Who Are You? What Do You Want? Where Are You Going? Whom Do You Serve – And Whom Do You Trust?!
On today’s installment of Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor, I watched a short interview of Andrew Apostolou; Vice-President, Research , The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. He presented the seminal theory that our current problems with residual Ba’athist forces in the Sunni Triangle have much to do with the 4th Infantry Division not sweeping in from the north, and quickly obliterating them.
I think we should add Andrew to our blogroll.
During the recent coverage of Burt Rutan’s history-making SpaceShipOne, I took note of the coverage of both the Rutans, who have been frequent aviation newsmakers, and especially, 62 year-old pilot Mike Melvill. He has been aptly called the next Chuck Yeager.
So, today I am watching TNT’s rerun of the epic HBO miniseries From The Earth To The Moon. And it occurs to me, NASA has done itself a great dis-service by not playing up the personalities of our current space program, as they had for Mercury through Apollo. Indeed, our current batch of Space Shuttle crewmembers are little more than bus drivers. And the people behind the scenes are, well, people behind the scenes.
Rest assured that, on the world’s new privately funded ventures into space, those who travel, as well as those who make it happen, will be hailed as the pioneering heroes they are.
So, I’m currently watching a Tim Russert interview with erstwhile Presidential candidate Howard Dean on CNBC. The topic turned to Fox News, and his infamous “I Have A Scream” speech. I am amazed that he is still trying to spin it as though Fox News deliberately altered the recording to accentuate his voice.
I have watched C-Span’s Washington Journal repeatedly, but sporadically in the past But over the last few weeks, a disruption in my sleep schedule has caused me to watched far more frequently, and more intently.
I have always been amazed at the rank idiocy of the callers. I mean, this makes talk radio look like a college discussion group. Now I know why: I’ve tried to call in the past week or so, only to be met by a busy signal every time. So, I figure only the most crazed, or the most idiotic, will have the persistence to get through. 🙂
Several of my less news-aware friends frequently turn to me for the real skinny on whatever concerns them at the time. Lately, I’ve been hearing some worries about North Korea having a missile that could deliver a warhead to the United States. And I believe I heard Dennis Miller jest about the possibility of Lil’ Kim dropping one on LA.
Well, this has had me taken aback. As, to my best knowledge, the as yet untested Taepo Dong-II would be lucky to hit Attu, AK. Well, it seems that some un-named brainiacs on the US payroll believe the range may now be up to 6,500 km However, you’ll be happy to know that even Anchorage is safe.
None of this means, of course, that we can be complacent. If North Korea is even a regional threat, they are still a threat to vital US interests. As well, there is still the possibility of alternate delivery systems, such as the cargo containers which flow into Los Angeles like illegal immigrants.
But rest assured; at the present time, unless some crazed Cossack gets his finger on the Russian button, the risk of terror dropping in from space is pretty low.
Lt. Smash catches Kerry’s intellectual dishonesty over Bin Laden in Tora Bora:
This is not a military dictatorship. The President makes the decision to go to war, after consulting with Congress. He may even approve or veto specific military strategies. But he does not write the war plan – the Pentagon does that. Our war planners are some of the most brilliant, thoughtful, and well-educated warriors on the planet. They’ve studied Clausewitz, Sun Tzu, and Mahan. They’ve dissected and analyzed all the major battles in history, from Thermopylae to Desert Storm. They know about logistics, intelligence, artillery, air support, guerilla tactics, and psychological warfare. They are professionals – the best of the best.
The Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines who fight these battles are not automatons. We teach our warfighters to think and react. We train them to adapt to the situation on the ground, and learn from their mistakes. And we are proud of what we have accomplished. When Kerry calls Iraq “a grand diversion,” and “the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time,” he insults all of us, and denigrates our efforts.
But Kerry also criticizes President Bush directly for making specific mistakes. For instance, several times during the debate, Kerry accused Bush of “outsourcing” the war in Afghanistan, and letting Bin Laden get away at Tora Bora.
