Osama Bin Laden and The Election

Osama Bin Laden's Al-Qaeda is a force to reckon with whether we like it or not. Bin Laden claims to be at war with the US, and in the context of that war it is entirely possible that he will order his forces to attack the US in order to influence the political process in the US to his liking. As I have written before, that means Osama may indeed attempt to influence the outcome of the US Presidential Election on November 2, 2004,- and that we should not fall for his tricks.

However, there is a question that appears reasonable to ask under the circumstances,- if Osama were to choose, whom would he like to win the Election? Sam Rosenfeld attempts to answer this question in his American Prospect article. He is making a good argument against the wide-spread notion that Bin Laden desperately wants Bush voted out of office.

...responsible journalists will want to remind themselves that there is not a shred of credible evidence documenting al-Qaeda’s preferences in the election one way or the other. This shouldn’t be a shock; after all, the ideological differences between the two major American parties probably aren’t quite sufficient in scope to sway the hearts of radical Islamic theocrats.

But hey, forget ideology for a moment and think strategy. Let’s speculate: If you were bin Laden, and you had enjoyed a year and a half respite from America’s full, undivided attention, as special ops forces, intelligence operatives, and spy satellites were diverted from the pursuit of al-Qaeda to the invasion of Iraq, for which candidate might you feel the most gratitude? If you were bin Laden, and had watched the United States turn its invasion of Iraq into a cause célèbre for Islamic terrorists worldwide, which candidate might you deem the most useful and effective as a recruiting tool for your organization?

I think Mr Rosenfeld is right on the money here.

Support Our Troops!

This is one of the few rallying cries I always back 100%. I may not support a particular war into which our troops are sent, but I am always concerned about their well-being, and I believe every concerned citizen ought to share this sentiment.

Apparently, some in the military establishment prioritize differently. Here is a report by Colonel David Hackworth about the plight of the of the US Army's 89th Company, 57th Transportation Battalion out of Fort Eustis which is currently deployed to Iraq and whose primary responsibility is traveling that country's dangerous roads and delivering various goods to the units in the field. According to Hackworth,

...they're driving thin-skinned trucks that wouldn't stop a heavy-duty spitball. Fiber doors don't come close to stopping AK-47 slugs, and a rocket-propelled grenade round rips through a truck like a paratroop boot through a barracks window.

That doesn't sound like a safe vehicle to drive through what can become an active battlefield on a moment's notice. However, the officers in charge appear not to consider this a high-priority issue.

When the 89th left Fort Eustis, Lt. Col. Jeffrey Helmick, the unit's former battalion commander, said they'd be issued up-armored trucks in Kuwait. The troops are still waiting. And their new commander, Lt. Col. Myrna Merced, doesn't seem to care if the soldiers are protected as long as the convoys run on time.

A soldier in Merced's battalion alleges she's "incompetent and certifiably insane. And our chain of command knows this and is doing nothing. In the meantime, my fellow soldiers are paying the ultimate price because we don't have the right stuff."

Another soldier in the 57th says: "She [Merced] is currently under investigation. Three of her company commanders have filed complaints on her. A BDE [Brigade] commander has ordered her to undergo psychiatric care, and medication."

Well, if what these soldiers are saying is correct, ladies and gentlemen, we have a battalion in the war theater under the command of somebody unstable enough to require psychiatric treatment. No further comment. Kudos to David Hackworth for once again telling it as it is, and let us hope these problems are fixed in the shortest possible order.

"We won't be fooled again"

Or maybe we will. Maybe we as a nation will worry more about whether or not John Kerry was wounded severely enough to get a Purple Heart when he was indeed wounded in battle in Vietnam than we will about the fact that George W Bush was at the same time serving in the Texas Air National Guard where he failed to even serve the time he was supposed to. I should also mention the fact that his departure followed his fighter pilot training the cost of which is estimated to be an equivalent of several million of today's US dollars.

In his article Frederick Sweet calls Bush a deserter. According to strict legal terms that definition may not be correct as desertion includes an intent never to return to one's service station, and there is no evidence there was such an intent on Bush's part. However, Bush's failure to fly the missions expected of him is testimony to his utter ingratitude and irresponsibility. Don't be fooled,- this is not the man to lead us.

And Now Available In Print...

Paul Thomson of the Center for Cooperative Research now has a book out titled "The Terror Timeline". Based upon the description available thus far this book is pretty much the Center's 9/11 timeline in print. The online content of the timeline was definitely worth a read; if you would like to read it on paper, you might want to reserve a copy.

On Honor, Race, Guns And Other Matters

Dennis Joyce, the author of this post, is a Black police officer and Chairman of the Southern Independence Party of Texas. While I find his post too emotional, accusatory and intolerant for my taste, I think it raises a number of important points.

