The sand, silvered, carries the moon on its shoulders

On Friday there was a release of a Federal Report on the President's Surveillance Program...
http://documents.nytimes.com/federal-report-on-the-president-s-surveillance-program#p=1

And in that report five different independent Inspector General's highlighted the results of the program which was limited even at best judgment of the program...
http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_12813785

But that was not all. Also in that report where a few key revelations. One of them was that the CIA was running a program that no one had told or briefed Congress about. Even more disturbing the CIA was directed by Dick Cheney to not tell of all people...the CIA director about the program...
The program in particular which details are now coming more into the light, was something the Seymour Hersh had been reporting on and mentioned last year:..
http://www.minnpost.com/ericblackblog/2009/03/11/7310/investigative_reporter_seymour_hersh_describes_executive_assassination_ring

A program authorizing the CIA to assassinate suspected Al Qaeda leaders...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124736381913627661.html

There are several things about this that is disturbing. For one we know that Vice President Cheney's actions are in direct violation with the law. In particular the National Security Act of 1947...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_of_1947

But more disturbing to me is how the programs were implemented by Cheney and the Executive branch. And this is something you have to be critical about whether our leaders are Democrat or Republican. This goes beyond party lines. The process of the National Security architecture was comprised over and over again.
In the past year I have read five different books that focused on policy for the Bush administration. And in all five of those books a pattern emerged and the pattern was the same. Time after time, over and over again.
The pattern would go like this. Dick Cheney would want to put a program in place because President Bush handed him supervision of the National Security Portfolio. So David Addington...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Addington

...who was Dick Cheney's lawyer would supervise the writing of a particular policy. He would have John Yoo the disgraced lawyer from the OLC (Office of Legal Counsel) write a law as a memorandum of understanding...
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/

Now Addington with the law written would go around in the White House to only select people who he knew would not give him an argument and who he could be sure were on board for whatever program he wanted to implement. After he got as many of them to OK it he would hand the document back to Cheney who had private lunches with Bush several times a week. Cheney would then have Bush sign the document in question and then Cheney would have Addington circulate it for group consumption.
This hands on approach violated several methods of process and checks and balances within the White House. This is why Colin Powell would often get outflanked on policy and he lost his voice. Cheney would go around even the President's own staff, get approval for something and then run with the program. But here's the funny part. David Addington was not in the employee of the intelligence community. Many of these policies once announced brought up furious argument but only when people heard about it...i.e. after Bush signed the policy. Addington would use Bush's signature on a memo then as leverage telling people to shut up and fall in line.
But this started to backfire after John Yoo left the OLC. When he did the man who succeeded after him was a very conservative lawyer named Jack Goldsmith...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Goldsmith

And Jack Goldsmith had a quality that Cheney and Addington had not seen before...he actually wanted to do what his job said and write opinions that followed a strange entity that Cheney had not paid attention to. Something called the Constitution.
Now Addington tried to bully Goldsmith around but Goldsmith held his ground and demanded more information. As he learned more about these programs and as he started to brief his own boss, John Ashcroft the Attorney General, he discovered that not even the attorney general had been briefed on these programs.
So let's review. Addington with Yoo were writing policies and laws for programs that were kept so secretive that even the highest ranking law officer in the country...who was supposed to certify that the programs were lawful was kept in the dark.
This is what eventually led to a huge showdown over one of these programs and its legality. And it's important to know what this program was about because the program's existence alone undermines everything that we know and appreciate in the Bill of Rights. The program in question that was written by Addington was a program that involved datamining and in particular the NSA (National Security Agency)...
http://www.nsa.gov/

The core of the program was something that we believe has been abandoned which collected and kept data on a massive scale. It looked for keywords throughout email and the internet. And if anything your IP address wrote matched the keywords it was looking for it would pull every email you ever wrote, any request you ever put through a search engine and would archive it. This was done without warrants, without any due process and more importantly Congress was kept in the dark about many of the details of this program.
In fact if you read Barton Gellmen's book 'Angler', which won the pulitzer prize for nonfiction, he cites multiple officials who quoted the director of the NSA (Michael Hayden) as knowing that these programs were illegal. He joked with a group of colleagues right before the 2004 election telling them, "I'm glad that I will have some people next to me when we all sit at a White table and testify to explain all this stuff to President John Kerry."
That to me is a remarkable admission. The head of the NSA joking with people knowing that programs he was running were against the law. Say What?!?
Now the Department of Justice rebeled against this program as well. In the remarkable testimony given by James Comey Assistant Attorney general...


