The wacky Petraeus tacky attack tactic

With Gen Petraeus' public downfall, the American public can begin to grapple with why after 11 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan "we haven't won anything", (Andrew) Bacevich says. The consequences of the myth of "the great heroic general" have been dire, he says. "It's an excuse to not think seriously about war and to avoid examining the actual consequences of wars that we have chosen to engage." BBC

"See, the problem is that God gives men a brain and a penis, and only enough blood to run one at a time." Robin Williams

David Seaton's News Links

Such a bad week for conservatives... first they lose the presidency, for the second time, to an African-born, Muslim, Communist of color and with it the chance to pack the Supreme Court with Tea Party vetted justices and then repeal a hundred years of social legislation; then to top that, their favorite general, a great white hope, a true man on horseback for conservatives in future presidential elections, turns out to be a nooky-whipped old fool.

The man in charge of all of America's countless spies is brought down because his dippy mistress used an amateur spy "dead drop" email which the United State's head spook activated himself, for general and mistress to discreetly exchange their billet-doux, to send threatening messages to Cent Com's "hostess with the mostest"... Who it turns out is herself drowning in debt.

And following the trail of said hostess, it turns out that Tampa Florida, from where all of America's wars are fought, from where young Americans are regularly sent to far flung lands to be killed or mutilated, is some sort of "Zenith of Winnemac on the blow", where the cheesy, greedy, parvenus, local babbitry, meet with the centurions of America's military elite, to greet and eat. The hostess then dragged in some minor FBI agents looking for dinner invitations and who knows what else, to investigate the messages, which contained no direct, physical threats: whereupon the agents, without a warrant, blithely opened the private correspondence of American citizens... Idiot citizens, but citizens, none the less. 

I could go on but I think I'd rather just go and throw up. DS

Themes for 2012: Petraeus and the fantasies of Hugo Chávez

The Magic General

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez speculated on Wednesday that the United States might have developed a way to give Latin American leaders cancer, after Argentina's Cristina Fernandez joined the list of presidents diagnosed with the disease.Chavez, Fernandez, Paraguay's Fernando Lugo, Brazil's Dilma Rousseff and former Brazilian leader Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva have all been diagnosed recently with cancer. All of them are leftists.(...) "this is very, very, very strange ... it's a bit difficult to explain this, to reason it, including using the law of probabilities." (Hugo Chávez). Reuters

David Seaton's News Links
Hugo Chávez, Venezuela's irrepressible president/strongman (take your pick) is more or less accusing the  United States of America of giving several left wing, Latin American leaders, including himself, cancer. Absurd.

The most disturbing part of this absurd accusation is what makes it absurd... As far as I know it is impossible to "give" people cancer, but I would not doubt for a moment that if it were possible, the CIA might try to do it... They have done even crazier stuff than that in their time with often quite disastrous results. Today they are doing things that no previous administration had ever dared to do before and some of that would be really hard to top.

Under the Obama administration, we seem to be entering a "golden age" of the CIA, where accusations like the one Chávez is making would be par for the course.

People reveal themselves by what they say and what they do, especially by what they do. By naming "magic general", David Petraeus, to run the CIA, Obama gives the game away.  Covert operations, drones, Israeli style targeted assassinations and the destabilizing of other countries' governments or economies by the CIA and front organizations, is now going to be the preferred or "smart" way of managing the empire... more cost effective than the hitherto horribly indecisive, hideously expensive or dismally failed armed adventures featuring thousands of uniformed soldiers, corrupt private contractors, aircraft carrier battle groups, etc. What could be smarter than that?

And what is most disturbing thing of all this "pragmatism" and smartness, is that the firewalls between what the US military and espionage establishment is allowed to do abroad and what is is allowed to do at home, even habeas corpus, are being breached. This gets to a point where "smart" moves into a territory that the British would call "too clever by half"... where the USA is in the gravest danger of outsmarting itself. DS

Democracy without consequences is exhibitionism

"Hypocrisy is a tribute vice pays to virtue"
La Rochefoucauld

David Seaton's News Links
Democracy without consequences is mere exhibitionism. If some serious jail time doesn't follow these revelations of torture and destruction of evidence then the United State is just "flashing" the world.

If America is not going to eradicate these practices it should at least have the decency to cover them up. That would show some consciousness that they were wrong or minimally incongruent with the supposed ideals of the republic.

Bush has to be extradited to the Hague for trial for war crimes if the USA ever wants to be taken seriously again as anything more than a large collection of fat people out shopping. DS

CIA boss faces tape interrogation - BBC News
The head of the CIA is due to testify to two key congressional intelligence committees, after it emerged tapes of two interrogations had been destroyed.

Gen Michael Hayden will face questioning amid ongoing concern over why the tapes were wiped in 2005. Some suggest a possible torture cover-up.