One of them is that police can not be there at all times to protect us, and thus the right to carry arms in many situations translates into a right for the citizens to protect themselves against criminal violence,- a right that is not only constitutional, but also happens to be a natural inalienable right of every living being. Joyce says to his fellow police officers,

To advocate this "thing," this "gun control," is the highest betrayal of the primary rule of nature: self-defense. It is a cruel betrayal of the people you are sworn to protect, and a boon to the evildoers among us. It is the ultimate betrayal of your hard-earned Badge and all it stands for.

Joyce is also, in my opinion, correct in characterizing the importance of the Second Amendment rights for minorities in their fight against racism. There is hardly a more effective technique one group can use to subjugate another than making sure the latter group can not acquire defense capabilities.

This brings me to a further assertion. I submit that if you wear the badge and happen to be of Black ancestry ("African-American" is the current "politically correct" term: I choose not to use it), and fit the criteria I have previously described, you should be held in special dishonor. Your ancestors fought and died under a special adversity for the rights you presently enjoy. I know that we still have a long way to go, (and you are unhappy with that last promotion you were "suspiciously" beaten out of). But today you are still freer than any previous generation, and should honor what they fought for by at least acknowledging that fact. A Black officer or group of officers that support "gun control" over the 2nd Amendment, in effect, support a continuation of practices rooted in racism, practices that currently discriminate against a targeted group of Americans not limited only to Blacks. If you support that you have no honor and are a disgrace to your badge, your brothers in blue, your brothers in ancestry, and the public you are sworn to protect and serve. (This goes for the rest of you who seek not to be identified as "Black," but are not, so-called, "white;" so for you "others," accept that you have advanced in large part on the corpses of millions of Black Americans who were here before you: It's a fact: Deal with it.)

I also like Joyce's comments on the subject of assault weapons.

In some jurisdictions, California comes to mind, Police Officers, assumed to be trusted to carry firearms in the defense of the public; are not exempted from these "assault weapons" bans, on or off-duty. Think about that, Lawman, What message is that sending you? What about "Officer Safety?" (Particularly in the wake of the North Hollywood shootout, where Cops had to go begging to local gun shops to borrow "illegal assault weapons" to stop terrorist bank robbers?). They are denying you safety, and survival, and by extension, also the public.

I think he offers a fresh and interesting perspective on the issues related to gun control,- even though toning down his rhetoric would, in my opinion, not be a bad idea either.

Poverty, Isolation, Indifference...

These three seem to go hand-in-hand in today's America. In his article Jim Wallis talks about the plight of a single mother working what is recognized as a staple of dead-end low-paid occupations,- serving customers at a drive-through window at a Burger King.

"Soccer moms" and "NASCAR dads" have received much attention in recent election campaigns. But who will speak to or for Burger King Mom? She may live in a red or blue state, but neither party is much interested in her or her family's issues.

It has been my experience that many in the US view poverty as a stigma. The victims of this affliction have only themselves to blame, is a common opinion. Walking down the streets of Denver where hardly anyone ever walks and most people just drive I have had my share of insults yelled at me out of the passing vehicles. Ironically, at the time I likely was better of than many a yeller. However, the perception is obviously there,- anyone walking,- not driving,- down a suburban street in an all-American city in an old pair jeans and an old jacket or sweater is a loser of some sort, homeless or just too poor to even get a car, that all-American symbol of financial independence and mobility. Needless to say I did have a vehicle at the time, and could indeed afford expensive clothes. For the latter part I simply have not seen a compelling need ever since I left my teenage years and their attendant insecurities behind me.

For many, the poverty is there as an affliction, the mere thought of it is too worrisome to concentrate upon. But it is there, and the best I can tell it ain't going nowhere no time soon. Mr Wallis appears to second this perception of mine.

The Republicans look after their wealthy constituents, and the Democrats want to be the champions of the middle class. Neither makes a priority of the needs of the poor. Is that because the problems of poverty are disappearing in America? Hardly. The poverty rate (including that for children) has risen over the past two years. More people than ever are without health insurance. Increasing numbers of people can't find affordable housing. The minimum wage hasn't been raised for seven years.

In many ways, I agree with his views of what is wrong with both major parties, as well as the overall political discourse in the US.

We need to redefine the poverty issue as one of growing income inequality in America, and one that increasingly affects working families. American inequality is now greater than at any time since the roaring injustice of the 1920s or the rampant wealth and poverty of the Gilded Age in the 19th century. The Bush administration's tax policies seem deliberately aimed at returning to the wealth distribution of those periods. But especially since the 1990s, both parties are following the dictates of their corporate donors more than the dictates of compassion or justice. The Republicans run as compassionate conservatives and then govern as corporatists, while the Democrats run as populists, then also govern as corporatists.