KERRY: Unfortunately, [Bin Laden] escaped in the mountains of Tora Bora. We had him surrounded. But we didn’t use American forces, the best trained in the world, to go kill him. The President relied on Afghan warlords and he outsourced that job too. That’s wrong.
So here’s my question for Senator Kerry, the armchair general (who served in Vietnam, don’t you know):
What would you have done differently in Afghanistan?
Presumably, he would have used American military forces, instead of “outsourcing” the effort to local warlords. But what forces where available in theater at the time? The first large contingent of conventional forces in Afghanistan, a brigade of 1,000 US Marines, arrived at an airstrip near Kandahar on November 25, 2001. That city, which had been the last stronghold of Taliban leader Omar, didn’t fall to anti-Taliban forces until December 7.
The only other US forces in Afghanistan at the time were Special Forces, and CIA paramilitaries. Their job was to help organize the various militias into a coherent force capable of defeating the Taliban, and to call in Coalition air strikes as required. It was this combination of Special Forces and local militia that had already driven the Taliban from the strategic city of Mazar-e-Sharif, the airbase at Bagram, and the capital Kabul.
The only US military on the ground at Tora Bora was a contingent of about two dozen Special Forces who were airlifted in to the area on December 2. Their mission was to coordinate the ground attack and to “laze” targets for US bombers. There is no way that these men could have taken Tora Bora without assistance – And the Marines in Kandahar already had their hands full. In any event, Tora Bora was completely overrun by December 12 – but not before the al Qaeda leadership escaped to Pakistan.
Let’s make one thing clear: outside of this “outsourcing” plan, there would have been no significant military action in Afghanistan prior to November 25 – but by the time those first Marines arrived, the Taliban had already been largely defeated. “Outsourcing” the war in Afghanistan was not Bush’s idea. It was the Pentagon and the CIA that came up with this plan. But President Bush did approve it, and it worked.
The only military alternative to this plan would have been a massive invasion of Afghanistan with several heavy divisions. Of course, these divisions would have had to get to Afghanistan by coming ashore in Pakistan and driving through the ungoverned (and largely hostile) Tribal Areas, where the Pakistani army wouldn’t even go. In any event, it would have taken several more months for these forces to arrive in theater – plenty of time for the terrorists to dig in and prepare for the fight.
Does anyone see any problems with this plan? It seems to me that the Russians tried this approach a while back, and the British before them. Both got their asses handed to them. Nevertheless, I’m sure that the Pentagon presented this option to Bush, with all of the caveats above. In my judgement, Bush was right to reject this plan, and go instead with the “outsourcing” approach.
Presented with the same options, would Kerry have made the right decision? Judging from his remarks last night, I’d have to say “no.”
I am wondering why no-one calls Kerry on his stock line about us “fighting a war in Iraq, while Bin Laden in still in Afghanistan.” When all our intelligence tells us that, if he is even alive, he is actually in the tribal areas of Pakistan, where overt military actions are not diplomatically prudent.
On todays issue of Fox News’ The Big Story with John Gibson, just hours after Kerry’s handlers threatened to rip out the lectern timing lights for tonight’s debate, I heard DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe claim Kerry actually likes the lights. :))
Madison, WI talkradio host Vicki McKenna posts on her website this recorded telephone campaign message from John Kerry, which came out of Ontario Canada.
So I’m discussing Bush, Kerry, and Iraq on some inconsequential BBS. And I’m subjected to the typical liberal idiotarian arguments about no WMD, yadda-yadda, Chalabi. yadda-yadda, Haliburton, yadda-yadda, ad nauseam. So, after discrediting about the 50th cited article from the likes of Al Jazeera, and the World Socialist Website, I respond with the following:
Basically, what you guys are saying is that, because there is some evidence that your preferred conclusion is true, than it is true without question. That is a logical fallacy.
