03.23.13

WhiteManistan — by numbers

Posted in Psychopath & Sociopath, WhiteManistan at 9:51 am by George Smith


Bigger.

Excerpted from the Post:

In my decades of polling, I recall only one moment when a party had been driven as far from the center as the Republican Party has been today.

The outsize influence of hard-line elements in the party base is doing to the GOP what supporters of Gene McCarthy and George McGovern did to the Democratic Party in the late 1960s and early 1970s — radicalizing its image and standing in the way of its revitalization …

In those years, the Democratic Party became labeled, to its detriment, as the party of “acid, abortion and amnesty.” With the Democrats’ values far to the left of the silent majority, McGovern lost in a landslide to Richard Nixon in 1972.

While there are no catchy phrases for the Republicans of 2013, their image problems are readily apparent in national polls. The GOP has come to be seen as the more extreme party, the side unwilling to compromise or negotiate seriously to tackle the economic turmoil that challenges the nation …

I see little reason to believe that the staunch conservative bloc will wither away or splinter; it will remain a dominant force in the GOP and on the national stage. At the same time, however, I see no indication that its ideas about policy, governance and social issues will gain new adherents. They are far beyond the mainstream.

If anything, Andrew Kohut is a bit gentle. The GOP became the party of Ted Nugent. WhiteManistan, as a broad description, is a sickening collection, according to Kohut, “demographically and politically distinct from the national electorate … Ninety-two percent are white … They tend to be male, married, Protestant, well off and at least 50 years old.”

Paranoid and the core of the GOP, they cannot retain power but, from a relative minority position, have brought the country to a near standstill, simply through the power of rage — at the president, at Hispanics, at women, at gays, at the poor, etc.


And from Ted Nugent, this week, at the birther conspiracy website, WND:

If you are addicted to common sense and logic, South Dakota should bring a smile to your face.

These sensible Americans just passed a law allowing teachers to carry weapons in school as a means to protect their students from terminal psychos hell-bent on committing mass murder …

Truth is, it is the socialist stooges who are responsible for violence. It is their policies that prevent good guys from arming and protecting themselves and creates the big lie of “gun free” slaughter zones.

It isn’t just anti-gun leftist policies that have enabled thugs to breed and prosper. The violence on America’s streets is the result of a number of other leftist big-government policies that have worked to destroy families and entire communities by discouraging accountability and rewarding dangerous behavior.

That’s the turbo destructo modus operandi of the socialists …

The Obama Hitler thing, which I’ve documented before, also at Media Matters:

Nugent: The President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama went to the Vietnam Memorial Wall. He did his smoke and mirrors scam. He pretended to show respect and honor, 58,000 American warriors who died fighting communism. And then he hired, appointed and associates with communists.

If you can’t see through the dishonesty and the scamming of this president with that scenario fresh in your mind, then that’s literally like, I guess that would be like, I don’t know, a German in 1938 pretending to respect the Jews and then going home and putting on his brown shirt and forcing his neighbors onto a train to be burned to death.

So we really have a rotten, rotten man in the White House who I am convinced hates America, hates individuality.

In WhiteManistan the President is a Nazi and a Communist, simultaneously. It’s something easy to see but not precisely addressed by Andrew Kohut’s Pew polling.

03.21.13

The Wit and Wisdom of Ken Pollack — revisited

Posted in Culture of Lickspittle, War On Terror at 12:26 pm by George Smith

I got into a slow burn over Ezra Klein’s apology that wasn’t one on the war, published yesterday at Bloomberg.

Klein, one of the alleged good guys, is a product of our culture of lickspittle. The piece at Bloomberg was as self-serving as they come, another essay to get on “most e-mailed” and read lists, as what happens with anyone who is in the small circle of anointed opinion-makers.

For his piece Klein went to the trouble of digging up Ken Pollack, a discredited national security expert whose book, The Threatening Storm, was used by the Bush administration as part of its global p.r. push (and I do mean global) for the Iraq War. Pollack, Klein told readers, had influenced his opinion on the necessity for war with Iraq. Klein had been a supporter and this week he is sorry for that.

Ken Pollack, as a Brookings Institution scholar, appeared in the news over ten years ago hundreds, if not thousands, of times. He was on television, he was on radio, he was on the Internet. His book was a best-seller. Pollack was as close to being a public figure and celebrity as someone from the Brookings Institution can get.

