« March 2006 | Main | May 2006 »

United 93 and Our "Survivors Guilt"

One year during Easter break, I learned a valuable lesson about how long fear and guilt can stain a man and his soul. Every year during Easter, my cousins and I would go to my Grandparents house in San Simeon for the break in the school year. My cousins and I were practically the only kids in the area as it was a very small coastal town, populated almost exclusively by retirees like my grandparents. It was a great time to spend with my cousins and my grandparents. Rock hunting along the shore or rabbit hunting in the hills, it was a great place to be a kid and the company we shared was as good as it gets. My grandfather was a walking encyclopedia. Every rock had a story, every plant a potential use. Glass floats found on the beach were given a sense of reality as he told us how they were made and where they came from and how long they had probably been floating before we found them. “The chief” is what my dad and uncles called him, but he was always just “granddad” to us kids. He was a hero in the world during a time and in a culture that was without the virtue of heroes.

One day I came back from the beach and came into the house, I slammed the screen door behind me. My grandfather was asleep on the sofa in "mid afternoon nap", but when the bang of the screen door reverberated through the house he leapt up off the sofa exactly the way that 70 year old men don’t and electrified cats often do.

I will never forget the look of stark terror that was on his face, and although he was looking right at me, it was as if I wasn’t there. In just one moment he had gone from snoring and sleeping away the afternoon on the sofa to standing in a cold sweat, looking confused and terrified.

That metallic sound of the screen door as it slapped the inside of the doorframe had just the right timbre, just the right pitch to send a nightmare loose in the mind of my sleeping grandfather. In one moment it was 1968 and he was sleeping on the sofa. The next, he was years in the past on the little “tin can” of the USS Fletcher, on watch below decks as she was being shelled by the battleships of Imperial Japanese Navy as they steamed through “the slot”. Of course at the time I knew none of this history and the minor role he played in it, all I knew is that I was probably going to catch hell for waking my grandfather in the middle of his afternoon nap.

“You have to be careful honey, that screen door does something horrible to your grandfather. So promise me you’ll be more careful with it, ok?” My grandmother said into my ear in a quiet whisper as she leaned down to guide me out of the room. My grandfather tried to compose himself as he sat there, his head in his hands and somewhat embarrassed to have been caught so emotionally exposed. I nodded a slight "yes" to her in return all the while wondering when the punishment for my innocent act would come. But there was to be no punishment. It was a simple accident and she knew it. It was one that she herself had caused several times over the years. She had witnessed his struggle with the past. She recognized their sound but never knew the cause for the sudden involuntary screams in the night of a man who had survived what so many others had not. It wasnt just the stress of the event, but the guilt that comes from survival that had left a mark on his soul.

That sound, that sudden sharp metallic clang that was made in the afternoon of the happy years in soft retirement along the California shore during the 1960’s was just enough of a trigger to transport a man back into a creosote, sweat and black coffee soaked moonless night that that was long over on the calendar, but never more than a moment away in his resting mind. A dark night in the uncertain summer in the South Pacific when all that stood between life and death for those below decks was the all too thin grey bulkheads of a very small ship. An inch of steel and the roll of the dice of fate is all that anyone below decks on that ship had to protect them from the strike of the deadly “long lance” torpedo. He and his crew were in the enemy’s backyard, and they didn’t call it “Iron bottom sound” because of the minerals found there. It was because so much of our Navy had already been sunk there and the floor of the sea was littered with our ships that were far bigger, far more capable than the little USS Fletcher.

That night of slow monotony mixed with the quick mechanical terror of warfare at sea as well as the whole war itself were long since over and well in the past, but they had really never left the mind of the man who had witnessed it first hand. The watch he stood that night had never really ended.

The screen door I slammed that day rang like the dinner bell for the beast that ate into his soul.

He had lived through that night and the war,and yet so many others with him that night had not. The guilt of survival was far more punishing to him than what the enemies aim had brought. It ate at his soul like spilled acid on a metal plate.

You see, time does not heal all wounds; it merely schedules them for surgery and forgets to provide the anesthesia.

Yesterday, I thought about my grandfather and the incident with the screen door when I grappled with the question of whether or not to go this weekend to see United 93. I don’t for one second believe that my life is anything at all like my grandfathers, yet I too suffer from a bit of survivor’s guilt.

Once upon a time, I was a “road warrior” and I have on occasion flown out of Boston on Tuesday mornings. I have over 500,000 miles on United Airlines and therefore the world of “air travel perks decision making” would have put me on a United Airlines flight before all the other possible choices. I believe that in the past, I probably have flown that same flight, on a different day and a different year.

I stopped living the “road warrior” life in 2000. In my time in the air as a "road warrior", I have witnessed many,many things. I once saw a passenger on a flight in the midst of a psychotic episode. I was horrified as the person tried to open the door of the aircraft while we were in flight. I watched as he was subdued by the crew, and after that flight I never again used the term "Stewardess".

I've just missed catching flights that went on to crash and killed co-workers, but nothing has effected me like the story of United 93. To me, United 93 is not just the story of other peoples suffering that bothers me the most. It is the nagging sense of guilt that has come from surviving these "near misses" that eats at my soul. The story of United 93 triggers those emotions in me like the screen door of my grandfathers house triggered his.

United Flight 93 claimed the lives of several of my company’s employees. They were people just like me, who were doing business one day and returning home the next and doing by air what most people do with the crosstown bus. But for a small change in my career decisions and personal desires during the preceding 12 months before 9/11/01 one of the flights of that day might very well have been a flight that I too would have been on and most certainly would have died like all the others. I cannot look at any pictures from that day without thinking, “it could have been me on that plane”. Its very unsettling to see your potential death scene replayed over and over. It is a small step from the reflective thought of "could have been" to the guilt that comes from the speculation of "should have been".

As I said, I once just missed catching a flight that a co-worker managed to catch. It crashed, and he was killed. That event bothers me too, but events of September 11th were something else altogether. It wasn’t just an "accident of icing" that caused the deaths on that September day; it was a deliberate murder. On that day, people were trying to kill us. The acts of that day represented something far more deliberate than that of a "regular" plane crash. "Acccidents happen" and we can rationally accept that they do, but we simply cannot accept the idea that there are people in the world who hate so much that they will set out to kill us by any means necessary.

Like most people who fly commercial and maintain some form of private pilot rating, I often find myself on long flights daydreaming about the “what ifs”. People who are pilots like myself often ask ourselves “if there’s a problem with the pilot, could I get in the cockpit and fly this plane?”. This is absurd, but we ask it to ourselves as if it was a real possibility. We ask ourselves if we know the location of the flaps and landing gear on a 737 like it might be important to know that sort of thing, as if holding a private pilots license holds you responsible in some way to the airline.

We ask ourselves what would we do first and what would we do to be sure, to be certain that the plan would land, even though we never flew anything bigger than a Cessna 172. Before September 11th, it was just a way to kill time, a harmless “Walter Mitty-ish” daydream to help kill the choking tedium that comes with long distance flights in coach while pressed up against the fuselage with a kid kicking the seat back, wishing we were anywhere but 30,000 feet in the dry air over Kansas with another 3 hours to go before we are released from our imprisonment..

We all know the plot to the movie “Airport” and we all think we are the Dean Martin character in the movie. Life however, is not a movie plot, life is often cruel and unforgiving and things in the world often fall right to hell, even for very good people and innocent children.

It is because of these mid-flight “Walter Mitty” adventures that I knew the morning of the massacre that the hijackers had used the Hudson River as a visual reference to guide them to Manhattan. I knew it before noon on that very day. I knew it, because I had seen it outside my window on many flights, and I too knew that as long as I followed that clearly defined river, that I could find the fabled island of Manhattan. There was no need to practice using navigation aids like GPS. Just look out the window, follow the river, and look out for the big buildings and dive when the time is right. It was as simple as that. I knew the moment I saw the attack that they had planned with ruthless efficiency to attack on just the right day – a clear autumn day with both ceiling and visibility unlimited, and using just the perfect visual landmark, a wide straight river that crossed right in front of the path of the aircraft to ensure that they could get to their target on their limited skill set. I knew that they had planned it well enough to know that it really doesn’t take a whole lot of training to steer and commercial airliner in mid flight. It takes training to land and takeoff, and they had no intention of doing either one. I fully recognized the cleverness of the attack. No bombs to be sniffed, to guns to be detected, just raw muscle and simple, supposedly harmless, box cutters tied to the applied use of terror physical against the passengers. I knew, that even though there were many hijackers on a flight that only the ones who took over the cockpit and actually flew the plane knew the full intentions of their mission. The “bully boys” that kept the crew and passengers at bay outside the cockpit were as surprised as anyone that they were actually on a suicide mission.