Yes, there have been substantial miscalculations in the past, and there will be more in the future. But, as Sun Tzu teaches us, “no plan, no matter how cleverly conceived, survives its first contact with reality.” When John Kerry says he has a “Four Year Plan” to get us out of Iraq, the wisdom of the ages tells us he’s trying to sell us a bill of goods. Any actions we take will be contingent upon the actions of the Iraqi civil authorities, which aren’t even in place yet. So any talk of grand “plans” is utter nonsense.
Yes, there are negative trends in some metrics. The most notable would be the increase in terrorist aggression, and the resultant losses. And I do not argue that is an entirely unsatisfactory situation. However, from the standpoint of the objective military strategist: The situation is likely to be beyond our currently achievable level of control. But the rate of loss, and its projected increase, is well within a sustainable range. At least on a near to mid-term basis.
Longer term, there are Iraqi security forces coming online – not nearly as quickly as Messrs. Bush and Allawi would have us believe, but far more rapidly than Mr. Kerry is claiming. All indications are that the training situation is getting the bugs ironed out, and moving forward smartly. AND, in this matter, we are getting significant international support (ref. The new NATO sponsored training academy). However, it will take time to build the Iraqi security force level up to one which has the upper hand on the situation. Keep in mind though, there is substantial weight to the argument that, with properly directed control measures by existing coalition forces on the guerillas, the rate of increase in guerilla offensive capability will be far outstripped by that of the Iraqi security forces.
In short, there is light at the end of the tunnel.
And it is common for those in the Kerry camp to liken the Iraq campaign to the Vietnam War. There are far too few parallels here to make any plausible claim of equivalence. Most notable among these differences are that, while the NVA/Vietcong axis had a personnel pool of millions to draw upon, without a massive influx of foreign forces, the Iraqi guerillas can draw upon a pool no likely larger than 250,000. And, while Ho Chi Minh strategized upon an acceptable loss ratio of 10 Vietnamese to 1 imperialist fighter, the loss ratio for the Iraqi Saddamist army/guerillas is far worse. Further, while the NVA/Vietcong axis could call upon the virtually unlimited materiel support of their superpower sponsor, the Iraqi guerillas are far more limited in what support they can expect from their foreign sponsors, as this must be transferred quite clandestinely.
But there is one important parallel we must be wary of: the politization of the war. In Vietnam, when we conducted serious, militarily planned operations, most notably Linebacker II, the results were swift and devastating for the North Vietnamese. But then, on the threshold of victory, the politicians stepped in and pulled back on the reins. The enemy regrouped the war continued, and more people died. And so it has been in Fallujah, Najaf, and Sadr City. Our forces have been on the verge of pacifying, and then sanitizing these major terrorist enclaves, only to be withdrawn for misguided political considerations. Such missteps cannot be repeated.
Now, My personal experience and philosophy tells me that, as with the general war on terror, our Iraqi campaign must be conducted far more aggressively than that of the current administration. Were I CIC, I would be instituting far more dramatic redeployment – making more troops available for actual combat theaters, conducting far more vigorous enlistment campaigns, vastly increasing pay and benefits – for not just active duty, but R/NG, and vets as well – and deploying far more troops to Iraq. This would be not simply for force protection and security, but as a buildup for potential invasion of Syria and/or Iran.
But George Bush has taken a markedly less dynamic and cautious course.
But what of John Kerry? Well, it’s harder to pin down his position on this war than that of a Florida hurricane on a weather map. But there is little doubt that, in one regard, he will increase political control over the Iraq campaign. This goes inescapably had-in-had with his professed desire to increase international participation. Does he fantasize that he could even get France to deploy even a single company, without giving up some major amount of control over conduct of the campaign?
In a conversation I am having with some individuals on another website, who don’t understand the military mindset, or the concept of duty and honor; they guffawed when I claimed that I did not know of a single American service member in Iraq that claimed they weren’t doing their duty willingly and proudly. One cited the infamous “One weekend a month my ass” sign(s) (I’ve only seen one myself.). He obviously also doesn’t understand the difference between a political statement, and a critique about one’s individual situation.