While I am not sure what the fix ought to be here, there is definitely a problem that we have to recognize and address. And you don't have to like the poor or even sympathize with them. Just bear in mind one thing,- they are there, they are alive, they are (fortunately) not emaciated from starvation, and yes, they have the strength to stand up for themselves and eventually they will if we force them to. We can work towards finding a compromise that works for everybody,- or else, I am afraid, a civil war will become as inevitable as death and taxes.

Suicide Map And Political Preferences

Max Blumenthal notes an interesting article published in today's Boston Globe by Michael Craig Miller, MD, editor-in-chief of the Harvard Mental Health Letter. Apparently, the areas of the US whose inhabitants are most likely to end their own life are the same areas where Bush scored the best in the 2000 Presidential Election.

The 9/11 Cell Phone Mystery

"Hello! Hello! Can you hear me?" I would guess that if you use a cell phone at all, this is the sequence you have gone through many a time. To the industry's credit, over the years the quality of the cell phone communication has improved considerably, as has the coverage. However, the whole technology was designed to provide connectivity on the ground, with the assumption that retransmitting towers can be placed relatively close to the cellular phone they are to service. Another major assumption is that the user would only be moving at ground speeds. On the ground, it is reasonable to assume pretty much that any and every vehicle a cell phone user would travel in would move no faster than a bullet train whose speed is about 300 km/h (roughly 200 mph).

All of the above makes it all the more surprising that according to the official version of the events of 9/11 a number of doomed passengers managed to place calls from their cell phones which appear to have gone through with nary a glitch. In this report Michel Chossudovsky provides a review of cellular technology's capabilities, with the emphasis on the state of that technology on 9/11/2001. The author's basic conclusion: the placement of the cell phone calls the doomed passengers are alleged to have placed was highly unlikely if not outright impossible.

Some inquiring minds with a knack for practical experimentation have tried to assess the usability of cell phones on board of an aircraft. What they have discovered largely backs Mr Chossudovsky's assessment.

As I have said before, the 9/11 report is likely at the very best incomplete. The data referenced by Michel Chossudovsky, A.K. Dewdney et al. seems to enhance that notion.

And A Cheap Shot It Sure Is

This is a good, thorough review of what Swift Boat Veterans For The Truth and their anti-Kerry activities are all about. What worries me is not the fact that such activities are ongoing, but the fact that a certain, non-negligible percentage of the populace is willing to even seriously consider the bogus claims against Kerry. Indeed, as Gerald Rellick laments,

There was a time in America that no one disrespected military service. Veterans from World War II and Korea didn’t challenge each other about whose service was the most dangerous, the toughest. Not everyone could serve in combat, and of those who did, not everyone was in the first wave of a beachhead assault or was in the lead plane in a bombing mission. Everyone in combat understood the fickle nature of war, that luck was everything. It was enough to leave it alone.

Apparently, no more so. Attempts to undermine the reputation of warriors who later in life decided to enter politics are now rampant. Notably, most of those attempts are the work of those who have never seen combat themselves. It is also worth mentioning that most of the time their allegations do not include those of war crimes,- which would be a legitimate concern, merely of not being much of a warrior. Apparently, the time when just being in combat and doing your job was enough to earn a soldier respect and recognition is in the past.

Do You Want To Keep Your Job?

Well, then keep your mouth shut, at least when it comes to politics. That was the lesson Glen Hiller learned when he voiced his disagreements with the Bush administration policies at a rally where Bush was present. According to this CNN report,

Hiller was ushered out of Hedgesville High School on Tuesday after shouting his disagreement with Bush's comments about the war in Iraq and the search for weapons of mass destruction. The crowd had easily drowned out Hiller with its chant: "Four more years."

That Hiller was ushered out of the venue as soon as it became clear that he was not a supporter of our President comes as no surprise to me. His employer's actions are also not entirely surprising. Yours truly has never lost a job for expressing his views on state politics, but he has lost jobs for criticizing on-the-job politics. For my general political views I have at times been shunned by many colleagues but it was their right to do so. However, the general trend appears to be that being different from the mainstream on issues such as material pursuit, subservience to authority and non-critical acceptance of the social order is tolerated less and less in all spheres of the American life. And that, of course, affects employment matters.

Now, I am not going to call the actions of Octavo Designs political oppression as, at least formally, that was a legitimate decision taken by a private business. However, in a country where the gap between the rich and the poor is so wide the threat of being deprived of one's income and an attendant plunge into poverty may be an argument strong enough to rule in many,- and effectively that pressure can effectively be used as a tool of political intimidation and oppression.

And before I sign off here,- I have said time and again that wherever politics is what matters most, professionalism vanishes. That certainly appears to be the case with Octavo Designs. I just tried to see their webpage, and all I got loaded into my browser's window was an orange screen. Well, that is not a very interesting read, nor is orange my favorite color. So it looks like Octavo Designs may not be around for much longer if that is the quality of their output.

And if you think I only bash the mainstream media,- not so, at least not all of the time. I am really grateful to the CNN for publishing their story about Hiller.