By 2007, The Threatening Storm was selling for 37 cents used on Amazon. Today it’s worth a penny a copy.

What I haven’t seen are any excerpts of how maddening and rotten news stories and opinions are from that time. Ezra Klein, for example, didn’t get into the horrendous reinforcing and congratulatory press on Pollack’s work. He didn’t republish anything of the quality that makes one gag.

So here it is, rescued from the old DD blog post in 2007:

Pollack argues his case well, going beyond the vituperative pronouncements of the administration to link operational objectives to national strategy, but he does not spend much time on the reconstruction of the country, which is, after all, the reason for invasion in the first place. He does make two noteworthy points, however: the removal of Saddam would allow for withdrawal of most of U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf region; and second, with its wealth in oil, Iraq can pay for its own reconstruction. Naturally, there are advantages and disadvantages to each option, and critics abound, but for Pollack the question is “not whether [we invade], but when.” — from a review of the man’s best-selling book in the Naval War College Review, Autumn 2002


You can tell a lot by the books people read, especially when the readers are members of Congress making life and death decisions about a war.

Winston Churchill is big on Capitol Hill, among both Democrats and Republicans. So is Kenneth Pollack’s new book, “The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq,” whose title is derived from Churchill’s “The Gathering Storm.”

Not on the must-read list are books like Mark Bowden’s “Black Hawk Down,” a harrowing account of just how grim urban street fights can get, even for today’s most elite forces. Nor, judging by interviews and the buzz on Capitol Hill, is there a surge of interest in “hearts and minds” books on Arab history or the culture of radical Islam. — The Christian Science Monitor, December 2002


Sean Penn needs to read [Ken Pollack’s] book. So do Mike Farrell, George Clooney and all the protesters who marched and chanted against an American-led war on Iraq in cities across the world last weekend. — The New York Observer, January 2003


Saddam has taken the entire Iraqi [WMD] program on the road,” said Iraq expert and former National Security Council official Kenneth Pollack in his recent best-selling book, “The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq.” — subsequently repeated thousands of times, like an incantation to ward off common sense, in the Scripps Howard newswire, February 2003


Given Saddam Hussein’s current behavior, his track record, his aspirations and his terrifying beliefs about the utility of nuclear weapons, it would be reckless for us to assume that he can be deterred. Yes, we must weigh the costs of a war with Iraq today, but on the other side of the balance we must place the cost of a war with a nuclear-armed Iraq tomorrow. — Pollack, on Hussein’s alleged WMD program and the reason for war, in the New York Times opinion page, February 2003. One bets they wish they hadn’t done that now.


Despite its human and financial cost (which [Ken Pollack] says could be less than we think even as we prepare for the worst), we are the only ones who can prevent the world from facing a nuclear-armed Hussein. It’s in our interest; it is our duty. — Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel, 2002


While the anti-war forces are derided, the media have turned pro-war intellectuals into stars. Each time you look up, you find another interview with Kenneth Pollack, the ex–CIA analyst whose book The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq is the bible of war supporters. — LA Weekly, February 28, 2003


While Iraqis “danced in the streets of Baghdad” in DC the “jibes were out for the naysayers who had feared a grueling and protracted conflict” to oust Saddam Hussein. VP Cheney called the war “one of the most extraordinary military campaigns ever conducted” and “praised the ‘carefully drawn plan.'” Cheney “was riding high” “as one of an elite corps of political prophets who had accurately forecast a quick collapse” of Saddam’s regime. Cheney insisted that the war “would last ‘weeks, not months.'” Others who predicted a short and decisive victory included Sec/Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Dep. Sec/Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Defense policy analyst Richard Perle, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), ex-CIA analyst Kenneth Pollack, and ex-Reagan admin. official Kenneth Adelman (Efron, Los Angeles Times) — Bragging Rights for Iraq, The National Journal, April 2003


“It’s looking like in truth the Iraqi (weapons) program was gray. The Bush administration was trying to say it was black,” said former CIA Iraq expert Kenneth Pollack, now at the Brookings Institution, a research center.

Pollack, who advocated a war to overthrow Saddam, said he believes more evidence of Iraqi weapons activity will be found. — Knight-Ridder newspapers, June 2003


The Bush administration-funded worldwide book blitz.