...which was confirmed by the Federal report, President Bush sent two of his goons...that would be White House Chief of staff Andrew Card and former disgraced Attorney General Roberto Gonzales to John Ashcroft's hospital bedside to try to get him to sign and reauthorize a program even though he was in an ICU bed in critical condition...
Now as both Angler and David Sanger's book 'The Inheritance' flesh out James Comey and John Ashcroft were prepared to resign over this program. But even I did not know the depth of how far the lawyers who found this program illegal were ready to go. When James Comey went to talk to the President about this program, which the President wanted and James Comey as the acting Attorney General objected to Comey was prepared to resign. But he was not the only one. Every deputy working for George Tenet under the CIA, The FBI Director, Every Deputy working for the FBI Director and every single Department head and Deputy Attorney General at Justice were ready to and were going to resign over this program and its illegality.
That move if triggered would have effectively decapitated the government. And the amazing thing is barely anyone knew. These were over 40 of the most arch conservative Federalist society certified lawyers in the country. Almost all of them Bush appointees. And because of this disconnect where Bush let Cheney just 'handle it' and he was not in the loop for what was happening...Bush had no idea about this revolt until it was on his doorstep.
Now on the Sunday talk shows we saw a very strange reaction from the Republican party. John McCain with a smile saying this was the 'tip of the iceberg' had a flair for understatement. Jon Kyl on This Week was practically a blithering idiot in his response...


And Peter King who sits on the Intelligence Committee has called strangely for a 'scorched Earth policy'...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/13/gop-hits-pursuit-of-torture-probe/

What the hell is wrong with these people? You know I didn't want to look at the past, just let history judge the Bush administration as it was. But this is entering ridiculous territory though now. How big does a crime have to be before Congress holds anyone in Washington accountable? If Obama was pulling this crap I would argue for his impeachment. I know he should already be called on the carpet because he is still doing CIA Rendition. But if you don't investigate crimes that are happening right before your eyes just because you think it will be politically inconvenient doesn't that make you an accomplice to the crimes?

I was reading a couple of articles in the past few weeks in regards to what has been happening in the Xinjiang province of China. It is the western-most region in China, that borders the Tibet Autonomous Region and India's Leh District to the south and Qinghai and Gansu provinces to the southeast, Mongolia to the east, Russia to the north, and Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India to the west. And, because it borders so many different countries, it has one of the more ethnically diverse populations in China, as the province is almost 50% Uighur. The Uighurs are Muslims who speak a Turkic language and are ethnically different from China's majority Han. They once dominated Xinjiang, a vast region in western China, but Beijing has encouraged Han to move to the region to find work, so Uighurs now make up only about half the population.

Uighurs complain they face discrimination from the Han, and that the government restricts their religious practices, as well as travel. But Beijing argues the Uighurs receive benefits the Han do not, such as the right to have more than one child, and preferential university places.

Tensions still remain between Han Chinese and Uighur Muslims following last week's violence in Urumqi, the capital of China's far-western Xinjiang region.
Chinese authorities say 184 people were killed in the unrest, 137 of them were ethnic Han. Some Han and Uighur people insist the riots were an aberration in an otherwise harmonious interracial city, but other Uighurs accuse authorities of longstanding discrimination against ethnic minority Muslims. The image of racial harmony in Urumqi is undercut by the government's need to deploy thousands of Chinese troops to bring quiet to the city's streets. Authorities arrested over 1,400 Uighurs following the riots. Since Sunday, residents are required to carry their identity cards to comply with police checks.

In response to the Chinese government's military crackdown in Xinjiang, Muslim extremists have been outspoken. China says it will protect its citizens in Africa, after a report that al-Qaida is vowing to avenge Uighur deaths in Xinjiang. A London risk analysis firm says Al Qaida's North African wing, Al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb, vows to target the 50,000 Chinese workers in Algeria and elsewhere in Africa.

Is it me, or in America has it seemed that Islamic extremists have only been portrayed as hell bent on the destruction of Israel and the U.S.? I mean, sure there were those bombings in London and Madrid, however, I'd venture to say that most of the exposure from American media outlets have painted this real East vs. West ideological or theological war that is being waged is either in Afghanistan or 9/11. What does this mean for the war on terror now that al Qaida is making threats against China, a non-Western potential world super-power, and what would the world say if China led a pre-emptive strike against a neighboring country like say... Pakistan?