Until September 11th, all hijackings were just bad TV drama. You land somewhere, make faces at the camera, express grievances, and they may kill a passenger or two, only to be let off the hook by the well meaning folks at the UN. On September 11th., the “bully boys” thought they were getting their name in lights but only the hijackers cockpit crews knew they were to be the “New Divine Wind”.

After United 93, that all stopped. Admit it. Every time you get on an airline today, you check out the passengers as potential threats. You size them up. Is that guy a cop or a whackjob? What kind of shoes are those? Is that person acting in any way that might give away their actual intent? You are polite to all, but inwardly suspicious of everyone at the same time. There’s not as much small talk on airlines these days. You don’t offer to play a game of cards with the person sitting next to you anymore. You sit, you scan, you watch. You glance at the crew, and you nod to them in acknowledgement of what you both know but dare not express out loud.

I know the story of United 93, but the written word doesn’t tell the story like a movie does. Movies are just a step away from dreams, or in this case, a nightmare. Movies imprint on the mind in a different way that the written word. For weeks after September 11th I don’t think I was able to sleep more than a few hours at a time. I always snapped bolt upright in the night in a sweat at the scene in my mind of the aircraft hitting the towers and knowing, really knowing what that scene represented. It wasn’t a machine crashing; it was people in the act of dying, of people being killed. They were dying and being killed deliberately and by the design of a group of madmen. In those months of no sleep and nightmares, it always felt to me that in my dreams, the planes weren’t hitting the WTC - they were hitting me for my crime of “not being there”.

The worst thing that the massacre of that day has left me with is a nagging sense of guilt that lingers in the back of my mind. I have been left somewhat hollow by the experience. After the day the massacre occurred and dice of fate had been thrown I had gone on to see more sunrises and sunsets, while others in my company had not. I do not know how to explain it or account for it; I just know that it is simply the way it is and over time I will learn to accept it for what it is.

I have done nothing in my life that should rationally cause a case of "survivors guilt" over the events of September 11th, but I cannot shake the horrible sense that I have let those people down in some cosmic way. I recognize that it’s not rational to feel this way but I can’t shake the feeling that in our day-to-day luxury of life that we have lived since that September 11th, that we’ve missed the point of what those people on United 93 so clearly understood in moments before it all ended.

While we stand by and debate the truth of the war that is being waged against us, the people of United 93 understood that we are under attack by madmen who want nothing more than to simply kill us all. Some of us even debate if there is an "enemy" at all. We as the living have that luxury while the people on United 93 looked into the eyes of the madmen and witnessed first hand their acts of perverted hate and saw the 'heart of darkness' for themselves.

There was no debate about the true nature of the madmen on Flight 93 by the people who were there. That debate only exists in our world.

They wish not to negotiate territory, trade disputes or borders. They simply wish to kill us all. It is not our “support of the Jews” which has caused their grievance, it is our very existence. Their God has forsaken them, and rather than face up to the shame generated by that fact, they choose instead to seek vengeance against those that appear to them to have found Gods favor. They hate happiness and freedom in every form, and wish only the worst conditions on all mankind. We can no more accept the Jihadi conditions for our surrender than the people of United 93 could just sit in their seats.

The United 93 movie represents something else besides a just a movie. It’s the ugly and cold metric of commerce. There are a number of people in the business of producing movies who are betting that Americans won’t go to see this movie. They believe that people do not wish to be reminded of that day. They do not think that Americans will go to see what happened. If United 93 were to fail, it would give rise to the myth that “Americans do not support the war”, which is becoming less a call for “leaving Iraq”, and more often than not is now a call to return to the days of the 1990s, when threats were ignored and allowed to fester into the embolism of 9/11.

They find it very easy to make a movie that drives a wedge into the country and destroys the morale of free people while it gives comfort to our enemies, like “Fahrenheit 9/11”, or creates a series of unsustainable paranoid theories like “Syriana”. But to make a movie about the first battle in the war against terror and show citizens as heroes, that is simply beyond the people who run Hollywood. Its extremely important to me that United 93 does well at the marketplace, because if it were to fail, it would give comfort to those who say there is no heroism in fighting back, that there is only heroism in defeat and dissention.

If United 93 fails at the box office, the war on terror will be re-written in our popular culture the way that returning Vietnam vets were re-written from normal people into murdering psychopaths let loose on the general population. Like it or not, what passes for popular culture very often serves as the basis of history. Popular culture is often the lens by which historical events are later interpreted.

If we are not careful to support this movie because of our collective sense of “survivors guilt”, then the failure of United 93 will serve as a springboard for furthering the cause defeatism that permeates most of modern era popular culture. No matter our victories in this war of which United 93 represents just the first, popular culture is already working to marginalize them as inconsequential. A ‘defeat at the marketplace” of United 93, will further make the case for those who think we must “lose to win” in their perverted logic in the worship of failure.

I do not know yet if I can go into a theater this weekend and watch a movie like United 93, but I do know that whether I choose at this point to see the movie or not, I will be buying a ticket to ensure that the legacy of that story is given the respect that it deserves by popular culture.

Hollywood knows nothing and cares not what tale is that is actually being told on the screen, but it does respect what happens at the box office. It will notice either a success or a failure and will react accordingly.

Like the sound of the screen door was eventually to be accepted as “just a noise” by my grandfather, I will also learn to look at movies about 9/11 as “just a movie” without an overwhelming sense of survivors guilt. Someday I will look at pictures of the 9/11 massacres and I wont feel that somehow that I failed the people on those planes.

UPDATE: Reviews for 'United 93' can be found here.

Posted @ April 28, 2006 02:10 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (21)

"Iron Mike" Defies Terrorists; Demonstrates what 'freedom of speech" really means

From 'Stars And Stripes' and Frontpage Magazine:

The picture that best defines our war:

And the story of the heroes behind it:

Snip...
"What Burghardt saw too late was another wire leading between his legs to a third such cannon shell. A distant terrorist, probably watching through binoculars, triggered it by remote control. The explosion hurled Sargeant Burghardt’s body 10 feet into the air. His limp frame came smashing down, face first, on the roadway.

As fellow soldiers rushed toward the limp body of Sargeant Burghardt, whom they knew as “Iron Mike,” he was awake. While still in the air, he had thought “I don’t believe they got me” and was already feeling “ticked off they were able to do it.”

After hitting the ground, Burghardt was unable to feel anything from the waist down. “I was lying there thinking I didn’t want to be in a wheelchair next to my dad,” Burghardt remembered, “and for him to see me like that.”

Around his body, his fellow soldiers looked down at his shredded uniform. After the gigantic explosion, they were amazed he still had legs and was clearly alive. They quickly began cutting off what remained of his pants.

“I felt a real sharp pain and blood trickling down,” the Sargeant remembered. “Then I wiggled my toes and I thought, ‘Good, I’m in business.”

Medics arrived with a stretcher, but Burghardt had other ideas.

“I decided to walk to the helicopter,” he said. “I wasn’t going to let my team-mates see me being carried away on a stretcher.”

And he wanted to send a message to the cowardly terrorist still probably watching from afar. He stood, then raised a one-fingered salute of defiance toward this bomb and all insurgents.

Sargeant Burghardt, theres a world of thanks and a truckload of beer waiting for you and your men in Califonia.

Posted @ April 27, 2006 11:13 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (1)

Who is Ty Cobb?

Dr. McCarthys Lawyer. More here from Westlaw. More info on Ty Cobb Esq. at RightWingNutHouse. And more from Chris Hitchens...