Even as President Bush delivered his pivotal speech on September 12th to the United Nations regarding the conduct of Hussein’s regime, we noted there was a very timely book launched at the same time by Ken Pollack of the Brookings Institute called, “The Threatening Storm.” We contacted Mr. Pollack and asked him if he would interrupt his book tour, which was not that easy to persuade him to do, and he agreed and went on a number of digital video conferences and visits to countries as far spread as France, Austria, Finland, Germany, Hungary, and now he’s scheduled for South Africa and he’s agreed to do a series more. He’s that third voice, and he is speaking about the cases, pro and con, of invading Iraq in a more reasoned and reasonable way than most people could, and he has another voice to offer. — Undersecretary of State Charlotte Beers, at the National Press Club, December 2002


At a press briefing Dec. 18, State Dept. public diplomacy topper Charlotte Beers announced that her division has asked author Ken Pollack to interrupt a book tour and travel overseas to talk about his book “The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq.”

Turns out the State Dept. also has been courting foreign journalists over the past year.

“We set up many more responsive facilities than we’ve had in the past for the foreign press at the president’s ranch in Texas, at the White House and in our own State foreign press centers, which are Washington, New York and Los Angeles,” Beers said.


Storytelling stressed

A former Madison Avenue exec, Beers extolled the importance of “storytelling” in convincing overseas ads that the U.S. is only trying to do good. — Daily Variety, December 2002


In fact, one of the reasons to go to war with Iraq sooner, rather than later, is so that we never find ourselves in that position where Saddam Hussein has nuclear weapons and we have to risk the obliteration of Riyadh, or Kuwait, and the Saudi oil fields, or Amman, or any of the other capitals of the region that we would worry so much about. Or, for that matter, New York. If the Iraqi’s decided to put a nuclear weapon on a freighter, they could just drive it into New York Harbor and have the same effect there. — Pollack, State Department-sponsored worldwide video conference, two weeks before war


In hitting American forces with chemical weapons, Saddam would exact vengeance, said Ken Pollack, a former CIA analyst now with Brookings. He also might hope to delay them from entering the city. — Course of Baghdad Battle Hinges on Unknowns, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, March 2003


“Unlike so many Iraqi oppositionists, [Ahmed Chalabi] actually does what he says he’s going to do,” says Ken Pollack, research director at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution. — from an article that should have been entitled, “Ahmed Chalabi — A Great Guy!” by Sally Quinn, the Washington Post, November 2003


“I think that we will find the [WMD] stuff,” Ken Pollack said. “I think it’s simply a matter of time, but I think that we will find, at the very least, the production capability.” — in another State Department-funded worldwide videoconference with Ken Pollack, one entitled “Dr. Wrong, Once Again and With Passion,” May 2003


In a New York Times op-ed piece, Brookings Institution analyst Ken Pollack writes “the search for Iraq’s nonconventional weapons program has only just begun. In the meantime, accusations are mounting that the Bush administration made up the whole Iraqi weapons threat to justify an invasion. That is just not the case – American and its allies had plenty of evidence before the war, and before President Bush took office, indicating that Iraq was retaining its illegal weapons program” — Pollack in the NYT via the National Journal, June 2003


In a world that valued logic and scholarly thought, Ken Pollack would have been run off the reservation a long time ago. This isn’t that world.

Americans no longer have any idea who Ken Pollack is. But that shouldn’t stop you from reading these excerpts or recommending the DD blog post to others.

It’s helpful to again have a look at the manipulated groupthink and how hard to stomach it is.


Ken Pollack, then. Once a very important person, now a nobody and a fraud, still a symbol for our time.

03.20.13

Fraud anniversary

Posted in Culture of Lickspittle, War On Terror at 4:04 pm by George Smith

I don’t have much to say for the anniversary week of the Iraq War. For 99 percent of America it’s been all downhill ever since, including me.
The GWB administration and the mainstream media broke everything.

No news agency ever really recovered from the role played in supporting the frauds of the American government. They’re worse now in that they’ve almost entirely given up on doing any critical reporting on national security issues.

As I’ve written recently, almost all the people I knew who actually did opposition work either quit or blew away in the intervening period. Being on the outside got old, people got old. I got old.

Today Ezra Klein does an “I’m sorry” piece at Bloomberg that isn’t much of one.

Klein admits he was a flack for the war as a college student and believed the say-so of a man almost no Americans can remember, Ken Pollack, a “liberal hawk” who had written a book that became a bestseller for the cause of war.