With all the bullshit nonsense surrounding Michael Jackson this week...


Which was so over the top ridiculous it's disgusting in how all of the main stream media has acted and they were all pathetic. I think I tuned it out and did not watch it on purpose. Quite possibly one of the few events I made sure I saw no part of in my life.
But a man who actually was far more important and had more impact on all of our lives died this week in his sleep. Robert McNamara...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_McNamara

Who was present for and had in a hand in policy decisions that were so central to the direction of this country and everything that this country stood for. And at the same time he is perhaps one of the most misunderstood figures who has ever served in government. Definitely without a doubt one of the most brilliant.
Just a few examples of what McNamara was present for and had a hand in:

1. Robert McNamara was working with Curtis Lemay's command when they firebombed Tokyo.
2. His analysis in many ways persuaded Harry Truman to drop the atomic bombs on Japanese cities to end WWII.
3. If you wear a seat belt when you get in your car...it was his research at Ford that led to that development.
4. He was the Secretary of Defense during the Cuban Missile Crisis.
5. If you have ever seen JFK's grave in Arlington National cemetery he was the guy who chose that spot.
6. He implemented the strategy that escalated the Vietnam conflict into a War.
7. He made the World Bank prominent by engaging in issuing loans lifting many countries and their own people out of poverty.

Yet Robert McNamara is often a vilified figure because in many ways he was and is remembered as the face of the Vietnam war. But the Robert McNamara I became familiar with (because I was born after the Vietnam War) was the man who was more reflective. Also one of the few men I have ever seen in government who has been ever willing to say that policy decisions that he implemented were wrong...



I do think McNamara has been in many ways made a scapegoat for Vietnam...


But in all my readings of him and seeing interviews with him context is very important. In that light I see Robert McNamara more like Colin Powell in how he should be remembered for the sake of history.
You know Colin Powell did not want to wage war in Iraq he thought it would be a terrible mistake and disaster. And privately when counseling the President and his advisers he said so. But Powell took the oath as a cabinet member and served the President. He didn't take an oath to serve the country. He served the President. So when the Iraq invasion came up Powell argued against it, said his peace, did everything he could to persuade the President of his position. But when the President made up his mind he fell in line and carried out the policy.
Now right there many people vilified Powell and held him in contempt. But context is everything. What is the meaning of duty? Powell I admire because although he lost the argument he said his peace and argued his view as best he could. But in the end he served the President and he knew that. The President will ultimately be judged by history. Now McNamara was not someone who argued for the Vietnam War to escalate. He wanted to get out of that country all together. But LBJ was convinced of the threat of communism and its spread and wanted a forceful reaction. LBJ wanted the fight and the war.
Now McNamara was the face of that war because he was the guy giving the briefings, giving the information to reporters and the press. He faced the tough questions day after day. It wasn't what he wanted but he agreed to serve the President and carried out the orders he was given. But he also was open to dissent and even hosted Vietnam protesters in his own home in the later years of the war. He did this because his own son was a protester. Now McNamara implemented the policy even though it was LBJ's decision to go to war. So why would he be the man held responsible?
If you ever want to get a closer look at history and the man who runs like a thread through it I strongly encourage everyone to sit down and take the time to Netflix, rent or just watch the movie 'The Fog of War' which you can see in its entirety on Google...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8653788864462752804&hl=en

The arguments that McNamara has with himself and with the film maker (Errol Morris) are essential arguments but also timeless because they bring forward the most grey questions about war. What makes someone a war criminal? What is the difference between a civil war and a war over ideas?
If you do watch it you will also see that we really did come one day away from all out total nuclear war with Cuba. McNamara was in the room for that too. But more importantly in my view you will see that history might not always judge people fairly. Often the reality is more complicated then we would like to believe.

I have left out such obvious American inventions as electrical light, water-skiing, space travel and the pop-up toaster on the grounds that someone else would probably have come up with those sooner or later.

This is more about the American genius for making daily life more convenient, more entertaining or just more fattening.

First - air conditioning - testament to the American ability to conquer the harshest physical environments and to expand American life towards improbable horizons.

For more than a century now, America has been making machines that blow cold air into hot places - without it Florida, Arizona and southern Texas would be uninhabitable.

Florida's population has gone up 10-fold since air conditioning became affordable. It caught on as a way of cooling cinemas when hot projection equipment made them unbearable in July and August.

Without aircon, going to the pictures would be as seasonal a pastime as ice-fishing.

Ice cubes, too, reflect the same happy knack for making light of the hostility of circumstance.

Every floor of every motel building in the country has an ice machine; every convenience store sells it by the sackfull, and every drink you are served contains lumps of ice big enough to sink a battleship.

All cold drinks in America are served at a temperature which could cryogenically freeze human tissue. I know you find ice cubes elsewhere, too, but in Europe bar staff hoard them as though they were precious stones. In America, they flow in rattling abundance.

Third -valet parking. President Barack Obama says America invented the car, which it did not. But it did invent motoring, and the pinnacle of the American motoring experience is the practice of having someone else park your car when you arrive at a restaurant or hotel.

It makes the list to symbolise the American genius for making money out of simple services done well.

I have paid people to valet my car and then watched mesmerised as they proceeded to park it just a few feet away from me. Somehow, I never feel I am being ripped off.

Chewing gum
Chewing gum is one of America's more enduring gifts to humanity

Item Number Four is aviation. America did invent the aeroplane but it was rather a dull device at first and spent its early years being flown short distances in wobbly straight lines by plucky pioneers.

Before long though, America had invented barnstorming, and intrepid entertainers were performing the Charleston on the wings of bi-planes as they were flown under low bridges. A pointless but brilliant feat.

I put it down to the manner in which the Declaration of Independence promises the right to the pursuit of happiness.

Fifth -chewing gum. One of America's more enduring gifts to humanity requiring no comment or explanation.

Except, perhaps, to note its surprising antiquity - juicy fruit flavour gum was invented in 1893. Odd to think it would have been a familiar taste already to the Americans who came to Europe to fight in the Great War.

1893, in fact, was a bumper year for people who do not worry too much about their fillings since it also saw the invention of Cracker Jack, a mixture of popcorn and peanut coated in toffee which is the baseball fan's snack of choice.

It is really on the list representing all processed food since the genius of it lies in a manufacturing process that prevents all the small lumps from sticking together in one big one.

And while we are on the subject of food, achievement number seven is American cheese - an industrially processed foodstuff chiefly valued for its ability to melt evenly on to a hamburger.

Cheeseburger
American cheese has a hyper-plasticity quality

Often sold in a shade of orange - also used on motorway workers high-visibility coats - it exhibits a quality which I think is called hyper-plasticity which means once its ever been melted it never quite returns to its solid form again.

That is a lot of science behind the cheeseburger.

For anyone travelling through an airport this weekend I thought I should also mention the invention of metal detector in 1881 by Alexander Graham Bell, he of telephone fame.

One of its first deployments was a failed attempt to find a bullet in the body of the assassinated President James Garfield as he lay dying from a gunshot wound. Might have worked too if he had not been lying on an iron-framed bed.

Finally, for this year anyway I give you the space pen - a miracle of engineering which allowed astronauts to write in outer space.

Do not believe the urban myth that says Russians achieved the same effect as the Americans without spending millions of research dollars by sampling using pencils in their spacecraft.

Actually, pencils are dangerous in space because wood is flammable. The Russians use the space pen, too, apparently.

I leave it there because I have run out of time [space] rather than because I have run out of examples of American ingenuity.

Indeed so lavishly have the blessings of providence and the bounty of human ingenuity been bestowed here that by the time America's 234th birthday rolls around, I might well have compiled an entirely different list.

We will see - but for now, happy Independence Day.

Any other Republican contenders for President want to come forward like good old Mark Sanford?...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/24/AR2009062402504.html

Pretentious, arrogant, puritanical hypocrites. All of them. Mark Sanford will not be the last of these guys coming forward. I really hated Bill Clinton for putting the country through the Monica Lewinsky bull. But it is slowly occurring to me that he was put through that nonsense by this same group of pretentious idiots. Newt Gingrich steered the impeachment hearings while sleeping with one of his own staff members and cheating on his wife while she was undergoing chemo.
John Ensign who railed against Larry Craig and called Bill Clinton 'scum' was just caught in his own affair last month...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0609/23841.html

Mark Sanford was one who voted for Bill Clinton's impeachment and called him a 'rascal'. I am so fucking sick of all these hypocrites. Adultery in South Carolina happens to be criminal. Sanford should have the dignity to resign.

I never thought I would think this but I agree with Gail Collins. Maybe all these hypocrites who brought us Bill Clinton's impeachment and the circus that came with it owe us all an apology. Everyone of them was doing exactly what Bill Clinton was...they just didn't think they would get caught.

Perhaps we should outlaw hypocrisy.