So, if there are any disgruntled service members out there, and they care to step to the fore, I urge them to write me, and I will post their letter(s) here.
Here are the rules:
Anyone that writes must include their name, rank, and unit. No anonymous BS. I also don’t care about subjective judgements about command decisions. What I want to read is some American service member deployed to Iraq that feels they were duped when they enlisted, and led to believe they wouldn’t be subject to the possibility of extended overseas deployments or combat. I will also post any letters from American service members who believe they are being compelled to participate in an internationally illegal war, or any other illegal military action.
Source: Nastech Pharmaceutical Company, Inc:
Nastech Pharmaceutical Company Inc. and Merck & Co., Inc. Announce Co-Development and Co-Promotion Alliance for Investigational PYY3-36 Nasal Spray for Treatment of Obesity
As you might guess, Nastech stock has skyrocketed.
In a very interesting interview on C-Span’s Washington Journal today, I caught an interesting fact concerning the action at ground zero on 9/11. Peter Lance was hawking his new book Cover-Up, Saying that it was the first time he brought it up, he mentioned a man arrested while coming out of the basement of Tower 7, wearing a fireman’s coat stolen from Engine Co. #10, and speaking Arabic on a cell phone. The NYPD notified the FBI, and were told they weren’t interested in him. He was given time served and released.
So, standing in the supermarket checkout line this evening, I notice a minor tabloid on the rack called the Weekly World News. And their lead story is headlined: Real Life Catwoman Found In Ozarks. In checking out the picture, I see she looks just like … Jeff Foxworthy 😀
So, I can hear it in my mind: You Just Might Be A Redneck Catwoman If…
Your Litter Box Is At The Edge Of The Woods…
When You Go To Scratch Up The Furniture, You Keep Poking Yourself On The Springs…
You And Batman Are Actually Cousins…
The Hound-dog Only Chases You When You Try To Raid His Still…
Just when you thought the service record issue was dead…
Josh Micah Marshall claims that Marc Racicot lied when he said George Bush volunteered to go to Vietnam, Josh is relying upon Bush’s 1968 enlistment forms, and the fact that the Palace Alert program ended shortly after Bush graduated flight training in 1970. However, we now find, according to retired ANG Colonel Ed Morrisey, Bush volunteered again:
“The Air Force, in their ultimate wisdom, assembled a group of 102’s and took them to Southeast Asia. Bush volunteered to go. But he needed to have 500 [flight] hours, but he only had just over 300 hours so he wasn’t eligible to go,” Morrisey recalls.
I’ve got an email into Byron York, perhaps the journalist most familiar with Bush’s service record, hoping to find out when Bush had accumulated 300 hours of flight time. Or perhaps one of our own astute readers or contributors can help me out?
Let me preface this by stating that I have not smoked any marijuana tonight, nor have I in recent memory. 🙂
I just put some cooked spinach on a Philly cheesesteak sandwich – YUM-YUM!
Oh, and please don’t tell my doctor I’m eating cheesesteaks at midnight. >:)
This is really amazing:
Sept. 24, 2004 — For years, dog owners have been informing their doctors about the apparent disease-detecting ability of their pets, and today those claims gain some credibility with the release of the first ever peer-reviewed scientific study showing that dogs can smell cancer.
The paper, published in the British Medical Journal, tested whether canines could sniff out bladder cancer within urine samples. The researchers believe dogs probably can smell other cancers and diseases, such as tuberculosis.
But I ask, with all these wonderous things we can train dogs to do, why do we need $50,000 dynamometers to do smog checks? 😀
Iraqi interim prime minister Iyad Allawi’s address to a join session of congress today drew repeated applause, Including standing ovations for such declarations that elections will absolutely go ahead in January; that, in 15 of 18 provinces, they could be held tomorrow; and particularly that the coalition must stand firm.
Look for John Kerry to again change his Iraq position.
On Fox’s Your World w/Neil Cavuto, today, I’ve just watched one of the most interesting meetings of talking heads in some time. This was triggered by an assertion by Stephan Leeb, of Leeb Capital Management, that the price of oil could go up to “$150-250/bl. or more” over the next 5 to 6 years. But, that price rise would not adversely effect the world economy, so long as there wasn’t a sudden spike.
This price rise, Leeb said, was inevitable, due to the increasing demand of India and China. I have stated this previously (old MT blog). I would further concur with Leeb’s analysis, with the following qualifications: Too fast a rise in oil prices (not necessarily a ‘spike’) could set off an inflationary spiral. And that, should oil move much beyond it’s current $48/bl., alternative sources, such as sand and shale, as well as synfuels, will begin to come online. This, however, will not happen fast enough to fully stem the price rise in conventional crude, but will certainly cap the total price rise over a 5-6 year time frame.
Update: For those seriously concerned about oil prices, this graph might be of interest.
The Minnisota State Troopers have cited a man riding a Honda 1000 for doing 205mph. This seems like bullshit to me. A CBR1000RR is only good for about 170mph topped out, Even in full Superbike racing specification, they will only do about 190. This bike would have had to been heavily turbocharged, and geared-up.
Of course, if he was riding one of these, I could believe it. 🙂
Update: my thumbnail calculations tell me this bike would have to be putting out about 220 rear wheel horsepower (up from about 150). This is doable, if it’s boosted to about 1.6-1.7 bar.
Update 9/24/04: According to Tom Lepper, Sales Manager at Huntington Honda, this sort of speed is “absolutely impossible”, as no turbo systems currently exist for the CBR1000RR. A check on Goole would seem to confim this.
I would think this case calls into question Minnisota’s arial speed enforcement regime.
“Malaysia’s “scorpion queen” Nur Malena Hassan has broken the world record after staying in a glass enclosure at [a shopping mall] with 6,060 scorpions for 32 days.”
Were this not from Robert Novak, a columnist I greatly respect, and perhaps the best-connected journalist in Washington, I wouldn’t give it a second thought, without some corroboration. But, given the source, it causes me great concern:
WASHINGTON — Inside the Bush administration policymaking apparatus, there is strong feeling that U.S. troops must leave Iraq next year. This determination is not predicated on success in implanting Iraqi democracy and internal stability. Rather, the officials are saying: ready or not, here we go.
This prospective policy is based on Iraq’s national elections in late January, but not on ending the insurgency or reaching a national political settlement. Getting out of Iraq would end the neo-conservative dream of building democracy in the Arab world. The U.S. would be content having saved the world from Saddam Hussein’s quest for weapons of mass destruction.
The reality of hard decisions ahead is obscured by blather on both sides in a presidential campaign. With six weeks remaining before the election, Bush cannot be expected to admit even the possibility of a quick withdrawal. Sen. John Kerry’s political aides, still languishing in fantastic speculation about European troops to the rescue, do not even ponder a quick exit. But Kerry supporters with foreign policy experience speculate that if elected, their candidate would take the same escape route.
This, of course, runs absolutely contrary to Bush’s speech before the UN General Assembly today, where he claimed the only viable option was to prevail:
Our coalition is standing beside a growing Iraqi security force. The NATO Alliance is providing vital training to that force. More than 35 nations have contributed money and expertise to help rebuild Iraq’s infrastructure. And as the Iraqi interim government moves toward national elections, officials from the United Nations are helping Iraqis build the infrastructure of democracy. These selfless people are doing heroic work, and are carrying on the great legacy of Sergio de Mello.
As we have seen in other countries, one of the main terrorist goals is to undermine, disrupt, and influence election outcomes. We can expect terrorist attacks to escalate as Afghanistan and Iraq approach national elections. The work ahead is demanding. But these difficulties will not shake our conviction that the future of Afghanistan and Iraq is a future of liberty. The proper response to difficulty is not to retreat, it is to prevail.
The advance of freedom always carries a cost, paid by the bravest among us. America mourns the losses to our nation, and to many others. And today, I assure every friend of Afghanistan and Iraq, and every enemy of liberty: We will stand with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq until their hopes of freedom and security are fulfilled.