Pollack’s Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq sells sells for a penny a copy, used. The third party sellers make their small profit on charging you a bit extra for mailing.

Because he’s aggrieved Klein spends an overlong column digging up Pollack for an interview. The only good part, one Klein doesn’t mention, is that Pollack and his colleague, Michael O’Hanlon, another now infamous think-tank “expert” ubiquitous in the news before the tanks rolled, did suffer as a result of the Iraq debacle.

While they remained in the “community” of national security experts, they were thoroughly discredited. The only other person this happened to was Judy Miller of the New York Times who was run out of the profession for the frauds on Saddam’s alleged WMDs published in that newspaper.

Klein wants to know what Pollack thinks now. It’s another exercise in excuse making.

Ezra Klein is a product of our culture of lickspittle. He has a reputation because he’s young, published everywhere that’s liberal and is on MSNBC. He does a mea culpa so he has a clear conscience going forward.

When it was obvious war in Iraq was coming I was writing for the Village Voice where I developed the Weapon of the Week series.

Don’t give the Voice too much credit.

The week US armor seized Baghdad and broke the back of Iraqi conventional resistance, the publisher canceled the column. They were buffaloed along with almost everyone else.

War over! Everyone was cheering. George and Dick were right. WMDs were going to be found any day. Old Don Rumsfeld was complaining the news outlets were showing the same videotapes of Iraqis stealing everything not nailed down over and over.

Yay. Don’t you feel things have become so much better?!

In 2004 I was the first person in this country to find that Colin Powell’s Security Council assertion that Hussein’s Iraq had been connected to a ricin plot in London was a fraud. At GlobalSecurity.Org we tried to take it to US newspapers and none would have it. They had simply quit doing their job.


The Wit and Wisdom of Ken Pollackfrom the archives. All the way back when I still had a beard because it hadn’t turned half white.

03.17.13

Cyberwar shoeshine video

Posted in Cyberterrorism, Shoeshine at 3:10 pm by George Smith

A particularly over-the-top example, distributed everywhere by Reuters.

This “news” video creates the impression, one reinforced by its unnamed talking heads, that a cyberattack on America’s power grid would be more devastating than the worst natural catastrophe. The attack would be untraceable, would take a second and would burn out tens of thousands of transformers around the country, it is alleged. It would take months, perhaps years, to recover from it.

American civilization crippled in a second, delivered in a “news” video about two and a half minutes long.

The Reuters reporter cites as a National Academy of Science report on the power grid to bolster its case. It seems reasonable to viewers but is a case of utter mendacity, if you actually read the report.

DD blog covered it here.

And the report was pointed to by by Steven Aftergood of the Secrecy blog here.

At the time, I wrote:

In the aftermath of the Sandy natural disaster, it has again been made obvious to some that the electrical grid can be damaged. And that electrical power, if it is disrupted for a long enough period of time, can result in death or the serious damage to the health of citizens in our modern world, particularly if they are old, sick and dependent on technological services.

For example, from the opening pages of the report:

“If such large [theoretically terrorism-caused] outages were to occur during times of extreme weather, they could also result in hundreds or even thousands of deaths due to heat stress or extended exposure to extreme cold.”

One of the recurring memes of the Cult of Cyberwar is the insistence that the electrical grid can be disrupted with little effort by cyberattack on the infrastructure.

This pernicious meme has created the impression that catastrophically turning off the electricity in parts or all of the United States can be done by many, simply by pushing software buttons from the internet.

The NAS report has this to say on “cyber vulnerability:”

If they could gain access, hackers could manipulate SCADA systems to disrupt the flow of electricity, transmit erroneous signals to operators, block the flow of vital information, or disable protective systems. Cyber attacks are unlikely to cause extended outages, but if well coordinated they could magnify the damage of a physical attack. For example, a cascading outage would be aggravated if operators did not get the information to learn that it had started, or if protective devices were disabled.

That’s about it, essentially.

The report describes the biggest hazard to the electrical grid as physical, not digital.

Physical attacks by terrorists, which are deemed not likely but possible, could — for example — destroy critical high voltage transformers. (The physical failure of such a transformer serving New York City, by Sandy and rising water levels, was recently and repeatedly on television and preserved on YouTube.)

“Although major terrorist organizations have not attacked the US power system, such terrorist attacks have occurred elsewhere in the world,” reads the report. “Simply turning off the power typically does not terrorize people. However, the United States should not ignore that possibility of an attack that turns off the power before staging a large conventional terrorist event, thus amplifying the latter’s consequences.”

