohio was found guilty of interfearing with the last presidential election. And Ohio being the key state you would think that would have brought the results into question. As usual noone payed it any mind. The Republicans are mindfull that there is at least nominal public outcry for reform of the electoral process after indecision 2000. Its even been suggested the UN observe our elections like would be done in some african dictatorship, which is a tremendous embarassment for the country that is supposed to lead the free world.

The Republican solution is of the type of double speak we have come to expect from the Red Side in the last 7 years. They move to replace old outmoaded vote counting processes with newer severely insecure voting machines. (the manufacturer of which is a heavy donor to the Republican party) They call this effort to make the voting process less transparent and more prone to interfearence "reform." Thats one type of double speak.

At the same time they also persue voter fraud through the "real ID" program and state laws requiring one present an ID when showing up to vote. This cuts down on the numbers of elderly, poor, and minoritys who vote. They just happen to mostly vote Democratic.
http://www.mlive.com/elections/fljournal/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1193669477242340.xml&coll=5
Also, actual voter fraud that can be countered by requiring an ID, like a single person voting more than once, or people voting multiple times as different people, tends to favor Democrats. This was an issue during the Justice Department firings of 8 US Attorneys. The US Attorneys were instructed to persue Democrats involved in this type of voter fraud, 8 refused the improper interferance and were terminated. But noone cares about the intracacies of justice, its not sexy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/29/nyregion/29real.html

Swept Under the Rug Monday: The Wyrm Eats Its Tail

Over the course of the Bush administration, there have been many famous cases of personnel management, such as the case of Valerie Plame. However, there has also been pretty severe staffing problems. Readers may remember, this Oct. 14th story in the New York Times about issues at the "Level I" level, but the problem goes much deeper than that. In the course of politicizing every political appointment in the federal bureaucracy, the Bush administration has pushed or otherwise drove highly qualified people from career positions in the various departments. From the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, to the State Department's Foreign Service Corps, from the Transportation Department's Transportation Security Officers (and the Homeland Security Department's Procurement staff), to Patent and Trademark Office's examination workforce, there is a common story of staffing problems. There is a recurrent question in recent times about whether the U.S. can survive the Bush administration, but I think the real question is whether the Bush administration can sustain itself in the one year, two months, and twenty two days that it can legally retain its authority.

In addition to driving down the unemployment rate in the greater Washington metropolitan area, this phenomenon has combined with another alarming trend in the Bush administration, that of over-classification (and more) and retroactive classification, a trend that supposedly found its origin in 9/11. Because of the volume of classified material and the resultant increase in demand for clearances, there is a backlog for security clearances that could force wait times to be most easily measured in months or years. If positions requiring security clearances are being filled by less than the best, it might explain why the Bush administration's approaches to sensitive intelligence work range from the illegal to the dysfunctional.

And the punch line is that the DHS can't properly comply with the Vacancies Reform Act.