The CIA and the US justice department are investigating the tape destruction.

Meanwhile, an ex-CIA agent has defended the use of "water-boarding", which critics say amounts to torture.

Speaking to ABC News, John Kiriakou said the technique, which simulates drowning, helped "break" a key al-Qaeda suspect.

The suspect, Abu Zubaydah, was said to be one of the men questioned in the deleted footage.

A Palestinian, he was captured in Pakistan in 2002 and sent to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Mr Kiriakou said the day after water-boarding was used on Abu Zubaydah, the detainee told his interrogator that Allah had visited him in his cell during the night and told him to co-operate.

"From that day on, he answered every question," the retired agent said.
But the director has come under pressure to explain the agency's decision to destroy the tapes.

Correspondents say there are suspicions that the decision was made to conceal evidence that terror suspects were being tortured in order to extract vital intelligence.

The New York Times reported on Tuesday that lawyers in a clandestine branch of the CIA gave written approval in advance for the destruction of the tapes, and said this could widen the scope of the investigation.

Gen Hayden has defended the decision, saying it was "done in line with the law".

The CIA says it destroyed the tapes to protect the identity of its agents.

But Democrats have accused the agency of a cover-up to hide evidence of possible detainee torture.

Speaking on Monday, Mr Kiriakou told ABC News he had wrestled with the moral implications of using so-called "enhanced techniques" on prisoners.

"Like a lot of Americans, I'm involved in this internal, intellectual battle with myself - weighing the idea that water-boarding may be torture, versus the quality of information that we often get after using the water-boarding technique," he said.

"And I struggle with it."

But on Tuesday he shifted responsibility from the CIA to the White House, saying the decision to use certain interrogation techniques did not rest with people like him.

"This was a policy made at the White House, with concurrence from the National Security Council and justice department," he told NBC TV.

Human rights groups say that water-boarding - and other techniques allegedly used by the CIA - can be defined as torture under various international treaties to which the US is a signatory.

The administration of US President George W Bush has always maintained it does not allow the use of torture. LINK

Things fall apart: the National Intelligence Estimate

David Seaton's News Links
Like bursting a child’s toy balloon, the latest U.S. National Intelligence Estimate on Iran, which expresses the consensus of the 16 branches of the intelligence community, stated that Iran was not in the process of developing atomic weapons. Many observers believe that by issuing its report, the CIA, backed by the State Department and the Pentagon, has engineered a “palace coup” to keep Bush and Cheney from attacking Iran with catastrophic consequences for a US economy teetering on the brink of what appears to be a nasty recession. Simon Tisdall wrote in the Guardian, “That the CIA and others felt able to act in this manner is a measure of Bush's weakness and their own lingering anger over the Iraq WMD debacle.” Fred Kaplan wrote in Slate magazine, “If Bush were to order an attack under these circumstances, he would risk a major eruption in the chain of command, even a constitutional crisis”

The New York Times said, “Rarely, if ever, has a single intelligence report so completely, so suddenly, and so surprisingly altered a foreign policy debate”. Arnaud de Borchgrave of UPI added, “The latest NIE makes tougher sanctions against Iran mission impossible.” The Israeli newspaper Haaretz underlined, “However successful or flawed this report may be, there is a new, dramatic reality, in all aspects of the struggle against the Iranian bomb: The military option, American or Israeli, is off the table, indefinitely. “

Haaretz may be over optimistic. President Bush told Chicago Tribune reporter Mark Silva, “I have said Iran is dangerous, and the NIE doesn't do anything to change my opinion about the danger Iran poses to the world. Quite the contrary.” What Bush’s stubborn attitude reveals is that, as with Iraq, Iran’s supposed Weapons of Mass Destruction are merely an excuse for a project long in preparation. Helena Cobban of the of the International Institute for Strategic Studies wrote in her blog, “ever since I first came to the US in 1982, I have heard US and Israeli officials and semi-official sources claiming that Iran is "just two to five years" or thereabout away from having a nuclear weapon. I note that 1982 is now 25 years into the past and it hasn't happened yet.” Vice-President Cheney, the neocons and the powerful Israel lobby want to bring down the Ayatollahs before Iran becomes the dominant power in the Middle East. Bush’s last year in power may be their last chance. Exactly like Iraq, the confrontation with Iran is not about Weapons of Mass Destruction and certainly not about democracy or human rights. Again it’s about oil and Israel. DS

Picking through Hersh

It was also true, he said, that Negroponte “had problems with this Rube Goldberg policy contraption for fixing the Middle East.”

David Seaton's News Links

I'm sure you've already read Seymour Hersh's latest New Yorker piece about the lead up to war with Iran, so I'll just point up a fragment that especially grabbed my attention. John Negroponte of Central American, death squad fame, lately US ambassador (viceroy) to Iraq and intelligence czar, someone you wouldn't take for having exactly a delicate stomach, is putting all the distance he can between himself and what a former National Security Council aide described to Hersh as "amateur hour".