In a speech today, John Kerry is claiming Gen. Eric Shinseki and Larry Lindsey were forced out due to their dissenting opinions on Iraq. I don’t know about Lindsey, but Shinseki retired on schedule..
This from Ratherbiased.com:
CBS Relied On Dems for Documents
Burkett, Moore Both Tied to Memogate Story
September 18, 2004 01:06:47 EDT
Memogate is the story that just keeps giving. The Washington Post and The New York Times both have huge stories in today’s editions on the connections between Bill Burkett, CBS News, and the Democratic Party.
First from the Post‘s:
The former Texas National Guard officer suspected of providing CBS News with possibly forged records on President Bush’s military service called on Democratic activists to wage “war” against Republican “dirty tricks” in a series of Internet postings in which he also used phrases similar to several employed in the disputed documents. […]
In e-mail messages to a Yahoo discussion group for Texas Democrats over the past few months, Burkett laid out a rationale for using what he termed “down and dirty” tactics against Bush. He said he had passed his ideas to the Democratic National Committee but that the DNC seemed “afraid to do what I suggest.”
In another message, dated Sept. 4, Burkett hinted he might have had advance knowledge of some details in an explosive segment that aired Sept. 8 on the CBS News program “60 Minutes.” […]
“I believe that Bush knows that there is more coming out than Ben Barnes,” Burkett wrote. “No proof, just gut instinct.”
In an Aug. 13 essay for a liberal webzine called OnlineJournal.com, Burkett hinted again that President Bush was going to be attacked. This time he was more specific:
Americans will get through the gotchas of the preemptive strike from the Republican swift boat crews who want to elevate obviously flimsy charges in order to immunize Americans from more Bush assaults. The Bush assaults are rumored to finally close the issue of Bush’s disappearance from his Air National Guard duty in Alabama; efforts and methods to falsify and cover up Bush problems in his files; and the obvious disciplinary actions that led to his grounding from flying. Both sides will count on the electorate to sicken of this style and leave the real meat on the table untouched.
As documented in most recent polls, the real issues of Iraq have already required enough Maalox for most Americans. Most Americans don’t like war. They are rapidly moving their focus to their domestic issues of jobs, healthcare and education.
his thoughts in an Aug. 31 posting not printed in the Post:
While some of us pine for the return of Bill CLinton, that’s not the real answer. Many of us have risked everything on this election. And the disappointment is deep and difficult to manage.
But we fight on, inspite of incompetance at the top.
The truth probably is that many of the insiders simply didn’t think to chekc someone out in Texas. Does that mean they won’t check out those that submit themselves for key positions, as well. That’s what we all think.
ined its controversial documents within the last few weeks. It may have received them from Burkett following the latter’s unsuccessful attempts to pass them on to former Democratic senator Max Cleland who has traveled to Texas in mid-May and late August.
Before Cleland’s August trip, Burkett telephoned the ex-senator saying that he had damaging information about Bush. He was told to pass this information along to the Democratic National Committe but, according to the Post, national hq was less than enthusiastic.
In an Aug. 21 posting, Burkett referred to a conversation with former senator Max Cleland (D-Ga.) about the need to counteract Republican tactics: “I asked if they wanted to counterattack or ride this to ground and outlast it, not spending any money. He said counterattack. So I gave them the information to do it with. But none of them have called me back.”
Cleland confirmed that he had a two- or three-minute conversation by cell phone with a Texan named Burkett in mid-August while he was on a car ride. He remembers Burkett saying that he had “valuable” information about Bush, and asking what he should with it. “I told him to contact the [Kerry] campaign,” Cleland said. “You get this information tens of times a day, and you don’t know if it is legit or not.”
Contacted by the New York Times, Cleland confirmed contact with Burkett, acknowledging that the disgruntled former guardsman had offered him information relating to Bush’s guard service.
“I couldn’t swear to it whether he used the term documents or information,” Cleland told the paper. “It was some kind of stuff, some kind of information he wanted to get to the campaign, or something, regarding Bush’s National Guard service. I referred him up to somebody in the campaign.”
CBS has publicly denied Burkett was its source although a source within the network told Times reporter Jim Rutenberg that Burkett had “helped with the reports” but did not elaborate on exactly how.
Burkett’s lawyer, a prominent Democratic activist named David Van Os who is the party’s candidate for the Texas Supreme Court denied that his client had forged the Memogate documents.
“From my knowledge of Bill’s character, I am 100 percent positively, unequivocally certain that Bill Burkett has not created or falsified any documents,” Van Os told the Times.
Stan Merriman, co-founder of a group seeking to make the Texas Democratic party more liberal, echoed Van Os’s sentiments in a Sept. 17 posting to the Yahoo Texas Democrats mailing list.
“Our brother, Bill Burkett is under siege by the Carl Rove [sic] smear machine,” Merriman wrote.
“David Van Os assures me that as Bill’s legal Counsel on a longstanding basis, any assertions that Bill has engaged in ‘forgery’ vis a vis the now infamous documentation of the Bush desertion of duty as a Texas National Guardsman is total smear with the footprints of the Karl Rove modus operandi all over it.”
“I stand with both our brothers Burkett and Van Os and applaud their guts to stand up to the right wing slander machine; President Kerry and many of our DNC brethren can take a lesson from our two populist fellow-Texans who have the cajones to look contemptuously in the eye these ruthless cowards bringing down our formerly proud democracy and tell them to go to h*ll.”
of Burkett’s is James Moore, a former reporter for CBS’s Houston affiliate, KHOU. Since 1994, Moore has been hounding Bush over his National Guard service. Eventually, he left “objective” journalism and has since become a part of the anti-Bush cottage industry that has sprung up following Bush’s emergence as a national figure. He is the author of two books on the president, Bush’s Brain and Bush’s War for Reelection.
While researching his second book, Moore received assistance from Burkett who provided him with a number of documents which Moore used to make the case that Bush had acted dishonorably during Vietnam. Some of these documents were given to CBS News which used at least one of them in a Feb. 12 Evening News report which relayed Burkett’s charges that Bush had instructed staff members to destroy documents which cast doubt on his Guard service.
Mary Mapes, the producer of CBS’s Sept. 8 report which relied on the controversial Memogate documents likely was the recipient of these papers since, according to the network, she has been working on the Bush Guard story for the past five years and is based in Dallas. CBS officials have confirmed that Mapes interviewed Burkett.
Than there’s this:
Exclusive: CBS Used Burkett as Document Source Last February
September 17, 2004, 21:15:09 EDT
Bill Burkett, the disgruntled former National Guardsman widely believed to be the source of the disputed documents shown last week on ’60 Minutes,’ has been colluding with CBS News for quite some time. RatherBiased.com can report that Burkett has been giving documents to Dan Rather and his colleagues. These documents have been used in CBS’s reporting.
On February 12, 2004, Dan Rather reported that there was “more election-year squabbling today over President Bush’s National Guard service record during the Vietnam War.”
Correspondent John Roberts reported CBS had obtained a document along with the writer of an anti-Bush book.
“In a six-year-old letter to Texas lawmakers, obtained by CBS News and in the new book Bush’s War for Reelection, former Guard Officer Bill Burkett claims that in 1997, Guard commanders purged Mr. Bush’s records to ‘make sure nothing will embarrass the governor during his re-election campaign or if he runs for president.'”
The letter was given to CBS and author Jim Moore, who also wrote Bush’s Brain.
Burkett, who lives in central Texas near Abilene, believes that Bush is personally responsible for denying him National Guard medical benefits, has been making a number of charges against Bush beginning during his time as governor of Texas. The former guardsman has been trying to get news organizations to report on his complaints but most have been loathe to relay his charges because they are denied by a number of people, including his friends.
Most likely, Burkett’s liaison at the network was Dallas-based CBS producer Mary Mapes who has been pursuing allegations that President Bush evaded his military obligations for five years according to network officials. Earlier this year, CBS had dispatched Mapes to interview Burkett.
During the course of the Memogate scandal, CBS has steadfastly refused to name the individual(s) who provided it with documents the network says were written by Bush’s former military commander, insisting only that the alleged memos came from an “unimpeachable source.”
If, indeed, they put their unqualified faith in so shaky a source as Burkett, ignoring sources to the contrary, this episode will reduce CBS News to little more than a laughing-stock.
Considering how frequently difficult it is to open the wrapper without a pair of scissors, shouldn’t the slogan be “SNIP into a Slim-Jim?” 🙂
Ralph Nader has won the right to be on the November ballot in Florida:
The Florida Supreme Court has ruled that maverick politician Ralph Nader can be on ballot papers in the November US presidential election.
The decision is regarded as a blow to Democratic Party candidate John Kerry.
In the 2000 election Mr Nader attracted enough left-leaning voters in Florida – a key swing state – to cost the Democrats the presidency, analysts say.
The Democratic Party unsuccessfully argued that Mr Nader’s Reform Party was not a genuine national organisation.
The Florida Supreme Court said it was not clear what constituted a national party, and that therefore it could not bar Mr Nader from running in the state.
My question is, why does Nader get all the press, when Michael Badnarik should make the ballot in at least 48 states, and will likely out-poll him in November?
Ratherbiased.com has fingered tin-foil hat Bush hater Bill Burkett as the source of the forged documents:
Bill Burkett, the disgruntled former National Guardsman widely believed to be the source of the disputed documents shown last week on ’60 Minutes,’ has been colluding with CBS News for quite some time. RatherBiased.com can report that Burkett has been giving documents to Dan Rather and his colleagues. These documents have been used in CBS’s reporting.
On February 12, 2004, Dan Rather reported that there was “more election-year squabbling today over President Bush’s National Guard service record during the Vietnam War.”
Correspondent John Roberts reported CBS had obtained a document along with the writer of an anti-Bush book.
“In a six-year-old letter to Texas lawmakers, obtained by CBS News and in the new book Bush’s War for Reelection, former Guard Officer Bill Burkett claims that in 1997, Guard commanders purged Mr. Bush’s records to ‘make sure nothing will embarrass the governor during his re-election campaign or if he runs for president.'”
The letter was given to CBS and author Jim Moore, who also wrote Bush’s Brain.
Burkett, who lives in central Texas near Abilene, believes that Bush is personally responsible for denying him National Guard medical benefits, has been making a number of charges against Bush beginning during his time as governor of Texas. The former guardsman has been trying to get news organizations to report on his complaints but most have been loathe to relay his charges because they are denied by a number of people, including his friends.
Most likely, Burkett’s liaison at the network was Dallas-based CBS producer Mary Mapes who has been pursuing allegations that President Bush evaded his military obligations for five years according to network officials.
I, personally. have lived with a 21 year-old drinking age here in California all my life. But I would drink at Keesler AFB’s enlisted club at 17, and Castle AFB’s enlisted club at 18 without a problem. Before I joined the service, I could buy booze at several local liquor stores without a problem. Of course, that was a “simpler” time.
Today, enforcement is far more rigid, and organizations such as MADD are pushing for a nationwide 21 year-old drinking age. But yet, 1/2 our high schoolers drinks at least once a month. Radley Balko makes a strong argument against this ill-conceived policy:
Seems to me that MADD’s actions here are far more nefarious than its usual statistical tomfoolery, junk science, and lobbying against common criminal protections for DWI defendants. Here, MADD’s zero tolerance bullshit will mean dead teens.
Changing the legal drinking age to 21 hasn’t stopped college or high school aged kids from drinking.
We live in a society based upon the concept of government by consent. In this case, it should be obvious that a majority of those subject to this prohibition do not consent to it.