(Tonight on a very special episode of "Mythbusters",Jamie tries to disprove the myth of doppelgangers...)

Posted @ April 25, 2006 04:39 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (1)

Dr. Freud, Call your Office

Any man who poses for a painting like this ...

is a man in the market for a red sportscar.

Posted @ April 25, 2006 12:08 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (3)

Gas Price Whining

My definitive piece on "how to beat the high cost of gas" can be found here.

I still own my 8 cylinder mega-truck, and I still buy gas once every 6 to 8 weeks. My secret? Easy, Just dont drive as much...

Posted @ April 25, 2006 09:37 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (7)

Tom Cruise: Journalists not "happy"

Quote:
"When I look at the people who write or say these things, I realise it's not a lot of people doing it. "It's just a few people, trying to take advantage of sensationalism"

Oh my. I finally agree on something with Tom Cruise. Suddenly I feel very "unclean".

Posted @ April 24, 2006 05:24 PM | Comments (0)

McCarthy: " I Didnt Leak, I was not escorted out"

From MSNBC.

snip...

"McCarthy's lawyer, Ty Cobb, told NEWSWEEK this afternooon that contrary to public statements by the CIA late last week, McCarthy never confessed to agency interrogators that she had divulged classified information and "didn't even have access to the information" in The Washington Post story in question.

After being told by agency interrogators that she may have been deceptive on one quesiton during a polygraph, McCarthy did acknowledge that she had failed to report contacts with Washington Post reporter Dana Priest and at least one other reporter, said a source familiar with her account who asked not to be identified because of legal sensitivities. McCarthy has known Priest for some time, the source said."

As they say, Read The Whole thing...

Later in the article, several apologists say in a sense that such "old fashioned ideas", such as not violating security oaths are outmoded in the modern world, and by Bush actually prosecuting leaks, it imperils the "security community" by forcing them to honor their oaths and that a better idea would be to simply give the Washington Post and the New York Times a security clearance so they can print whatever they think is important and cut out all this leaker "fol-der-all" about "leakers". Cut out the middleman and pass the savings on to you, the citizen.

Better yet, Let's stop giving security clearances altogether because of the burden it apparently places on the overburdened employees of the CIA.

(Note: one other point of no significance whatsoever. She has a lawyer named "Ty Cobb"?, what? is he from the firm of Jackson, Landis and Ruth? Their slogan "We'll hit your case out of the park or its free!")

UPDATE: More info on Ty Cobb Esq. at RightWingNutHouse.

The score so far -
1) She was a high ranking member of Clinton NSC
2) Whos boss inexplicably stuffed classified information into his pants and removed them from the archives, pleaded guilty and paid a fine, but never disclosed the nature of the materials removed.
2) Has working background with Ghana affairs.
3) Who works at an NYU speakers board with Washington Post Reporters Dana Priest and Sy Hersh.
4) Dana Priest Pulitzer winning reporter for her story on the renditions program, and who's husband appears to act on occasion as an agent for former Ambassador to ghana, Joe Wilson.
5) Sy Hersh, whos most recent opus was on the Administration "deviltry" at the now notorious Iraqi prision "abu ghirab". His work was purported to be simply "reporting the scandal", which was in fact investigated and prosecuted by the military long before it became public via Sy Hersh.
5) A CIA agent who was, until she was fired was in the CIA Inspector General office, which is responsible for making sure there are no "leaks", yet a regular and repeated campaign appears to have been run by the CIA against the elected government of the United States.
6) ---> Now has a high powered lawyer from deep within "The World Wide Legal Defense League of Clinton Apologists, Inc.".

Now, back to the question of "Who sent Joe Wilson, and Why"? It appears to me that there is now a much better answer to that question than there was before last weeks polygraph.

Posted @ April 24, 2006 04:29 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (0)

Who Does Dr. McCarthy Remind me of?

I was asked this morning, what historical event "the Mccarthy case" most reminds me of.

I thought about it for a second and what comes to mind is this. When the Manhattan Project was underway, there were a large number of scientists working on the bomb, and had signed security oaths to protect what they had learned (and the Government and people of the US had in point of fact - paid for), that thought to themselves that it was simply wrong for the US to have exclusive use of nuclear technology and that steps should be taken to ensure that others besides the US had "the bomb".

So, they started working with contacts in the Soviet Union to give them the information. They had decided on their own to leak information ensure that the Soviet Union had an equal footing with the US in regards to nuclear power.

Ted Hall was the first person who came to mind as a historical example of the sort of self-righteous person who is so full of self hatred and personal guilt, that any sense of basic right and wrong simply disappears into a fog of martyrdom.

When Ted Hall was asked about his actions, he said "an American monopoly on nuclear weapons was dangerous and should be avoided."

To address this "American Monopoly", He took action to arm the most genocidal, anti-human regime in the history of all mankind with the single most destructive weapon in history which was used to subjgate its own people as well as threaten the people of the United States and its allies.

The depths of some peoples hatred of the United States simply cannot measured.

At the core of the McCarthy case is a person who is singularly the most responsible for providing the intelligence warning the US of the threat of al-queda, and failed twice during her tenure( In 1993 and 2001) to provide that warning. Her career didnt progress because of a change in administration politics; it didnt progress because she was dangerously incompetent and as it turns out, she is also dangerously disloyal.

A person who is willing to spy for a political party is a just step away from a person willing to spy for another nation. Once you start to rationalize your reasons for disobeying your oath, theres no turning back.

Dr. Mary McCarthy is not a "leaker"; she is a spy who has taken actions to subvert the democratically elected government of the United States.

Posted @ April 24, 2006 10:41 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (1)

The First rule about "fight club"

also applies to the CIA, yet some people are shocked to find that the CIA treasures an atmosphere of secrecy, to wit:

from al-jazeera-on-the-hudson, sorry, I mean the NY Times:

"There's been a fundamental shift in practice at the Publications Review Board. There's literally been a reinstitution of the 1950's attitude that what happens at C.I.A. stays at C.I.A."

They say that like its a bad thing...

Posted @ April 23, 2006 08:06 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (0)

The "Grand Unified Theory" starts to gel.

Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame, Sandy Berger, Richard Clarke. Do they all lead back to Dr. McCarthy?

And whats this? Did they travel as a group to get some sort of discount? Seymour Hersh, Dana Priest, Anthony Lewis and Mary McCarthy? What? They couldnt get Chomskys agent? With that much left wing hatred on display behind the podium, the audience must've needed to wear big rubber ponchos like they have at a Gallagher concert.

Posted @ April 22, 2006 01:41 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (0)

McCarthy: Second Day - First Thoughts

1. Maybe the war would be over by now if half the CIA wasnt more interested in "getting Bush" than it is with "getting Osama".

2. The WAPO and the New York Times are saying that McCarthys efforts are not just legitimate, but actually required for the safe running of a government. Would they say the same if other members of the CIA were to reveal classified information on the failures of the Clinton Administration?

3. In my mind, the CIA is a compromised organization. Mary McCarthy is not some back bench disgruntled civil servant, she's a major player in the Security Community, the NSC and the CIA. Organizations tend to take on the attributes of those at the top. People who are promoted within the organization are promoted because they mimic those in the leadership. This means that there are a large number of people in the CIA whos careers map, personal network and decision making processes mimic those of Dr. McCarthy. Those that are supporting McCarthy now need to explain how an out of control, and apparently disloyal CIA has helped secure the United States against the people who are trying to kill us.

4. How many "dots" are not being "connected" because half of the CIA is sitting in its cubicles frothing at the mouth in hatred over the words "President Bush". How many people have died due to someone elses Bush Derangement Syndrome?

5. At what point does the actions of someone like McCarthy stop being a "Leak" and start being a form of "shadow government"?

6. Its supposed to be the "Central Intelligence Agency", not the "Central Policy Agency". We didnt elect you Dr. McCarthy, you are not "the decider"; its not your call.

7. If a person will violate their security oath for political revenge, what wont they do?

8. What strikes me as most interesting about this case is that it appears that Dr. McCarthy has close working relationships with many people in the "anti-Bush" community and the Democrat party. Is this just a leak, or part of an attempt at a soft "coup"?

9. Why is Dr. McCarthy so interested in overturning the results of an legitimate election? Should we trust someone who doesnt trust the voters? ( I love replaying Clinton Apologies for my own benefit)

10. Now that we have reason to question the loyalty of Dr. McCarthy and that she served in the NSC with Sandy Berger, Just what was it that Sandy Berger was carrying in his pants out of the archive? Is it related to this?

Posted @ April 22, 2006 09:32 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (4)

The Friday Office Blog Pool

Mary O. McCarthy - CIA Officer and former NSC member. Fired for leaking classified information to the press.

NOTE: This is officially the biggest story of the year, if not the decade. The CIA no longers stands for "Central Intelligence Agency" its the "Compromised Intelligence Agency". The implications involved with where this story is going are simply staggering. Be aware that since this post was originally made, many many updates have been added, so keep scrolling to pick up the latest findings.

The Story:

CIA Fires an Officer for leaking info to Media.

The Pool:

1. How long until the CIA Officer is referred to by the media to as a "whistleblower"?

2. How long until he/she shows up on Chris Matthews?

3. Rougly how many BTU's are being generated by quick fingers tapping on New York literary agents blackberrys trying to find this person, so as to sign a real hefty book deal before the competition?

Any takers?

Its a bit of a problem for the media. If they make this character to be a hero "speaking truth to power", it does make you ask why Libby is being prosecuted.

Theres much more to this story, and we havent seen the last of this for some time.

UPDATE: Fox News reports that the CIA officer is a "Mary Mccarthy" ho testified for the 9/11 commission. The 9/11 Transcripts show only this name:

"Mary McCarthy NSC senior director for intelligence, 1998-2001"
Testified on "Warning of Transnational Threats" as Mary O. McCarthy, former National Intelligence Officer for Warning, Central Intelligence Agency

Not just a deskbound "paper pusher", now is she...

My first clue on where to look for info on Mrs. McCarthy is that Porter Goss was seen today carrying a copy of the 9/11 Commission book. It turns out, she testified, and was involved at the very highest levels of National Security.

UPDATE II: More - In March 2001, Rice asked the CIA to prepare a new series of authorities for covert action in Afghanistan. Rice's recollection was that the idea had come from Clarke and the NSC senior director for intelligence, Mary McCarthy.

UPDATE III: Even More - "In sending the draft MON to the CIA, the NSC's senior director for intelligence programs, Mary McCarthy, cited only the August 1998 and July 1999 MONs as relevant precedents--indicating that these new authorities were limited to using the capture and rendition approach. There was no indication that this MON authorized kill authority, although lethal force could be used in self-defense. See NSC memo, McCarthy to CIA, Dec. 1999". ( note: a MON is a " Memorandum of Notification ", apparently an ass saving device sent from the executive branch to others over areas of possible legal concern. )

Rendition? Wasnt that the issue behind the info she was leaking to Dana Priest? ( Limited in 1999 to capture and "rendition"...File under what might have been...)

UPDATE III: I just got this really wierd vibe that this is all going to lead back to Sandy Berger and Richard Clarke.

UPDATE IV: From the NBC site - "The officer flunked a polygraph exam before being fired on Thursday and is now under investigation by the Justice Department, NBC has learned."

Here's a 10 second career tip from Varifrank. When your boss walks into your office and asks you if you did "questionable things", confession is your only route to safety. Oh, you'll still get fired, but you might be able to get your boss to remember why it was he hired you in the first place if you dont treat him like a fool. It helps convert "fired, and prosecuted' into "retired for health reasons". If you make your boss tie you up to a polygraph to find out what both he and you already know to be true, it shows contempt for the system, and no one respects that.

UPDATE V: Chapter 4 9/11 Commission - "Mary McCarthy, the NSC senior director responsible for intelligence programs, initially cautioned Berger that the "bottom line" was that "we will need much better intelligence on this facility before we seriously consider any options". I toldja Berger was in this in some way...

UPDATE VI: Two documents pop up that she authored during the Clinton administration.

McCarthy, Mary O. "The Mission to Warn: Disaster Looms." Defense Intelligence Journal 7, no. 2 (Fall 1998): 17-31.

A National Security Council staffer and former NIO for Warning, Dr. McCarthy agrees with the Jeremiah and Rumsfeld studies that there is a "dangerous scarcity of specific skills, particularly technical and linguistic," among U.S. analysts. She believes that major changes are needed.

McCarthy, Mary. "The National Warning System: Striving for an Illusive Goal." Defense Intelligence Journal 3, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 5-19.

The author is National Intelligence Officer (NIO) for Warning. Her article deals with current structure and problems. "The National Warning System usually concentrates on threats judged to be about six months away or less."

Ok, scratch the "Mrs." , its "Dr. McCarthy". How could such a smart person have done such a dumbass thing? Dr.? Hmmm I wonder from where? Yale? Well, God does have a sense of humor...

UPDATE VII: Bingo. She was on the NSC with Sandy Berger during the Clinton administration.

UPDATE VIII: Biographical info from CSIS. "Prior to joining CSIS in August 2001, Mary O. McCarthy was a senior policy adviser to the CIA's deputy director for science and technology. Until July 2001, she served as special assistant to the president and senior director for intelligence programs on the National Security Council (NSC) Staff, under both Presidents Clinton and Bush. From 1991 until her appointment to the NSC, McCarthy served on the National Intelligence Council. She began her government service as an analyst, then manager, in CIA's Directorate of Intelligence, holding positions in both African and Latin American analysis. From 1979 to 1984 she was employed by BERI, S.A., conducting financial, operational, and political risk assessments for multinational companies and banks. Previously she had taught at the University of Minnesota and was director of the Social Science Data Archive at Yale University. McCarthy has a B.A. and M.A. in history from Michigan State University, an M.A. in library science from the University of Minnesota, and a Ph.D. in history from the University of Minnesota. She is the author of Social Change and the Growth of British Power in the Gold Coast (University Press of America, 1983)".

UPDATE IX: Questions, Questions, Questions. If She was fired for leaking information on "the CIA’s rumored secret prisons in Eastern Europe", yet as the EU itself now says, "We've heard all kinds of allegations, impressions; we've heard also refutations. It's up to your committee to weigh if they are true. It does not appear to be proved beyond reasonable doubt," he said. "There has not been, to my knowledge, evidence that these illegal (activities) have taken place". That means that McCarthy appears to have leaked info to a WAPO reporter (Dana Priest), who managed to get a Pulitzer for reporting a story that now appears to be both - not true and legally actionable by Mccarthys employer. She appears to be someone who is getting fired for illegally releasing information, whether or not it was actually a lie, is not the question at all. It doesnt seem to really matter in this case.

Is the original story based on truth? If its not, then just what the hell is going on here? If it was a part of a planned disinformation campaign, then to what purpose? The story of "Secret CIA prisions" nearly destroyed the remaining coalition in Europe that is working with the US. The ripples from that story still reverberate through the halls of power in the European capitals. If it was a lie, and McCarthy is the one who released it, then what was the purpose?

My other major "area of question" is this; just what is the motivation for a person to take a lifetime career and committment and turn it upside down? For what? This story, and not all the others that may have been known? That the CIA has prisons that the "average joe" knows nothing about and that on occasion they interrogate their prisoners with "questionable means"? This is news? Isnt that what we pay them for? Is this a case of 'Bush Derangement Syndrome' gone to the most extreme? Is this just more evidence of a possible "covert coup" against the Bush Administration by the "lifers" in the CIA?

She sees like a smart dedicated professional, why do something so absolutely guaranteed to go so horribly bad for everyone involved?

I don't just get it.

UPDATE X: Ok, this seems to make sense to me. It looks like someone is on the same wavelength as I am.

UPDATE XI: For the moment,I am resisting the "grand unified theory" that seems to be forming around this story and the very interesting connections that appear to exist between Dr. McCarthy and so many prominent Bush detractors. Let's see what the morning brings...

Posted @ April 21, 2006 01:35 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (2)

varifrank calls for "Open Skies" Policy

Google Earth - (the single most addictive product that I've seen in some time) allows me, by simply giving it my address, to see satellite views of my house with such detail that I can see what car is parked in the driveway and what color it is...

And yet, I cant see any details of North Korea, Iran or China?

Posted @ April 21, 2006 11:12 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (4)

Update

Im back from my travels. Blogging resumes...

Posted @ April 20, 2006 03:28 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (0)

Questions for the day

Q1: Is the "Revolt of the Ex-Generals" being treated as wholly legitimate in the eyes of the MSM?

Q2: Do Military leaders ever receive legitimacy in the eyes of the MSM or the left - except when they take action against the American Administration?

Q3: Is the left supporting or calling for a "Military Coup" against Bush?

Q4: One question for the Ex-Generals: How has your annoying piss-pants-dance, politically motivated prattle helped us win the war?

Posted @ April 18, 2006 09:53 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (1)

Tel Aviv - Baltimore

This man:

Did this today in Tel Aviv:

And the only thing stopping him from doing the same in Baltimore, is this:

We are at war.

Posted @ April 17, 2006 01:49 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (1)

Because the SecDef is always beloved by all generals and Admirals

My two minute take on Secretary Rumsfeld comes from a bit of advice I was given when I started my career. My first manager told me " You can be beloved by one and all or you can be effective - pick one".

His point was this, if you want to make change, no one is going to like you. No matter how much the clamor for change, they hate it when it happens. If you want to make change in the world, get used to being disliked and hated.

Secretary Rumsfeld is changing the US military from the ground up from a post cold war leviathan into a rapid response force.

Change, political change, change the effects the power centers of Washington, particularly when it effects peoples civil service careers is damn hard work.

Generals and Admirals, while fine people and who are very "nice" are often the people who are most resistant to change. This is why we have a Civilian in charge of the Military. For those of you unfamiliar with Military culture, there is, shall we say a great deal of animosity between those in the Military and those in the Civilian world. Generals and Admirals often find themselves at odds with the civilians in charge of the military, but thats how we do things here in the good old US of A.

What I like most about Rumsfeld is that he is not running for President or selling a book. Its my beleif that he is the most important Secretary of Defense in the history of the job.

I reject this idea that the Secretary of Defense is always universally loved by one and all. Its a tough job and its often thankless difficult work making the Military do the bidding of the civilian world, but it must be done.

Shall we take a moment and look at the careers of other SecDefs?

James Forrestal - First Secretary of Defense .

snip...

"He was a tremendous supporter of naval battle groups centered on aircraft carriers. The newly created Department of the Air Force opposed his plans to build new ones, claiming that operations could be accomplished from ground bases. The conflict between Forrestal and the Air Force was probably the foremost cause of his mental breakdown and ultimate suicide. One year after his suicide his ideas were vindicated by the Korean War, which showed an essential role for aircraft carriers in future wars. The Navy's first supercarrier, USS Forrestal was named in his honor."

So, James Forrestal oversaw the creation of the Air Force, only to have the Air Force turn on him at the very first opportunity. The result is the man comitted suicide.

Ok, how about his replacement.

Louis Johnson - Second Secretary of Defense.

snip...
"Johnson's economy drive, which began on April 23 1949, when he announced cancellation of the 65,000-ton flushdeck aircraft carrier USS United States. The United States Navy had been planning this ship for several years and construction had already begun. Johnson, supported by a majority of the JCS and by President Truman, stressed the need to cut costs. At least by implication, Johnson had scuttled the Navy's hope to participate in strategic air operations through use of the carrier. Abruptly resigning, Secretary of the Navy John L. Sullivan expressed concern about the future of the United States Marine Corps and naval aviation and about Johnson's unprecedented and arbitrary action so drastically affecting the Navy's operational plans without consulting it.

snip...

"The cancellation of the supercarrier precipitated a bitter controversy between the Navy and the United States Air Force, the so-called "Revolt of the Admirals." The Navy reacted to Johnson's action by questioning, in congressional hearings and other public arenas, the effectiveness of the Air Force's latest strategic bomber, the Convair B-36. The Air Force countered with data supporting the B-36 and minimized the importance of a naval role in future major wars."

Second Sec Def - A House investigation, a "Revolt of the Admirals". It makes Rumsfelds situation look positively rosey, doesnt it?

Shall we say that SecDef McNamara had an easy time of it? Or How about Caspar Weinberger?

My point is this. The Sec Def is a tough gig for anyone, even in peacetime. Secretary Rumsfeld has overseen the successful overthrow of the taliban, and the Hussien Regime and has mobilized and streamlined a military force during wartime without destroying the US economy in the process. Morale amoungst the troops is high and efficiency is at its best in years. If people in Washington dont like him, well that just endears him to me all that much more.

We are winning this war, and we are winning largely becuase of the direction and leadership provided by Secretary Rumsfeld.

Posted @ April 17, 2006 09:51 AM | Current Events | Comments (3)

A Blogger Struggles

I have a really big snarky rant that i'd like to post, but I cant figure out how to do it without some particularly illustrative cursewords.

So, if you remember the movie "TERMINATOR" - Where the Terminator is trying to figure out the best phrase to give the biker and a little drop down menu appears in his eye with a list of various distasteful phrases that should be said and he chooses...

All Im saying is, I wish I had one of those.

Posted @ April 14, 2006 11:42 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (4)

Neil Young: "Impeach The President" song in the works

Oh no, another rocker against the President. Wow, thats a real brave act of one man speaking truth to power now isnt it?

Why is it that everyone on the left are such big supporters of Dick Cheney? For all the bravado of those on the left who say "Bush should be impeached" theres a complete lack of understanding that by successfully doing that, Dick Cheney gets a promotion!

How does this help their case? "whoopiee, we invalidated an election"! wheee! were big time democrats now!

Ok, so lets say they get Cheney too, two for one - what the hell...

President Hastert? Check this list. Theres not one Democrat on the list until you get to number 12 - Norm Minetta.

So lets say they manage to "Get Bush". So what? Does anyone think they can pull off an additional 11 impeachments to get the first Democrat in the line of succession?

And before you get to "President Norm Minetta" - you have to go through not just "President Cheney" But - and doesnt this make your heart skip a beat - "President Rumsfeld". Of course, first you'd have to go through the impeachment of "President Rice".

I dont mind "the left", its just that they are so damn dumb and small mindedly petty sometimes you just cant take them seriously anymore.

Posted @ April 14, 2006 11:24 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (3)

My childhood nightmare has returned

This is pitchblende, its the source ore for Uranium.

Once its scooped from the earth, it gets processed into this stuff. It's called "Yellowcake".

This material is then processed into a gas and then that gas is spun around in one of these things, a gaseous diffusion centrifuge. This one is from Oak Ridge Tennessee, sometime in 1944.

What comes out of the centrifuge is something called "enriched Uranium".

Once you have few pounds of this material, you can put it in something like this:

It's a simple device actually. You see, once enough enriched uranium is brought into close proximity, the material will cause a chain reaction with itself. In fact, its so simple that most people dont know that this device, the bomb known as "Little Boy" didnt need to be tested by the scientists on the Manhattan Project as it was virtually certain that it would work when used. They tested the hard bomb, the Plutonium Bomb "Fat Man" because they werent sure it would work. They never had any doubt about "Little Boy", they just didnt have enough enriched uranium to make very many of them.

"Little Boy" was a Uranium Bomb. It was the "easy" Bomb.

This is what happened when that bomb was tested for the first time:

A few thousand pounds of pitchblende, into a few hundred pounds of yellocake, into a few pounds of enriched uranium, add some 1940's technology, stir with a pinch of patience and 100,000 people living in a city that was alot like Long Beach California ceased to be in a flash.

Today, this man said his country had created, "Enriched Uranium" and thus joined the "Nuclear Club".

This man works every day prays every night for the death of me, my family and my civilization. This man says that the Holocaust never occured. This man says that "Israel should be wiped off the map".

I am not Jewish, I don't pretend to know what it is to be Jewish, but today, for the first time in my life, I feel jewish.

When I was a little boy, some crazy bastard went and put some nuclear missiles 90 miles off our shore, and the world nearly went into global thermonuclear war and as a result, putting an end to my young life and millions of others before it had a chance to get started. My parents always talked about the Cuban Missle Crisis as "the scary times". My dad always talked about the plans he made with Mom, about how she was to take my sisters and I out of the city if "things got bad" while he was away at sea during the crisis. This was the talk around the kitchen tables of America in October 1962.

Today, I look back on those days with nostalgia as a period of relative sanity and calm.

Posted @ April 11, 2006 01:17 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (4)

It cant be done: Part II

NASA Satellite photo showing the Mexican-Guatemala border visible from space. Why? Because its fenced in. Check the angle shaped jungle discoloration in the middle, as well the dark line ( thats a "fence" folks) thats leading to the coastline.

Here's a view from National Geographic thats a little closer:

What's My Point?

1. Come talk to me about changes to immigration policy when we have an established and recognzied border with Mexico, because as things stand today, we dont have a border.

2. Dont tell me "it cant be done", because heres proof that it is.

Posted @ April 10, 2006 11:54 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (5)

Why dont I care about Sy Hersh?

Because in the alternate universe where Noam Chomsky is President, Sy Hersh is the Secretary of State.

This guy has used one template for every story he's written since 1969.

" America bad, American Government really bad, Republicans unbelievably bad..."

Does he think that I really give a damn if some 6th generation ivy league state department hump is going to quit because he disagrees with the President? Some mid level "state department poindexter" like
"J. Fletcher Preachy McGottrocks, Assistant deputy chief of staff for Central American affairs, Yale class of 65..." is all upset that Bush and Cheney didnt call him before making the 'big call', so he takes Sy Hersh down for a martini or two at the Westchester country club and has a good long crying jag on the shoulder of his good friend.

Hersh calls that sort of thing news, I say its a call for an intervention.

Mark me down on the list of people that are actually happy that someone in Washington is at least thinking about using those big expensive weapons systems weve all paid for over the years. The mullahs just spent two weeks displaying their wares, a russian sub, a russian torpedo and some ground effects aircraft.

my reaction: "Whoop-i-dee-freakin-doo..."

so think of this as our response in the big poker game of international politics. I see your underwater missle and I raise you 50 ICBM's, so let's see you your cards smart guy...

Sy Hersh ( and the mullahs...) just figured out that while they might have a few toys, we have a fleet of Nuclear Submarines that are chock full of the "weapons from hell" on board, and yet, to Sy Hersh, now its "hankie time".

Just what does he think we have those things for?

Does anyone besides me think its just a bit peculiar that the said-same news groups that are screaming about "leaker in chief" seem to have missed the story of insiders in the State Department willing to tell reporters like Hersh about our plans for nuclear war, something that if true, would most certainly be a major breach of national security?

Anyone care to follow up on that story?

Posted @ April 10, 2006 10:41 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (2)

It Cant Be done!

1869 Promontory Point Utah - First Transcontinental Railroad.

August 1914 - Panama Canal Opens.

1955 - US Federal Interstate Highway System Opens.

1969 - "We came in peace for all mankind" Man Lands on the Moon.

2006 - Congress declares "US Border Fence too difficult and expensive to build"

Posted @ April 07, 2006 09:08 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (5)

Macao: Another front in the war on terror

People talk about Iraq as a central front on terror, but theres another war going on quietly behind the scenes. One of the places where there have been signifigant gains by the US against the North Koreans is in the money laundering captial of Macao. Since the US shut down Banco Delta Asia and froze over 25 million in assets, the changes in Macao have been substantial.

The original post from the LA Times can be found here.

snip...

"Today people here want to do business with the Americans, not the North Koreans," said Jose Rocha Dinis, director of the Jornal Tribunal de Macau, a Portuguese-language newspaper, as he drove along a waterfront cluttered with construction cranes. "When they are seeking investment from the outside, they can't let the North Koreans get in the way."

A North Korean company, Jokwang Trading Co., long believed to be a front for illicit activities, closed its headquarters on the fifth floor of an office building near the bank. Most of its personnel have relocated to Zhuhai, just across the border in China proper, business sources here say.

"You used to see the North Koreans around here all the time with their Kim Il Sung badges, but suddenly they're gone," said Seok Yeong Chong, a South Korean businessman living here. He said their numbers had dropped from more than 100 to only a handful. "They gave the Macao government too much of a headache."

Businesspeople here say the North Korean presence became a liability at a sensitive time. The North Korean government in Pyongyang is more unpopular than ever internationally because of its pursuit of nuclear weapons. At the same time, China is trying to develop Macao into a gambling destination to rival Las Vegas.

The freezing of the $25 million in the Banco Delta Asia has been a particularly big blow for a government scraping by for lack of hard currency. North Korean banks kept large sums of money in the Macao bank. Now, with those accounts suspended and other banks frightened off by the Treasury Department action, North Korea has been largely cut off from international trade.

"The impact is severe," said Nigel Cowie, a British banker based in Pyongyang who is general manager of the Daedong Credit Bank, serving mostly the tiny foreign community in the North Korean capital.

In a telephone interview from Pyongyang, Cowie said that North Korea, because it had no credit and a weak banking system, dealt almost exclusively in cash, which might have created the appearance that it was laundering money when it was not.

"I can't speak for what everybody was doing, but I can say that in our case, a lot of legitimate business has been hurt," Cowie said.

The North Koreans blame the U.S. for their woes in Macao. A senior North Korean diplomat, Li Gun, visited Washington last month on what appeared to have been a futile attempt to get the Macao freeze lifted. He left angry, declaring that North Korea would boycott negotiations on its nuclear program until the banking situation was resolved. "Under this continuing U.S. pressure, we can't go back to the negotiation table" Li said.

Here's another report on the crackdown that is clearly causing some pain (original post here)

snip...
"It is true we are having great difficulties but they cannot kill us," said Jon Sung-hun, president of Pugang Corporation, one of the North Korean companies whose assets have been frozen in the crackdown.
"Because of the US's terrible sanctions, all bank transfers are impossible and we are also not able to carry cash between countries.. but we are finding other ways," Mr Jon told the Financial Times, denying his company had been involved in wrongdoing.

"These days the world is multinational but they think they can catch us this way because our country is a closed society, but they are just not clever enough."

Mr Jon declined to elaborate to avoid tipping off American authorities.

So know you know why your 10 dollar bill looks like Canadian money...

Posted @ April 06, 2006 08:52 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (0)

When some people say “immigration” most people are hearing something else.

I have to say that while I’ve done a fair bit of writing as of late, at the same time I just haven’t been able to get the blogging engine going. This case of “bloggers block” has been going on for almost a month now. It started back during the “port issue”. At 8:00 am the day it happened I was livid at the idea. At 8:30, after I thought about it for a minute, I relaxed a bit. By 10:00 I had done enough research to know that it was a baloney issue, and the shrapnel like phrases of “Arabs in charge of our security”, “selling our ports and our security to the highest bidders” were just a pile of nonsense. By three o’clock that very day the story broke, I couldn’t care less about the issue any more. It just didn’t look to me to be a real issue. It was widely and repeatedly misunderstood and it was propped up to be something other than what it was. Most of what was being said just wasn’t true and frankly it still isn’t true. After a few days I had the distinct feeling that I was being manipulated, that some people’s reactions just weren’t genuine, but spun up and full of froth.

Of course it didn’t end there at the first few days, once the tinder of the underbrush of senselessness started smoldering, the tall trees of logic started to catch fire and burn. We had to sit through day after day of hot lead pouring down from above. It got to the point that you couldn’t talk about it without someone going into full froth mode.

Last year we had the “Harriet Miers kerfuffle", which I couldn’t stand and I begged off of blogging about because it just drove me crazy and that issue was mild compared to the “Ports Kerfuffle”.

Now we face the “Ports issue on steroids”, that being the issue over “Illegal Immigration”. Talking about Immigration is like talking about abortion; no one has ever changed anyone’s mind on the subject so talking about it just annoys the hell out of everyone when the subject comes up. It’s a subject that you can only talk about with people who already agree with you and frankly, what’s the sense in that?

When I hear people use the word “immigration” to describe what is going on, I find it funny because the problem being discussed has almost always has nothing to do with immigration at all. But the problem is, you can’t even talk about the issue in rational terms. “Immigration” isn’t “Migration”. Immigration is a legal process of becoming a citizen of another country. What’s going on now is something more akin to tribal “hunter gatherers” following a pack of bison across the plains for food than the legal process of joining another country.

So now its time for full disclosure. First off, I was born in Southern California, which is many ways the Capital City of the third world in the Western Hemisphere. I lived most of my life south of the San Bernardino Mountains before I went to High School. My father was born in San Pedro and his father was from Germany. After my father left the Navy, he ran a mill in Gardena, and later worked at a variety of furniture factories in the industrial district of LA. To say that my father spoke Spanish at work goes without saying, because that’s who you worked with when you worked in those kinds of jobs. In my own life I’ve worked in commercial landscaping, at a plastic pipe factory and for two summers I worked on a peach orchard in the upper Sacramento Valley. Did I speak Spanish while I did those jobs? You betcha, because that's who I worked with. In my little tiny slice of life, I’ve either worked beside or worked for, went to school with, played with, mowed lawns with immigrants both legal and illegal documented and undocumented for most of my life.

But just wait a second, my "full disclosure" gets even better.

My mother’s side of the family is from Canada. In 1933, my grandparents and their extended family of about 12 cousins, grand aunts and uncles, up and moved from Kitchener Ontario to Lansing Michigan. Unfortunately they didn’t bother to talk to anyone in the government about the process of “legally” immigrating , they just up and moved. They were self-sufficient, they weren’t rich by any means but they had enough to enjoy a good life, they never took welfare or any state support and they paid taxes and like most Americans, they did pretty well, but they didn’t vote. Because as they said at the time, "that would be wrong".

And they never looked back. Was it illegal? Again, you betcha. Did that bother them? Nope! not in the slightest. They felt they were voting with their feet. They wanted a better life for their kids and America was clearly the place to do that in. They never felt any shame about it; it was a simple fact of life. They voted with their feet. Legal immigration from Canada was extremely limited, so there wasn’t any way to go about it. This country represents more to people all over the world than just a place to work. People all around the world are inspired by what this country means to them, not just the poor mestizos who come up from the south but even for working class Canadians.

So, I think I have a view towards immigration that most people don’t have. I know the migrants pretty well, and I have to say this.

I like them. I do. I really do.

They work hard. They take care of their families, heck unlike many Americans they've actually bothered to have families. They aren’t spoiled little babies who cry every time something needs to get done or sit around and sing “ oh woe is me...” every time something goes bad, they get out there and do what needs to be done. They don’t whine about how bad things are today and how they are being ripped off by the man. To the migrants, this is a great place to be with great opportunity and hope. To the migrants, these are the good old days.

Now, remember, I’m the very worst sort of “Right wing Republican” that every liberal has a picture of taped to his dartboard; I’m “Snidely Whiplash” in the flesh. I’m supposed to hate people who have a skin tone is darker than ivory soap. I’m supposed to be against anything that doesn’t look like it came off the set of “Our Town”, but I don’t. I’m supposed to be the one sneering at the low riders and the maids and the landscapers. But I’m not sneering at them. I’m happy to have them, and frankly I’m glad they are here.

Most of these people who come here are the hardest working people you ever met. Most of them are the nicest people you ever met. Most of them took their lives in their hands to get here, many worked in conditions of near slavery, indentured to a “Coyote” just to make it here and after they get an underground job, they get to do something hard, smelly and well frankly something we don’t think our “little junior” should ever do, that being the very worst sort of manual labor. This might very well be the “push button world of the Internet” but there is still one hell of a lot of things that require a certain amount of sweat and endurance to get done.

After payday comes, these people very often go to Western Union and wire a good portion of what they make back home to feed the parts of their family that didn’t make the trip. That takes guts, it takes heart and soul to have the discipline to take a risk like that, not for yourself but for your family, knowing that at any moment they could be killed, jailed or deported back to wherever they came from, all to work at a job in the most menial conditions, only to send most of the money back home.

It’s important to me that you understand that most of these folks we are talking about don’t come here by choice; they do it because the alternative is very often, starvation. They aren’t crossing the Great Sonora Desert to mow your lawn so they can get a 50 inch plasma TV. It takes more than that to make a man take that risk, and very often it’s the look in his kid’s faces at dinner when there isn’t any and there might not be any tomorrow either. You couldn’t get me to walk 5 miles for a TV, but if my kids were hungry, I’d cross the Sierra Nevada in midwinter if I thought the only place with a job was in Reno and I had to feed my kids.

It’s not politics and its not “shiftless immigrants” that is causing this migration, its biology; you do what you have to do to take care of your family. These people are not motivated to take these risks by crass consumer greed, unless you consider a full stomach to be a luxury.

Put yourself in the Mexican state of Oaxaca with no hope of getting any sort of job and money is hard to come by even under the best of conditions. Now stand by and watch as members of your family die of Tuberculosis or Chagas disease or tetanus, diseases that immigrants live with every day but the average suburban American has never seen outside of history books. Then imagine your cousin comes in and tells you he can get you a job as a dishwasher in El Paso for 5 bucks an hour and all the hours you can work, and realize you haven’t seen the equivalent of 5 dollars for over a month. How fast would you pack you bag, say your goodbyes and start walking north? If you don’t understand the near magnetic, almost salmon swimming upstream pull that would have on you, then you my friend have never been hungry, you’ve never buried members of your family from common diseases and you have never lived life without the hope of a future.

That lack of experience doesn’t make you a problem; it just means that you are an American. The world of want and fear and disease is a far off place from the lives and minds of most Americans. It’s an every day horror and nightmare for the lives of the average migrant.

Let’s all just stop saying that they are up here “living on welfare”, shall we? There just isn’t any welfare anymore; they are up here working. If they can’t find a job they make a job. You see them at the end of every Home Depot parking lot. You see them there, a line of men standing and waiting for work. You doing a little landscaping project? you want an extra hand to help you put in lawn sprinklers? 5 bucks an hour and lunch and you’ve got yourself a deal mister! While I often find my brother legal citizens on street corners with cardboard signs begging for money, I’ve never seen that from a migrant. What I have seen are immigrants selling bags of oranges or roses on street corners.

Selling Fruit. Basic Commerce. It’s a job and they aren’t begging. I wouldn’t do it, but I’m not hungry enough to consider it. If my kids needed food, you can bet I’d be the best and biggest orange selling white guy you ever did see. If they didn’t buy oranges here, I’d move to Canada. To feed my kids I'd do anything. The law will just have to wait.

Its not politics at work here folks; its just biology. A man does what he has to when it comes to feeding his family. It’s why thousands of men packed up their families and left Oklahoma for places like Bakersfield California in the 1930’s. You talk to any long term resident of California and you are likely to find an “Oakie” not too far away, which again, makes me laugh. 2nd generation oakies in California, talking about the evils of migration.

When most people use the term “Illegal Immigrant” they are really saying something else, and frankly what they are saying is something I don’t like to hear. Many people who are the most exercised over the issue of “Immigration” just don’t like Mexicans, which I also find to be funny because most people who think that way wouldn’t know a Mexican from a Salvadoran or a Costa Rican or a Honduran. They just know they don’t like them “darned Mexicans”. I can’t help thinking that many of the people screaming about “illegal immigration” today would have been burning the “Oakies” out of their shacks 40 years ago.

So, does all of my fond feelings for the immigrant condition mean that I’m all for free and unfettered access to the US?

No.

Does it piss me off when immigrants continue to fly their flag over the US flag and speak of “La Raza”?

Oh, you bet it does! Big time baby...

And are their bad people that come into this country illegally? Sure there are, and I cant stand that fact that Mexico gives protection to murderous criminals so long as the death penalty is in effect here in the US. I also don’t think for a second that being illegal gives you some special variance on the ways of the world.

Do I think there should be a border fence and more border guards?

Yes.

All 2000 miles should be fenced and patrolled and penalties for crossing illegally should be enforced.

Is that a big job? Sure it is, but we are a big country and we’ve done big things before. If we can dig a trench through the jungles of Panama, we can sure as hell put up a fence here at home. I seem to remember that we went to the Moon awhile back; that seemed like a big job too, but we did it. In that same time frame, we built a whole Federal Interstate Highway System, we don’t think much of it today, but it was a big job and it got done somehow and now we cant hardly live without it and yeah there were a fair amount of people at the time who were against it and said it couldn’t be done. They were wrong, just as those who say a wall can’t be built today are wrong. It seems to me that without that basic tool of governance in place, that being a legally recognized and respected border, none of the other provisions that are currently in discussion over “immigration” really matter. You either have a border or you don’t, and right now, we just don’t.

I don’t think the key issue about “immigration” is about the people involved because as I’ve said, I like people. Its the governments that I can’t stand and in this case there is two governments to work on, and for some reason we always ignore the other partner in this little game of ours and concentrate on the people instead.

This is a serious mistake in my opinion.

The government we share a border with is every bit the failed state the Iraq is (or was ) and every bit as dangerous. The socialist policies of the Mexican government have allowed poverty to expand at the same time that other Socialist governments in such as India and China have now seen the light and have opened economic liberty to their people. The result of wealth has grown in those two places, while poverty has grown in Mexico.

Why is this? How can a country with large oil reserves be in such poverty? Easy. Socialists run the oil company. PEMEX is the worst run oil company in the world, and what’s worse, PEMEX is the largest tax base for the country.

In addition, Mexico has severe restrictions on the ability for non-citizens to buy property in Mexico, and what’s worse is that non-citizens have less than equal access to the law in Mexico, and as a result, property rights are often subject to “squatters” overrunning the property. This makes in nearly impossible for foreign companies or individuals to justify putting capital to work in Mexico. It’s a simple rule that if capital isn’t coming in then people are going out, and that’s exactly why Mexicans, Hondurans, El Salvadorans are leaving and always will until that issue is corrected. Mexican citizens have found themselves in a condition where they have more rights as illegal migrants in the US than they do as legal and proper citizens of Mexico.

So, while the rest of the world gets wealthier, Mexico gets poorer, which feeds the cycle further. Mexico is a country where its only major export is its own people. The Mexican economy is floating on the money wired back from the US from Western Union on paydays. Its absolutely pathetic, but that’s the Mexican government for you.

Would I offer amnesty to people who are here illegally? No. Frankly, I wouldn’t offer them citizenship at all. I would offer legal residency, but citizenship is not an option for anyone who first takes steps to violate the laws of the country. The status of legal residency, which can be revoked for any felony. Legal residency means we know who you are, and you have to keep in touch, failure to do so means your status is revoked. Legal residency also allows people who have kids born in the US to remain in the US with no fear of separating the family. It also would mean than access to those privileges that come with citizenship are limited to the legal resident. Legal residents should expect to get no support beyond basic services, if they lose their job and you are no longer employable, well it might be time for them to pick up stakes and leave.

I’m sorry my friend this time it didn’t work out for you. Yes, its true, you pay taxes and you can’t vote. Yes, that makes you a “second class citizen”, but you are also a guest. If we like you and you like us, we might upgrade you to the route of taking the test to be a citizen. If you pass that test, then you are in fact a full citizen but until then you are a guest, so long as you follow a few basic rules.

If you cant, we can and will have you deported.

Should we give legal residents a driver’s license? Sure, but the country of origin and the immigration status needs to be stamped on the front. I don’t know why this is so hard to implement, and no one wants to solve this and say what it is. It’s a “drivers license”. It’s not a passport. You can have a driver’s license if you are not a citizen, so long as it’s clear what your citizenship status is.

So when it’s all said and done, I just can’t get excited about this issue and since its sucked up all the oxygen in the blogosphere, its sapped my “blog-a-bility”. It’s not really about immigration at all. That’s a legal progression exercise. That problem seems solvable and pretty straightforward to me. No matter how much everyone wants to whine about how bad the economy is, the reality is there are more jobs than people and people are naturally coming in to fill the resultant vacuum. I think a border wall is necessary and proper and I don’t have a problem with it in any way. I don’t think one is necessary across the Canadian border because the population is so small and the majority of the border if fairly remote. If it starts to become a major problem, then I will change my mind, but for right now, small ones should suffice in Washington and New York and Maine.

I think it’s entirely possible for people to come to the US to work and not be citizens or enjoy the all privileges that citizens get. I don’t have a problem with that, although I know the ACLU would have kittens at the idea of such a thing, but its common practice in 192 countries around the world, I don’t understand why it would be a problem here. Citizens and non-citizens enjoy equal access to the law, but they are not equal in the eyes of the law.

Citizenship means something; just as a country and its borders do as well.

Posted @ April 05, 2006 06:11 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (6)

So who owned the terminal?

From Seattles KomoTV News:
22 Stowaways Found In Container At Harbor Island

Key points:

snip...

The Rotterdam docked about 9 a.m. Tuesday and was carrying general cargo. Based on the ship's manifest, investigators believe it left Shanghai on March 23, Milne said.

Four days earlier, it was in Hong Kong, and the following day, it was in Yantian, China. After Shanghai, the ship made a stop at Nangbo, China, then Pusan, South Korea, before heading for Seattle, Milne said.

Early Wednesday the stowaways apparently pried open the container, lowered themselves about seven feet to the ground and tried to slip out of the secured terminal area, he said.

About half were discovered by a guard "on a routine security patrol" within the terminal and the other half were spotted trying to get out through Gate 4, Milne said.

Once they were intercepted, "there was no attempt to flee or hide," he said. "They were cooperative."

Port and city police as well as federal authorities established a cordon, checked cars leaving Harbor Island, where the ship docked, and are confident no one who might have been in the container escaped detection, Milne said.

Secure Terminal. Guards. Federal Authorities.

So the shipping company has limited responsibility in the application of security.

UPDATE: And in other Hong Kong News, someone tried to ship out a MIG-29 and was intercepted.

Posted @ April 05, 2006 11:04 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (0)

I'm still struggling with bloggers block...

But has it occured to anyone else that at the same time our country has people in the streets protesting for the right to not be a citizen and still legally work, the French have their own citizens protesting in the streets to secure the right to not work?

America = non citizens upset at not being allowed to work.
France = citizens upset to find that they might have to work.

Posted @ April 05, 2006 09:30 AM | Current Affairs | Comments (2)

Just one thing...

One possible reason why the United 93 trailer is being reacted to so strongly...

Movies about heroism on 9/11 or any general theme that shows America or Americans in a good light will not be in vogue until after Bush has left office. The cries of "Too Soon" have more to do with the audience not willing to look President Bush in the eye and admit to themselves that "he was right" than not being willing to look at scenes of the massacre. When those scenes were used to denigrate the President and the country, those scenes worked just fine for the same people who say they can't look at it now. They didnt say "Too Soon" when the duplicitous, hatemongering, Propaganda hit-piece Farenheit 9/11 hit the screens, did they?

As soon as Bush has safely left office, the world will be safe to "remember the day"but until then, the left will continue to try to pretend to the rest of the world that "it just didnt happen".

Show the trailer, show the film. Remember 9/11.

Posted @ April 04, 2006 08:13 AM | Comments (2)

Guess Who's Got an A380?

So tonight I'm killing time at a bookstore in between picking up and dropping off from various kid functions, and I stopped by the magazine rack for a quick look at this months offerings in the way of Aircraft Magazines ( known as "Air Porn" by my wife).

Airlines Magazine may 2006 issue - Cover Story Building the A380. Centerfold - The Airbus A380, Worlds Largest Passenger Aircraft - Wearing the colors of United Arab Emirates Airlines.

I laughed out loud. You just wait till that baby lands at JFK.

UPDATE: Apparently Emirates Airlines plans on being the first and the largest owner of Airbus A380s. They plan on taking delivery of 45 of these babys.

So, they can buy and fly 45 of the biggest aircraft in the world, which they fly at will through American Airspace, own terminal gates in Americas Most Premiere Airport(JFK), which they can load and unload God knows what, but they can't own the company that owns the company that drives the forklifts in Bayonne, New Jersey.

Posted @ April 03, 2006 09:18 PM | Current Affairs | Comments (3)