I find this similar to Tony Blair's draw down of British troops in Iraq. Neither Blair or Negroponte could be described as being over weighed down with scruples, but they know what's coming and they don't want their fingerprints on what may be a major disaster that will break many careers and maybe even land some VIPs in jail before it has run its course. DS

Abstract: Iran-Contra was the subject of an informal “lessons learned” discussion two years ago among veterans of the scandal. Abrams led the discussion. One conclusion was that even though the program was eventually exposed, it had been possible to execute it without telling Congress. As to what the experience taught them, in terms of future covert operations, the participants found: “One, you can’t trust our friends. Two, the C.I.A. has got to be totally out of it. Three, you can’t trust the uniformed military, and four, it’s got to be run out of the Vice-President’s office”—a reference to Cheney’s role, the former senior intelligence official said. I was subsequently told by the two government consultants and the former senior intelligence official that the echoes of Iran-Contra were a factor in Negroponte’s decision to resign from the National Intelligence directorship and accept a sub-Cabinet position of Deputy Secretary of State. (Negroponte declined to comment.) The former senior intelligence official also told me that Negroponte did not want a repeat of his experience in the Reagan Administration, when he served as Ambassador to Honduras. “Negroponte said, ‘No way. I’m not going down that road again, with the N.S.C. running operations off the books, with no finding.’ ” (In the case of covert C.I.A. operations, the President must issue a written finding and inform Congress.) Negroponte stayed on as Deputy Secretary of State, he added, because “he believes he can influence the government in a positive way.” The government consultant said that Negroponte shared the White House’s policy goals but “wanted to do it by the book.” The Pentagon consultant also told me that “there was a sense at the senior-ranks level that he wasn’t fully on board with the more adventurous clandestine initiatives.” It was also true, he said, that Negroponte “had problems with this Rube Goldberg policy contraption for fixing the Middle East.” The Pentagon consultant added that one difficulty, in terms of oversight, was accounting for covert funds. “There are many, many pots of black money, scattered in many places and used all over the world on a variety of missions,” he said. The budgetary chaos in Iraq, where billions of dollars are unaccounted for, has made it a vehicle for such transactions, according to the former senior intelligence official and the retired four-star general. “This goes back to Iran-Contra,” a former National Security Council aide told me. “And much of what they’re doing is to keep the agency out of it.” He said that Congress was not being briefed on the full extent of the U.S.-Saudi operations. And, he said, “The C.I.A. is asking, ‘What’s going on?’ They’re concerned, because they think it’s amateur hour.” READ IT ALL

Who are we finally?

The Pentagon has been using a little-known power to obtain banking and credit records of hundreds of Americans and others suspected of terrorism or espionage inside the United States, part of an aggressive expansion by the military into domestic intelligence gathering. New York Times

David Seaton's News Links

Really that is the question now: who are we? How did we get here and how do we get out? We all know the famous Herman Goering quote, You frighten the people and you take control of them. Since the beginning of the cold war we are living in the "National Security State". All those in power today are stakeholders in the national security state. This is a political construct that has finally produced something as bizarre as George W. Bush. Power is not acquired easily. Those that have it, have sought it all their lives, with all their being. Don't think for a minute that any of the candidates for president in 2008, if elected, would ever do anything fundamental to cut back the powers that Bush/Cheney are hoarding up now for their succesors. None of today's candidates would resist renouncing those powers from any special perversity on their part, but simply for the same reason that it would be difficult for you or me to unlearn riding a bicycle.

What must be done?

The only practical remedy I have seen offered by any mainstream politician so far, the only remedy that would have any chance of succeeding, is Howard Dean's "50 state strategy". Only a major grass roots movement that empowers "ordinary people" can save the Republic from this sinister, systemic dynamic that the cold war has engendered. Why? Because ordinary Americans have the republican values hard wired in their cultural DNA. These values are as central to the US culture as cold logic is to the French or methodical analysis is to the Germans. There is no sentimentality in this, there is simply no other language Americans can speak. Even fascism has to be dressed up as democracy to be sold to Americans.

Leaders cannot reclaim democracy for the American people. Only the people themselves can do that. The leaders must be turned into followers.

Fortunately, at the same time that the new technologies make all this sinister surveillance easier, Web.2 has placed a tool in the people's hands which makes resistance possible.

Web.2, and mass obesity, are the only two things that George Orwell did not envision in "1984". We are living in a period made for activists, not just for voters and leaders. The system has to be brought alive. Reform has to come from the bottom up, there is no other way it is going to happen. Seen from this perspective, we may be living at the beginning of the most attractive political culture in history, one with the possibility of everyone actually being invited to do their bit to create a better world. DS