And there you have one clear cut example of outright lying in a news piece, an exercise in which a National Academy of Science report is used to buttress an extravagant claim when the actual report did nothing of the kind. The report was about the potential consequences of grid failure, largely as the result of either natural disaster or potential terrorist plots that successfully destroy large components of infrastructure, both in the physical, not digital, realm.

Readers please take note: Who are the two unnamed talking heads in this video? DD blog wants to know.

General Keith Shoeshine wants information sharing

Posted in Culture of Lickspittle, Cyberterrorism, Shoeshine at 1:07 pm by George Smith

… except when he doesn’t.

The US national security megaplex has set up a system rife with internal contradictions. As a consequence it has no firm ground to stand on when making arguments about what is and is not appropriate conduct by other nations.

And so it is with the shoeshine of cyberwar. NSA director Keith Alexander, or General Keith Shoeshine, now slightly infamous for making the absurd claim that cyberwar against the United States constitutes “the greatest transfer of wealth in history” is a man who can only make arguments from authority.

This was on display on Tuesday of last week before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

From the New York Times:

The chief of the military’s newly created Cyber Command told Congress on Tuesday that he is establishing 13 teams of programmers and computer experts who could carry out offensive cyberattacks on foreign nations if the United States were hit with a major attack on its own networks, the first time the Obama administration has publicly admitted to developing such weapons for use in wartime.

“I would like to be clear that this team, this defend-the-nation team, is not a defensive team,” Gen. Keith Alexander, who runs both the National Security Agency and the new Cyber Command, told the House Armed Services Committee. “This is an offensive team that the Defense Department would use to defend the nation if it were attacked in cyberspace. Thirteen of the teams that we’re creating are for that mission alone.”

General Alexander has been a major architect of the American strategy on this issue, but until Tuesday he almost always talked about it in defensive terms …

Since it was theater, no one asked a tough question.

A tough question would have been to ask our cyberwar shoeshine man why the US had created an environment in cybersecurity that was one big conflict of interest.

Last year Alexander spent a lot of time campaigning in support of cybersecurity legislation. That effort failed in Congress. But during it he lobbied for more instantaneous “information sharing” on cybersecurity threats, signatures and trouble between the government and corporate America.

However, in cyberspace the US government, in developing and unleashing malware on its enemies in the Middle East, has made a world environment where vulnerabilities are commodities and capabilities, information not to be shared because of applications in cyber-weaponry.

I put it this way:

The history with regards to information sharing is fifteen years old.

It started with the Clinton administration where it was vigorously pursued by Clarke and assistant secretary of defense John Hamre. They argued for an exception to be added to the Freedom of Information Act, one to encourage corporate America to be forthright about its computer security intrusions, secure in the knowledge its secrets were safe from competitors and journalists armed with FOIA.

They got what they wanted. And it didn’t make a substantial difference. Subsequently, every year — between then and now — someone has always argued for ever more information sharing. Corporate America is not transparent. A frictionless system of information passage with it cannot be created.

Paradoxically, the US government has contributed to the creation of a global Internet security environment where information is not to be shared because there is value in that. Critical vulnerabilities have great worth in cyber-weapons development. This has created a gray market in which the vulnerabilities, information of zero social value, are sold at good profit.

As with discussions about cyberwar and the creation of cyber-weapons, the American government, by its actions, has cut the ground from under its feet on being in position to take the high ground, right from the start.

You can’t have operations reliant upon security information sharing and security information hoarding and develop trust. In fact, no one should trust you to do the right thing at all. It’s a natural and obvious conflict of interest.

Sorry, General Shoeshine.

Unfortunately, we have a press that gave up on pointing stuff like this out years ago. And the New York Times article on Alexander’s Congressional testimony did not mention it.


General Keith Shoeshine of the NSA believes cyberwar is causing the greatest transfer of wealth in human history.


Can you see the shaded area where cyberwar and Chinese hacking created the greatest loss of wealth in US history?


In England there are still a few people willing to call rubbish rubbish.

From the BBC, on al Qaeda, China and cyberwar:

Al-Qaeda lacks the technical expertise to sabotage Britain’s national power and water systems, a cyber-security expert has told a committee of MPs.

Asked why a cyber-attack had never been launched on such assets, