Feb 29, 2020
Peace in Afghanistan
After 20 years (two decades) of war in Afghanistan, a peace deal has been signed.
The terms of the deal has the US committing to withdraw all military forces and support staff, and it's NATO allies, within about 14 months. US will withdraw troops to 8,600 in the first 135 days out of five bases.
The remaining forces, according to the agreement, will leave "within the remaining nine and a half months."
The Afghan government agrees to release up to 5,000 Taliban prisoners in exchange for 1,000 Afghan security forces currently held by the Taliban.
"We owe a debt of gratitude to America's sons and daughters who paid the ultimate sacrifice in Afghanistan, and to the many thousands who served over the past nearly 19 years," Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said which comes after seven days after the "Reduction in Violence" agreement.
"The only responsible way to end the war in Afghanistan is through a negotiated political settlement. Today is a reflection of the hard work of our Nation's military, the U.S. Department of State, intelligence professionals, and our valued partners," he added. "The United States is committed to the Afghan people, and to ensuring that Afghanistan never becomes a safe haven for terrorists to threaten our homeland and our Allies."
Jul 12, 2011
Taliban Propaganda Win
The half-brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai has been assassinated in Kandahar, officials say.
Ahmad Wali Karzai, a leading power broker in the country's south, was shot dead at his home in a blow to Nato's battle against the Taliban in the area.
He was shot twice by his long-time head of security Sardar Mohammed, was also killed .
The Taliban said they carried out the attack, calling it one of their top achievements in 10 years of war.
Sardar Mohammed's motives remain unclear, but the killing will raise questions about securing Afghanistan's top officials.
Read more ....
Jun 22, 2011
News of the Day
Apr 27, 2011
WBC Attacked, Not Good for Bill of Rights
The Westboro Baptist Church arrived in Brandon, Mississippi, to picket the funeral of Staff Sgt. Jason Rogers who was killed in action in Afghanistan. However, a series of events reportedly kept the WBC from doing any actual protesting: A WBC member was beaten by locals at a gas station; Rankin County pickup trucks strategically blocked Kansas-plated cars outside the WBC’s hotel; protesters that made it to the funeral were “ushered away to be questioned” under cover of an alleged involvement in a crime.
The source of the report is a lone member of the Ole Miss message board The Oxford Square, and the account is nowhere to be found in mainstream media outlets, but it’s interesting to note that the controversial nature of the tactics supposedly employed to prevent the WBC from protesting Rogers’ funeral — namely the beating and the questionable detainment — has forced Redditors and MeFites to do something they likely find as repugnant as the WBC: Defend the WBC.
WBC is among the most despicable hate groups operating in the US today. As such, they are our generation’s litmus test of whether we really believe in the Bill of Rights. If you agree that they should be beaten up and detained by police on false pretenses then the answer is simple, you don’t.
It was really only a matter of time until this happened. They've been baiting this - so now they'll take everyone to court, sue for damages against their assailants, the police department, and everyone else within a 60 mile radius of the alleged events. And the stupid part - Fred and the WBC will win.
Apr 7, 2011
Honor
Apr 2, 2011
One Religious Nut Incites Other Nuts to Start Killing

The clashes marked the second consecutive day that mobs thronged the streets of major Afghan cities to protest the burning of Islam’s holy book last month by a Florida pastor. On Friday, a mob attacked a U.N. compound in the normally placid northern city of Mazar-e Sharif and killed seven U.N. employees: four Nepalese guards and three European staff members.
The Koran burning also prompted more peaceful demonstrations in the capital, Kabul, in the western city of Herat and in the northern province of Takhar.
Read more
Afghan Rioting Spreads Over Quran Burning -- Wall Street Journal
Mar 25, 2011
Boots and Bigger Threats
2,200 Marines Go To Libya, ‘What Happened to No Boots on the Ground’?In all the reporting on the involvement of US Forces in Libya a report by WCTI Channel 12 News in New Bern, North Carolina seems to have gone by almost unnoticed.
Almost.
The News channel reports that 2,200 U.S. Marines have been shipped off the Libya. Hold on now - that deployment doesn't jive with Mr. Obama’s steadfast insistence that there will be “no boots on the ground” in Libya.
On March 20 WCTI reported that the Marines were shipping out. About 2,200 Marines from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, or 26th MEU will take part. Their mission is to help end the violence directed at the Libyan people.
Oh. Good thing the Pentagon eliminated their amphibious transports that the modern Marines have no use for. Maybe they're just going so that they can keep singing their theme song? "To the Shores of Tripoli!?"
Read More, It's Canadian, eh.
Meanwhile, I wonder if we'll also be sending troops to a much more significant source of terror that's been aiming to actually harm the United States? Oh, didn't hear about that one, eh? Yeah, looks like the Unrest In Yemen Is A Major Setback For U.S. Counter-Terrorism Operations. Remember the UPS and FedEx bombs in toner cartridges? Yemen. Remember the Christmas Underwear Bomber? Yemen. Unrest and regime change in Yemen? Oh, oh, Shaggy.
Oh, and if that wasn't enough, Syria is also quivering on the brink of toppling over -- and while that sounds great, it's probably not great for the Western powers.
So we're engaging Libya. Missing Yemen and Syria. And of course the REAL fart in the car that no one's talking about is Saudi Arabia. Just how important is the Kingdom to the world of Big Macs and iPad2's? If you had to rank which country could be the greatest threat to the modern world's stability - Saudi Arabia should be on the top of your list. Arrogant leadership and oil producing power? Right there. Number 2? My answer would be Iran.
Where's Iraq on that list?
Mar 17, 2011
General Petraeus Admits That His Son Has Served In Afghanistan
Here's a man who has put a personal stake into this conflict. General David Petraeus revealed his son Stephen has recently completed a 'secret' combat tour as a member of the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team.
2nd Lieutenant Stephen Petraeus served as platoon commander with 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team.
Read more ....
I wish and DARE more leaders to do exactly this with their own sons and daughters. Nay, I DEMAND it.
General Petraeus - please, pretty please, run for higher office. We need leaders like you. I only wish you were the rule, not the exception.
Jan 1, 2011
Oh, Those Opulent O’s.
In the grand tradition of rehashing old news and making sub-standard lists of events, arbitrary lists of the ‘best’ movies or music, reality television ‘stars’, or worst of all - consumer products - allow me the exercise of looking back with the rose colored glasses of time. I’d like to try to present the previous ten years as it might show up in a history book.
The Opulent O's
Previous eras of the American experience have been labeled, whether accurately or not, by the generations that followed. The eras of the Gilded Age, the Roaring Twenties, or the Fabulous Fifties give an over reaching illusion of wealth and comfort afforded by all the citizenry. Careful study shows that there were major exceptions ranked by class status and race in each of these three examples, and the names themselves discount recessionary times, and any turmoil that existed. However, the tradition of remembrance for a grouping of ten years with a fantastical moniker has become an unfortunate reality of historical narrative when examining the history of America. The era that we are focusing on now is no exception -- the era which begins at the turn of the 21st Century to the new year of 2011 CE. This time has become known as the Opulent O’s.
To first explain the name of the era, the people of the time did not refer to the year in which they lived as the aughts, or oughts as proper English would dictate, or even the example of the generation that lived through the turn of the previous century, the 1900’s. The pronunciation of the year in which they lived predominantly was spoken as, “two thousand and...” followed by the number designate. Hence, why a few historians have refereed to the era as the ‘And’s’. The consensus by reputable sources and careful research has been to designate this time as the ‘Oh’s.’ The evidence in the historical record suggests that the people of the time would sometimes drop the ‘two thousand’ in speech and would simply state, “Oh six,” when giving a descriptor of a year; as an example.
The word Opulent has become to describe the era. The Latin derived definition in English are defined as 1. Having or indicating wealth, and also 2. Abundant or plentiful. Ignoring race or regional exceptions -- the word perfectly defines the era.
The primary fuel of the time was cheap and easily obtained petroleum drilled from the ground. The peak of use of gasoline and plastic derived from oil occurred in this era. The abundance of cheap oil and fuel allowed for cheap food sources. The importance of oil in the life cycle of plant to waste product must be studied to understand the mindset of the time. The availability and sheer amounts of cheap fuel created a cradle-to-grave manufacturing cycle from consumer goods to 4 ton single passenger vehicle with low fuel to kilometer use ratios -- which defines the zeitgeist. The most important aspect, in hindsight, to the lifestyle of the times was the amount of fuel used to create inexpensive food. The petroleum was used in the creation of fertilizer, and copious amounts were used in the entire process of seed to market, and market to aftermarket production.
Simplified, the oil or oil products would be used by the farmer from every aspect of his production -- from the multiple passes on a tractor (soil toiling, planting, chemical pesticide application, cultivation and a final till of the soil), to transport to industrial food processing off site (sometimes thousands of miles) from the farmland. Next, from the secondary processor which would create a chemical byproduct of the original agricultural product (Maize and soybeans being the most popular of the bases found in most supermarkets [see also ADM Corporation] would then transport and package the new product and ship by truck to market. Retail supermarkets [Safeway, Albertsons], “fast food” restaurants [McDonald’s, Chili’s] or superstore retail outlets [Costco, Wal-Mart] would then cater to the final end user, who more often than not, used a single passenger vehicle to transport the product home. Once the product was consumed, the end user simply disposed of the plastic packaging to preserve the food product, and the outer container -- typically another plastic or cardboard package which only served to encourage purchase. Once discarded the packaging materials were then transported by another gas powered truck or transport to take the used goods to be covered in a landfill. The concept of cradle to cradle manufacturing may have germinated in this era, but due to the nature and scale of the single-use economic cycle, it was counter productive or even suicidal for any industry to adopt a plan to reuse or recycle their resources or waste products.
Since fuel and food were inexpensive, the lifestyle of the typical American of the Opulent O’s were filled with store bought conveniences and electronic trinkets designed for obsolescence which encouraged constant replacement. Leveraged credit based upon elevated housing prices allowed consumers buying power. It was not uncommon for an American to have bought a home past their means, and taken credit based on that home’s perceived market value, called a home equity loan. These funds were then used to purchase more consumer goods -- and often with a credit card [MasterCard, Visa]. The economy was primarily based on the spending habits of the consumer. Even after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, President George W. Bush urged Americans to go to the malls, and purchase houses and cars to get the economy engine moving again. The government created an environment of low interest rates and extremely easy credit in order to facilitate the consumer’s appetite.
Two major military engagements were initiated in response to the sensational terrorist attacks in America, under the banner of a “War on Terrorism.” The engagements in Afghanistan were aided by the Allied Western NATO nations, and the second invasion of Iraq resulted in the replacement of the government there, and a permanent American presence. History has shown, both of these costly involvements were to secure the oil fields, and an attempt to stabilize the region [see also Iran v America 1970-2020] -- thus insuring the flow of inexpensive oil to American business interests. Specifically those partners in Europe and China. Like the citizenry, these foreign entanglements were funded largely by credit. The U.S. had gone from a creditor nation to a debtor nation in 1988, but accelerated during the Bush and Obama Administrations.
Despite the trillions of dollars expended, the price of oil rose as industrial engines of India and China grew their GDP by 20% per year. Oil Prices rose in late 2006 because of simple supply and demand, plus speculation in the commodity markets. Soon, inflation of consumer products, fuel prices, and food began to outpace the threshold of business and consumer expendable incomes. Quickly, the slowdown of consumer spending toppled the preposterous derivative financial products of the time, wiped out the housing speculation and subsequent consumer credit bubble, and exposed widespread institutional Ponzi schemes, not dissimilar to the domino effect experienced at the end of the Roaring 1920’s.
Amazingly, the Six Corporate media companies either were misinformed or incapable of reporting the trends that were creating the problems that led to disaster, and instead reported only soft news (entertainment and sporting events which fed to their other advertising sponsored media concerns), or blatantly perpetuated partisan arguments to fill a 24 hour news cycle with surprisingly low or useless content to their audiences. The news of the day, even as late as 2010, was that of recovery and consumer confidence -- despite under reported or manipulated unemployment figures and a withering manufacturing base. Despite the ineffectual news climate, the government and other influential sources were inserting the word “unsustainable” into the collective vocabulary. At the end of the decade, even to the most optimistic, it seemed that the party was coming to a close. The start of a ‘new normal’ was discussed and contemplated.
Notable Starts: Enhanced government security, social media on networked devices, portable networked computing in communication devices, alternative energy, commercial exploration of space, TEA Party [Taxed Enough Already Party]
Influential Americans: George W. Bush (43rd President), Barack H. Obama (44th President), Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Warren Buffet, Alan Greenspan, Oprah Winfrey, Mark Zuckerburg, Steve Jobs, Sarah Palin.
Human Achievements: Completion of the Human Genome Project, Large Hadron Collider (Switzerland), 2nd Hubble Space Telescope repair by Human Astronauts, extra solar system planetoids discovered, water found on Mars and the Moon.
Notable Disasters: Terrorist Attacks on September 11th, 2001, Hurricane Katrina hits New Orleans and Mississippi, Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill, Global Warming/Climate Change.
Nov 27, 2010
A Dark Anniversary
U.S. Now In Afghanistan Longer than the SovietsThe last Red Army troops left in 1989, driven out after nine years and 50 days by U.S.-backed fighters known as mujahedin. Despite contrasts, the U.S. and Soviet wars have common narrative elements.
Reporting from Kabul, Afghanistan, and Moscow — As wartime days go, Friday was a fairly quiet one in Afghanistan. Helicopters skittered across the sky; convoys rumbled along desert roads; soldiers in mountain outposts scanned the jagged peaks around them.
But one thing set the day apart: With its passing, the U.S. military's campaign in Afghanistan matched the Soviet Union's long and demoralizing sojourn in the nation.
Read more ....
In a completely unrelated note...
Afghanistan discovered an oilfield containing an estimated 1.8 billion barrels of crude in the north of the country, a Mines Ministry official said.
If proven, the resource would be more than 10 times the size of the country’s oil reserves, assessed at more than 150 million barrels by the U.S. Geological Survey. By comparison, Saudi Arabia had proven reserves of 264.6 billion barrels at the end of 2009, according to BP Plc data
“A huge oil resource, which looks like a triangle, with an estimated 1.8 billion barrels of oil, has been discovered by Afghan geologists in cooperation with international geologists between Balkh and Sheberghan provinces,” Jawad Omar, a spokesman for the ministry, said.
The field is a new discovery and was not among those found by Russian exploration companies, Omar said. Further research will be carried out in the next six months and the field will be tendered once all investigations are completed.
The U.S., which has spent $27 billion since 2002 training Afghan forces, is promoting development of Afghan resources in an attempt to stabilize President Hamid Karzai’s government, U.S. Deputy Under-Secretary of State Paul Brinkley said earlier this year. Back in August U.S. President Barack Obama and Karzai discussed the need to jointly keep the pressure on the Taliban and to build Afghan capacity.
The country itself lacks local knowledge to get the oil itself, according to Sayed Masood, an economics professor at the University of Kabul .
“Lack of capacity, lack of capital, lack of skilled people means that Afghanistan cannot extract the reserves itself."
If only there was a country that had the military and the capacity to extract that oil and buy it to fuel their infrastructure?
Nov 6, 2010
The Next Two Years
Mr. Obama allowed himself to appear repentant at his press conference or at least allowed The Media the opportunity to portray him as repentant. Clinton never really recovered from that perception in 1994 and neither will Mr. Obama. His image as Mr. Super Cool is now officially tarnished.McConnell's speech at the Heritage Foundation and Boehner's press conference show that the Right smells blood in the water and will offer no compromise. To think of Harry Reid and whatever remains of the Left in Congress as some kind of firewall is a joke. The Republicans control BOTH houses - don't kid yourself otherwise. Obama can only veto so much until HE looks like an obstructionist. They have the chance to play offense and force Obama to appear reactionary for the next two years. Any cliffhanger elections from this year will fold all the way over in 2012 and even more will be in play. For The Right the plan was always to cut off the legs this election and the head the next.
Meanwhile in Afghanistan - since the July deadline is right around the corner Obama will have no choice but to back down on his promise to begin withdraw. Then, whatever remains of The Left that supports him will eat him alive. Since he already appears weak on domestic policy already; he cannot afford to appear weak on foreign policy too - or The Right will eat him alive. Quite a tightrope act, if you ask me. Whomever Obama hires to replace Gates will be the first real indicator of his own military policy, not Bush's. By July it might be hard to find anyone who doesn't suggest, nay, demand escalation.
And back at the state level - it's gerrymandering time again - and the new Republican Governors will go back to creating those funky electoral districts that are one street wide for two miles just so they can connect one trailer park to another. As of Tuesday, the District Map already looks red. Dick Morris (Clinton's old adviser turned Republican adviser) says that they could fix it so the Left couldn't even begin to try to take back the House until 2020. Or at the very least, those Republicans won't have to worry about campaigning so much.
So where does this leave Mr. Obama? In two years, the country will be just as divided and self-destructive, he may - like Johnson - realize he simply is not in the right place and time to unite and govern. More likely, when he mentions the idea of re-election to Michelle, she'll probably smack him in the head with the Official White House Rolling Pin. Obama's legacy may be a Post-Presidential analysis of the built-in flaws of Washington Politics tracing back to The Revolution. It won't do much for the people of this country, but in his hands, it would make a hell of a book. Just ask Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon about post-Presidential book sales.
But what about Mr. Obama's huge Progressive Base? Even if all those Twittering Lazy ObamaZombies who fell asleep this year woke up in 2012? The Right - and probably even the MSM will be tempted to blow them off as Trendy T-Shirt Wearing Twittering Lazy ObamaZombies, too. Why believe them? Why trust them? The fever of 2008 was propaganda-marketing whirlwind and you can't recreate that with a Facebook status change.
And adding Hillary over Biden will be an act of desperation that will be seen as a deliberate act of desperation that it will actually BE a desperate act. Besides, what does Hillary bring to the ticket at this point? Why would anyone get excited about her, Left or Right?
Oct 26, 2010
WMD in Iraq Was True, but Only Because Wikileaks Said So
One surprising development with the newest WikiLeaks information dump has been how many liberals are now willing to admit that Gulf War era WMDs were found in Iraq. For years, many folks not only denied that WMDs had been found in Iraq, they openly mocked people who said otherwise.So now that WikiLeaks has released the information, they finally believe it and are producing articles like this...
Oh, and the Iranian involvement in Iraq and also Afghanistan has been substantial... even the NY Times ran an article on that today. Afghan Leader Admits His Office Gets Cash from IranWikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq With Surprising Results
By late 2003, even the Bush White House’s staunchest defenders were starting to give up on the idea that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
But for years afterward, WikiLeaks’ newly-released Iraq war documents reveal, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins, and uncover weapons of mass destruction.
An initial glance at the WikiLeaks war logs doesn’t reveal evidence of some massive WMD program by the Saddam Hussein regime — the Bush administration’s most (in)famous rationale for invading Iraq. But chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict — and may have brewed up their own deadly agents.
Oct 5, 2010
Would-Be Terrorist's Bully Pulpet
"Brace yourselves, because the war with Muslims has just begun," 31-year-old Faisal Shahzad told a federal judge. "Consider me the first droplet of the blood that will follow.""We are only Muslims trying to defend our religion, people, homes and land, but if you call us terrorists, then we are proud terrorists and we will keep on terrorizing you until you leave our lands and people at peace."
U.S. District Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum said,"You appear to be someone who was capable of education and I do hope you will spend some of the time in prison thinking carefully about whether the Quran wants you to kill lots of people."Shahzad responded that the "Quran gives us the right to defend. And that's all I'm doing."
The judge cut him off at one point to ask if he had sworn allegiance to the U.S. when he became a citizen last year.
"I did swear, but I did not mean it," Shahzad said.
In his address to the court, he said Osama bin Laden "will be known as no less than Saladin of the 21st-century crusade" — a reference to the Muslim hero of the Crusades. He also said: "If I'm given 1,000 lives, I will sacrifice them all."
Shahzad smirked when the judge imposed the life sentence. Asked if he had any final words, he said, "I'm happy with the deal that God has given me."
Oct 4, 2010
The Taliban are the greatest enemy force we have faced since World War II

-- Chris Ryan, The Daily Mail
Our greatest wartime leader was rarely wrong. The ability to carry on when you are almost dead on your feet, to continue to hold your ground when others have faltered, is what, I believe, goes to make up a good soldier.
Read more ....
Oct 1, 2010
The Forever War
“We’re not leaving Afghanistan prematurely,” Gates finally said. “In fact, we’re not ever leaving at all.”"In a shocking indication of a split between the White House and the Pentagon over the war in Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates believes that the U.S. military will never leave the war-torn country. During a dinner hosted by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for Afghan President Hamid Karzai in May, Gates reminded the group that he still feels guilty for his role in the first President Bush’s decision to pull out of Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal in 1989, according to Bob Woodward’s new book, “Obama’s Wars.” And to express his commitment to not letting down the country again, he emphasized:Well, at least you have to give him credit about being honest about it! There you have it. Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace.
“We’re not leaving Afghanistan prematurely,” Gates finally said. “In fact, we’re not ever leaving at all.” Woodward notes that the group was shocked by the blunt comment: “At least one stunned participant put down his fork. Another wrote it down, verbatim, in his notes.”
The definitive statement seems to clash with President Obama’s assertion that he does not want to leave the war to his successor. Though he has emphasized that the U.S. will stay in Afghanistan “until the job is done,” he wants almost all the US troops out before the end of his first term in January 2013, leaving in place a small contingency force."
Jul 26, 2010
The Pentagon Papers 2010
Thousands of classified US military documents including details of when coalition troops killed civilians in Afghanistan have been released through the website Wikileaks. Here are some key findings.
– A secret unit of special forces called Task Force 373 is being used to hunt down and kill or capture Taliban leaders without trial, The Guardian reported. More than 2,000 enemy targets were on the list called the "Joint Prioritized Effects List".
– The coalition is increasingly using Reaper drones controlled by joystick from Nevada to target and kill insurgents. Files also showed that 97 missiles had been fired by British reapers since 2008.
Read more ....
The War Logs -- New York Times
The War Logs -- The Guardian
The Afghanistan Protocol -- Spiegel Online
Afghan War Diary, 2004-2010 -- WikiLeaks
Wikileaks Afghanistan files: download the key incidents as a spreadsheet -- The Guardian
Afghanistan War Logs: Shattering Illusion of a Bloodless Victory -- The Guardian
Afghanistan War Logs: Secret War Along the Pakistan Border -- The Guardian
Afghanistan War Logs: Iran's Covert Operations in Afghanistan -- The Guardian
Afghanistan War Logs: Fear Taliban Could Tap Mobile Phones -- The Guardian
Afghanistan War Logs: Taliban Listening in to Top-secret Phone -- The Guardian
Afghanistan War Logs: CIA Paramilitaries' Role in Civilian Deaths -- The Guardian
Afghanistan War Logs: Civilians Caught in Firing Line -- The Guardian
Inside the Fog of War: Reports From the Ground in Afghanistan -- New York Times
In Disclosing Secret Documents, WikiLeaks Seeks ‘Transparency’ -- New York Times
Strategic Plans Spawned Bitter End for a Lonely Outpost -- New York Times
Pakistan Aids Insurgency in Afghanistan, Reports Assert -- New York Times
The Afghanistan Protocol: Explosive Leaks Provide Image of War from Those Fighting It -- Spiegel Online
The Afghanistan Protocol: Task Force 373 : The Secret Hunters -- Der Spiegel
The Afghanistan Protocol: German Naivety : Growing Trouble in the North -- Der Spiegel
The Afghanistan Protocol: The Flaws of the Silent Killer: When Drones Fail -- Der Spiegel
The Afghanistan Protocol: Intelligence Agents Drowning in Data -- Der Spiegel
Exclusive: Massive 'War Log' Leak Wasn't Done Alone, Whistleblower Says -- ABC News
US documents leaked online give inside look at war -- Yahoo News/AP
Pakistan secretly helping Taliban: report -- Yahoo News/Reuters
US condemns massive leak of Afghan war files -- Yahoo News/AFP
WikiLeaks Drops 90,000 War Docs; Fingers Pakistan as Insurgent Ally -- The Danger Room
Thousands of 'Secret' Afghan War Files Released on Internet -- Voice of America
US Documents Leaked Online Give Inside Look at War -- ABC News
Leaked files lay bare war in Afghanistan -- Washington Post
Tens of thousands of alleged Afghan war documents go online -- CNN
Afghanistan War Logs: 90,000 classified documents revealed by Wikileaks -- The Telegraph
'Hidden US Afghan War Details' Revealed By Wikileaks As Thousands Of Top Secret Files Go Online -- BBC News
Wikileaks releases massive set of Afghan war files -- CNET
Papers: Leaks Show Unreported Afghan Deaths -- NPR/AP
Pakistan Aids Insurgency in Afghanistan, Reports Assert -- New York Times
The big leak -- Politico
Wikileaks takes new approach in latest release of documents -- Washington Post
Afghan war logs: inquiry launched into source of leaks -- The Telegraph
Afghan says it's 'shocked' by leaked U.S. documents -- CNN
W.H. condemns 'irresponsible' leaks, dismisses stories -- Politico
White House Responds to Disclosure -- New York Times
White House Decries WikiLeaks' Release -- Los Angeles Times
Government 'laments' Afghan war documents leak -- BBC
Pakistan denies Wikileaks reports it 'aided Taliban' -- BBC
Pakistani spy agency denounces US intel docs -- Washington Post/AP
Jones lashes out at Wikileaks for putting lives at risk with Afghanistan files -- The Hill
U.S. Denounces Publication of Classified Documents on War in Afghanistan -- Bloomberg
The War Logs: Reaction to Disclosure of Military Documents on Afghan War -- New York Times
Hamid Gul Responds to WikiLeaks Allegations -- Wall Street Journal
Afghan war logs: webchat with Guardian reporter David Leigh -- The Guardian
What the WikiLeaks Documents Really Reveal -- Leslie H. Gelb, Daily Beast
The New Republic: The Significance Of The Wikileaks -- Andrew J. Bacevich, NPR
WikiLeaks' Afghan Documents and Me -- Mother Jones
The Afghan war is too important to be side-tracked by wikileaks that tell us nothing new -- Con Coughlin, The Telegraph
Posted by Bookyards
So, let me paraphrase : In war people get killed. But only under George Bush. War sucks.
Jul 6, 2010
Doctored Image, No Bias?
On the right, Larry Downing/Reuters President Obama on the magazine cover and in the original photograph with Charlotte Randolph, president of a Louisiana parish, and Adm. Thad W. Allen of the Coast Guard.
A metaphor for a politically troubled president? Fun with Photoshop?
There was President Obama on the cover of the June 19 issue of The Economist, standing alone on a Louisiana beach, head down, looking forlornly at the ground, presumably at a pile of garbage, perhaps the flag.
The problem was, he was not actually alone in the picture. The photograph was just edited to make it look that way. So what? It's cover art. Just ask OJ and Time Magazine, right?
The unaltered image, shot on May 28 by a Reuters photographer, Larry Downing, shows Adm. Thad W. Allen of the Coast Guard and Charlotte Randolph, a local parish president, standing alongside the president. But in the image that appeared on The Economist’s cover, Admiral Allen and Ms. Randolph had been scrubbed out, replaced by the blue water of the Gulf of Mexico. Oh, that's what everyone's pissed about. It wasn't tar brown.
When it comes to its own photographers, Reuters has stringent standards regarding photo editing. “Reuters has a strict policy against modifying, removing, adding to or altering any of its photographs without first obtaining the permission of Reuters and, where necessary, the third parties referred to,” Thomson Reuters said in a statement on Sunday.
Editors from The Economist had no comment when asked on Friday about the cover image.
Reuters has had a photo-editing controversy of its own in 2006 after one of its freelance photographers altered images of the Israeli military incursion into Lebanon to make the damage from Israeli warplanes appear more severe. Reuters later stopped working with the photographer and removed his images from its photo archives.
Emma Duncan, deputy editor of The Economist, said this about the cover,So settle down, ya'll. It's not political. It's just a crappy cover! Okay? It's not like they broke a story about a General who's shining light on a war that's all but forgotten about in America even though it's costing us a Trillion dollars to fight it. Rolling Stone, people! Can we get back to cat pictures now?"I was editing the paper the week we ran the image of President Obama with the oil rig in the background. Yes, Charlotte Randolph was edited out of the image (Admiral Allen was removed by the crop). We removed her not to make a political point, but because the presence of an unknown woman would have been puzzling to readers.
We often edit the photos we use on our covers, for one of two reasons. Sometimes — as with a cover we ran on March 27 on U.S. health care, with Mr. Obama with a bandage round his head — it’s an obvious joke. Sometimes — as with an image of President Chavez on May 15 on which we darkened the background, or with our “It’s time” cover endorsing Mr. Obama, from which the background was removed altogether — it is to bring out the central character. We don’t edit photos in order to mislead.
I asked for Ms. Randolph to be removed because I wanted readers to focus on Mr. Obama, not because I wanted to make him look isolated. That wasn’t the point of the story. “The damage beyond the spill” referred to on the cover, and examined in the cover leader, was the damage not to Mr. Obama, but to business in America."
Jun 28, 2010
Peace Brings Turmoil. What?
Pakistan proposes peace talks between Hamid Karzai and a notorious insurgent commander triggering political tensions.
Pakistani proposals for peace talks between President Hamid Karzai and a notorious insurgent commander have triggered political tensions inside Afghanistan that analysts warn could dangerously destabilize the country.
Western officials say Pakistan's ISI spy agency has offered to negotiate with Sirajuddin Haqqani – an al-Qaida linked commander accused of numerous suicide attacks – as part of a broader initiative to find a find a settlement to the conflict.
Read more ....
Update: Afghan talks raise speculation -- Al Jazeera
Afghanistan's minority groups are clearly upset with these developments, but CIA Director Panetta's skepticism on the success of these talks is probably right.
Pakistan is trying to broker a deal in order to have a say in future peace and reconciliation talks in Afghanistan. To get to the table they are threatening the Haqqani network that if they do not try to resolve their differences with the Kabul Government, Pakistani forces will be launched against their safe havens on the Pakistan-Afghan border, which is why they're sitting down to start talking.
To reconcile with an enemy that you regard is a puppet of the infidels is something that the Taliban and their Al Qaeda allies do not do - it will be an affront to their religious convictions. But they've show they can turn those on and off when it is convenient for them.
This is all theater and show, and buys time before Pakistani forces attack Haqqani camps on their side of the Pakistan border.
Thanks to our good friends @ War News Update for the Post
Oh, and speaking of Afghanistan --
U.S. Officials Say Karzai Aides Are Derailing Corruption Cases Involving Elite
Not even Mayor Daley of Chicago has this kind of clout. Top officials in President Hamid Karzai's government have repeatedly derailed corruption investigations of politically connected Afghans, according to U.S. officials who have provided Afghanistan's authorities with wiretapping technology and other assistance in efforts to crack down on endemic graft.
In recent months, the U.S. officials said, Afghan prosecutors and investigators have been ordered to cross names off case files, prevent senior officials from being placed under arrest and disregard evidence against executives of a major financial firm suspected of helping the nation's elite move millions of dollars overseas.
Read more ....
I suppose if you're skimming billions off of the Americans, and you bribe the Americans back with those same dollars - you can do anything? No?
Jun 27, 2010
The Week In Review - Sunday Comics





Yesterday there was a protest against oil in Washington DC and also "hands across the sands" which was a bunch of white people holding hands on their beach front property. Many of them had green hard hats on, which meant they wanted 'clean' energy. Of note, were the green hard hats which were made of plastic. Which is made of petroleum. Goddamn it people.And why does America need 20 million barrels of oil A DAY?
Yeah, it's a joke about the sweatshop that made the iPhone 4, but the reality is that it's our waiting-in-line attitude and cult-ish worship of the newest and shiniest new gadget rolled out on top of the pile of pointless consumerism and one-up-manship of the Joneses. But on the bright side, this lifestyle is completely unsustainable. Just ask everyone looking for employment.
That recovery is going great! Right?! I mean, every country in the world is following Mr. Obama's advice and driving their countries into crippling debt and dependence? What? they're not? They're standing up to him? Oh, Greece scared the living crap out of everyone? Really?And as the G8 gets around to condemning North Korea for continuing to fight the Korean War, with a mildly worded letter, the good old fashioned protesting in Toronto is being led by Tyler Durden... no, really.

What a week. See you next time.
Jun 23, 2010
McChrystal Pulls a McClellan/MacArthur; About to Get Sacked
Right out of the pages of your tattered US History book, General Stanley McChrystal is about to join George B. McClellan and Douglas MacArthur in the discard pile of American Generals after talking some serious smack about his president outloud. And to Rolling Stone, of all people.Here are some excerpts of what's about to get him canned and out of the War on Terror.
"Stan" McChrystal voted for Barack Obama, but he was disturbed when the president promoted him without knowing who he was.
Even though he had voted for Obama, McChrystal and his new commander in chief failed from the outset to connect. The general first encountered Obama a week after he took office, when the president met with a dozen senior military officials in a room at the Pentagon known as the Tank. According to sources familiar with the meeting, McChrystal thought Obama looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" by the roomful of military brass.
Their first one-on-one meeting took place in the Oval Office four months later, after McChrystal got the Afghanistan job, and it didn't go much better. "It was a 10-minute photo op," says an adviser to McChrystal. "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. Here's the guy who's going to run his fucking war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The Boss was pretty disappointed."
Stanley McChrystal also struggled when he had to convince Barack Obama to give him power for something stupid. (Barack Obama eventually did this, of course.)
Last fall, with his top general calling for more troops, Obama launched a three-month review to re-evaluate the strategy in Afghanistan. "I found that time painful," McChrystal tells me in one of several lengthy interviews. "I was selling an unsellable position." For the general, it was a crash course in Beltway politics – a battle that pitted him against experienced Washington insiders like Vice President Biden, who argued that a prolonged counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan would plunge America into a military quagmire without weakening international terrorist networks. "The entire COIN [counterinsurgency] strategy is a fraud perpetuated on the American people," says Douglas Macgregor, a retired colonel and leading critic of counterinsurgency who attended West Point with McChrystal. "The idea that we are going to spend a trillion dollars to reshape the culture of the Islamic world is utter nonsense.
And here's pretty much the biggest problem with the Afghanistan war, Washington, Stanley McChrystal, and 21st century anxiety in general:
You know, Lincoln was famously quoted as saying, "If General McClellan does not want to use the army, I would like to borrow it for a time." Despite this, he was the most popular of that army's commanders with its soldiers, who felt that he had their morale and well-being as paramount concerns. The analogy doesn't work here. McChrystal was shooting - and shooting his mouth off too.In private, Team McChrystal likes to talk shit about many of Obama's top people on the diplomatic side. One aide calls Jim Jones, a retired four-star general and veteran of the Cold War, a "clown" who remains "stuck in 1985." Politicians like McCain and Kerry, says another aide, "turn up, have a meeting with Karzai, criticize him at the airport press conference, then get back for the Sunday talk shows.
Frankly, it's not very helpful." Only Hillary Clinton receives good reviews from McChrystal's inner circle. "Hillary had Stan's back during the strategic review," says an adviser. "She said, 'If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.' "
McChrystal reserves special skepticism for Holbrooke, the official in charge of reintegrating the Taliban. "The Boss says he's like a wounded animal," says a member of the general's team. "Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors that he's going to get fired, so that makes him dangerous. He's a brilliant guy, but he just comes in, pulls on a lever, whatever he can grasp onto. But this is COIN, and you can't just have someone yanking on shit."
At one point on his trip to Paris, McChrystal checks his BlackBerry. "Oh, not another e-mail from [U.S. special envoy Richard] Holbrooke," he groans. "I don't even want to open it." He clicks on the message and reads the salutation out loud, then stuffs the BlackBerry back in his pocket, not bothering to conceal his annoyance.
"Make sure you don't get any of that on your leg," an aide jokes, referring to the e-mail.
General McClellan also failed to maintain the trust of Lincoln, and proved to be frustratingly derisive of, and insubordinate to, his commander-in-chief. After he was relieved of command, McClellan became the unsuccessful Democratic nominee opposing Lincoln in the 1864 presidential election. Perhaps there's something to that in the McChrystal story? MacArthur was just a little too happy to pursue the Korean War.
Rolling Stone?!
Oh, also, the General loves Bud Light Lime, and his favorite movie was Talladega Nights. Now that's more up to par with the Rolling Stone interviews I'm used to.
Here's some more excerpts from Rolling Stone magazine profile

