Category Archives: Military

UPDATE VIII: Lessons About Wicked TSA Appied To WikiLeaks (Patriotism Or Statism?)

Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Free Speech, Intelligence, Journalism, Just War, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Military, Propaganda, Republicans, The State, War

You’ve already been designated a terrorist at the nation’s federally controlled airports. As you go about your business, trying to make a living, and pursuing familial and professional contacts around the world—you ought to have an inkling, by now, of what being at the mercy of this accreting evil is all about. I hope you are able to extend these lessons and sensibilities to the persecution of an admittedly far more courageous opponent of the Federal Frankenstein than you and I: Julian Assange, proprietor of WikiLeaks.

First up, here are my reservations about hailing Assange as a folk hero: I suspect that Assange’s opposition to the oppressive impetus of the American state is reserved for causes dear to the Left. Witness the posting by Assange’s WikiLeaks, on 18 November of 2008, the name, address, age and occupation of many of the 13,500 members of the rightist British National Party. This is a wee bit of a give-away. Does he not respect this small group’s rights to live unmolested? Apparently not.

UPDATE II: WikiLeaks was, likewise, nowhere to be found when the Climagedon emails were exposed.

The fascist Fox News is leading its reports on the latest leaks with headlines calling to “designate WikiLeaks a ‘foreign terrorist organization.'”

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton seconded the sentiment: “Leaks ‘tear at fabric’ of government,'” she lamented. Good.

Let me focus the story for you. Far more serious than the gossipy prattle among diplomats about Iran, revealed in the 250,000 classified State Department documents, leaked on Monday, are the exhortations issued at Foggy Bottom to SPY ON THE WORLD:

The leaks cited American memos encouraging U.S. diplomats at the United Nations to collect detailed data about the U.N. secretary-general, his team and foreign diplomats — going beyond what is considered the normal run of information-gathering expected in diplomatic circles.
Le Monde said a memo asked U.S. diplomats to collect basic contact information about U.N. officials that included Internet passwords, credit card numbers and frequent flyer numbers. They were also asked to obtain fingerprints, ID photos, DNA and iris scans of people of interest to the United States, Le Monde said.
State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley played down the diplomatic spying allegations. “Our diplomats are just that, diplomats,” he said. “They collect information that shapes our policies and actions. This is what diplomats, from our country and other countries, have done for hundreds of years.”

The fabric of such a government must be torn and shorn; it’s the stuff of society that needs rebuilding.

UPDATE I: I repeat the observation made in “Warbot Wants to Kill WikiLeaker” (08.07.10):

“The politicos, and now even the generals, preach the practice of left-liberalism at its most extreme in every structure of the military and the government. And then, when it appears that their affirmative recruits are crappy—they can’t abide by a code of secrecy (or by a contract); or are unable to refrain from killing their colleagues—then their bosses suddenly turn bigoted and want to kill them.

“These are the same generals and politicians who campaign for free and open sex for hets and homos in the military. What do they expect? Disciplined buttoned-up soldiers?!”

“You can’t run a liberal organization—structurally and philosophically—and expect your members to behave themselves. Left-liberalism is about license and lenience.”

UPDATE III: TRUER WORDS WERE NEVER SPOKEN. Julian Assange’s, that is. The Australian who heads the secret-sharing Web site” said that “the documents will skewer ‘lying, corrupt and murderous leadership from Bahrain to Brazil.'”

UPDATE IV (Nov. 30): CLIMAGEDON. Although WikiLeaks’ proprietor did not break the climagedon story, he did “host the full 120MB archive.” I’m not quite sure what this cryptic, Wikipedia statement means. Is Assange committed to exposing power irrespective of ideology? I still don’t know. There is no doubt that he has done liberty a tremendous service so far by pulling back the curtain to reveal the affairs of state we fund.

UPDATE V: Via Fjordman, of the Brussels Journal: “… in 2001, … two out of Norway’s three largest newspapers, Aftenposten and Dagbladet, reported that most … rape charges involve an immigrant perp, which again mostly means Muslims. Both newspapers have since then conveniently ‘forgotten’ about this, and have never connected the issue to Muslim immigration although the number of rape charges has continued to rise to historic levels. They are thus at best guilty of extreme incompetence, since their former articles about this issue are still available online. Norway’s Minister of Justice from 2001 to 2005, Odd Einar Dørum, mentioned the problem in 2001 but has later gone quiet about the issue. The reported number of rapes in Oslo is now six – 6! – times as high per capita as in New York City, yet the media keeps warning against Islamophobia.”

Swedish women, at least, can at last feel safe. The Swedish government is finally getting serious about their rape problem.?!!

“Interpol, at the request of a Swedish court looking into alleged sex crimes from earlier this year, has put WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on its most-wanted list.
The Stockholm Criminal Court two weeks ago issued an international arrest warrant for Assange on probable cause, saying he is suspected of rape, sexual molestation and illegal use of force in August incidents.”

Now what a coincidence this trumped up charge is, don’t you think?

UPDATE VI (Dec. 1): It is interesting how the collectivist impulse has kicked in among so many so-called defenders of freedom. A single man exposes the wicked workings of the US empire—an arm of which is the terrorist TSA—and that individual has become the enemy of the good.

The use of the term “anti-American,” vis-a-vis Assange, moreover, is so childish and utterly inaccurate. Assange is anti-American only if one equates America with her government. Proceeding from this error, the people who can-can for the criminalization of Assange’s speech draw the conclusion that by opposing state criminality, Assange is anti-American. So far, the one Assange action to qualify as unpatriotic and awful is his exposing of the home addresses of members of the rightist British National Party. That was a bully-boy tactic; it certainly qualifies as an ideological stand; a show of hatred to rordinary, peaceful citizens.

This is not a neoconservative site. Yes, we despise the Obama regime, but we despised the rule of Genghis Bush just as much—and almost from its inception.

People confuse statism with patriotism. This is how this classical liberal writer has defined patriotism (which is why Bad Eagle is wrong: American Indians can be patriotic):

“Patriotism in my view is a very modest thing. I feel patriotism when I encounter many people in my immediate community, or among my readers. The arborist who came to trim my trees the other day told me he was not a Republican or a Democrat. He said he hated the war in Iraq and loved his guns as well as keeping what he earned. This independence of mind is quintessentially American. I feel patriotic when I encounter such an American. Ditto the gentleman who installed my alarm system recently. He too expressed his disdain for politics, and moved on to discuss his gun collection. The sight of the Jeffersonian arborist swinging heroically at the top of my giant cedars, giving them a trim, and the cowboy-clad alarm installer makes me patriotic. People like Dr. Yeagley make me patriotic. There are quite a few Americans such as these around. Not enough, but enough to make me want to fight the good fight for them. …”

“So what is patriotism? Here’s what it’s not: It’s not an allegiance to the government of the day, or to its invariably wicked, un-American policies. It’s an affinity for your community; it’s an understanding of the great principles upon which this country was founded—which have been excised by successive governments, Republican and Democratic alike. And it’s a commitment to restoring the republic of private-property rights, individual freedoms, and radical decentralization.”

UPDATE VII:

“I miss the old WND,” writes Clay Smith, at the Letters section on WND:

I was sadden to read Mr. Farah’s article, “Nobody asked, nobody told.” I remember under President Clinton, WND would be a beacon of liberty, questioning government on everything. Back then WND even honored the “informer” by naming its magazine “Whistleblower.” I really miss that old WND.
Who cares if Pfc. Bradley Manning is a deviant, godless homosexual? The message is what I’m looking at, not the messenger. An individual tells me my house is on fire … I don’t stop and ask him whether he is a godless homosexual. I check his sincerity and validity of the information. In the case of WikiLeaks, the information has showed us numerous forms of government abuse.
There are no secrets in a free and open society – only with governments that keep their citizens in the dark, dictatorships, empires and those who engage in black ops. This is the root cause of terrorism in the first place. Ron Paul was right when he said, “Truth is treason in the empire of lies.”

I read Joseph’s column. I did not take away that he opposed whistle-blowing. What I deduce is that he thought the military appointed the wrong people, a point I made earlier in this post: “You can’t run a liberal organization—structurally and philosophically—and expect your members to behave themselves. Left-liberalism is about license and lenience.”

UPDATE VIII: Vox day writes this on On the heroics of WikiLeaks:

“If WikiLeaks meets the legal criteria of a “U.S.-designated terrorist organization” then so does Wikipedia and the Encyclopedia Britannica. Governments always want to operate in the dark and keep their subjects in ignorance, which is why Julian Assange should not be assailed by the American people, he should be awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, regardless of whatever his motivations in making all of this information available to the public might be.

WikiLeaks is nothing more or less than a technological blow for American freedom. Assange is no traitor; the accusation doesn’t even make sense considering that he has absolutely no connection with the United States. But it should come as no surprise to the readers of this blog that the verbal attack against the organization is being led by one of those freedom-loving Republicans.”

Debt Commission Dross

Debt, Economy, Military, Politics, Regulation, Ron Paul, Taxation, The State, War, Welfare

As has been said over these pixelated pages, “government commissions are where accountability goes to die.” You get my meaning. For example: Some major cost-cutting measures suggested by Obama’s deficit commission’s preliminary report only kick-in in 2050 and 2075.

Like his father, Rand Paul promises to be a beacon for liberty. Intuitively, Rand cleaves to free-market principles. Here are some salient points Rand has made in response to some silly questions, concerning the deficit commission’s preliminary report, fielded from Face The Nation moderator Bob Schieffer:

“… if you’re serious about the budget, you have to look at the entire budget–military and domestic, if you want to make a dent in the debt.

“…I don’t think I want to raise taxes right now. I think government
is too big and so I think we need to cut spending. The way I see it is, is that you want the private sector to have more money. I want to expand the private sector because we have a– a serious recession so I want to leave more money in the private sector. I want to shrink the ineffective sector of the economy which is the government.”

“… I want to be on the side of reducing spending. So I think really the compromise is where you find the reductions in spending. But I don’t think the compromise is in raising taxes. I mean here, you have to put things in perspective. We now consume at the federal level twenty-five percent of the Gross Domestic Product. [Actually, it is more like 40%, as a lot of spending is off budget] Historically, we were at twenty percent. So we’ve taken five percent away from the private sector. And the private sector is the engine that creates all these jobs. I want to send that five percent back to the private sector.”

“…you should shrink the federal work force and you should make their pay more comparable. Right now the total compensation for government workers versus private workers is almost two to one.”

“…make the tax cuts permanent.”

MORE…

The Real Porker Programs (Yes To A State Shut-Down)

Debt, Democrats, Economy, Healthcare, John McCain, Military, Republicans, The State, Welfare

If the Republicans’ ideas on budget slashing is anything like McMoron’s, then, the months ahead will be filled with threats to cut National Public Radio loose, and to do away with earmarks—minuscule amounts which don’t cover a day’s interest payment on the national debt.

Even the Harvard Political Review, which now departs from the King of Keynesians, Paul Krugman, knows as much. The editors of the HPR-produced “Annual Report of the USA” include a Democrat and a Republican. The one writes:

“Despite public criticism of ‘pork barrel’ spending and foreign aid, these items constitute a minuscule portion of the federal budget. Instead, the area of greatest concern is spending on the major entitlements: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Spending on these programs is expected to skyrocket in the coming decades due to an aging population and the increasing cost of medical care. The long-term Social Security solvency problem can be avoided if Congress can muster the political will, but there is no obvious solution as to how to limit the growth of public health care spending. One of the major goals of the recent health care reform legislation was to reduce health spending over the long term, but achieving this will require a discerning and disciplined Congress in the years to come.”

“While the military budget is not growing nearly as rapidly as spending on entitlements, it represents nearly a fifth of total federal spending and is a perennial target of deficit hawks. While there is some waste in defense spending that could be eliminated without much consequence, more fundamental cuts will entail a sacrifice of military capabilities.”

[SNIP]

The deceptive issue of earmarks was raised by Rep. Eric Cantor, of Virginia. From Chris Wallace’s interview with Cantor, the “Presumptive House majority leader,” it transpires, moreover, that Republicans intend to demand “sizable” spending cuts (presumably other than earmarks or NPR) from Obama in return for agreeing to raise the debt-ceiling.

The debt ceiling should not be raised. Better that the government be forced into default. In that case, a government shut-down, as in 1995, would be most welcome.

To his credit, Cantor did not rule out such eventualities. Should they occur, he contended, Obama would be the one to blame for the fiscal crisis that brought about a default on the debt and a subsequent government shut-down.

If government shuts-down for long enough, we may find ourselves thanking Obama for delivering us from evil, indirectly, at least.

"A War He Can Call His Own" Revisited By Woodward

Barack Obama, Military, Neoconservatism, Politics, Republicans, Terrorism, War

Distilled, the Big Idea behind Bob Woodward’s new book, “Obama’s Wars,” was outlined over these pixelated pages on July 18, 2008, in “A War He Can Call His Own”:

Obama needs a “good” war. Electability in fin de siècle America hinges on projecting strength around the world—an American leader has to aspire to protect borders and people not his own. In other words, Obama needs a war he can call his own. In Afghanistan, Obama has found such a war.
By promising to broaden the scope of operations in Afghanistan, Obama has found a “good” war to make him look the part. By staking out Afghanistan as his preferred theater of war—and pledging an uptick in operations against the Taliban—Obama achieves two things: He can cleave to the Iraq policy that excited his base. While winding down one war, he can ratchet up another, thereby demonstrating his commander-in-chief credentials.

Okay, so Woodward has framed as dovish “the president’s decision to order a surge of 30,000 additional troops late last year — 10,000 fewer than what top military leaders had been strongly pushing — with a withdrawal date of July 2011.”

The bottom line is that the president pushed for enough of a commitment, in blood and treasure in Afghanistan, to make him the presidential pick of a blood-lusting public.

That commitment was slightly less than the one the military had in mind—“to keep the troop commitment more open-ended.”

Talk about triangulation—BHO was able to shed just enough blood to give the left a foot in the door, while pacifying the murderous neoconservatives (Repbulicans in all permutations).

Calibration: that was the genius of the cunning Obama.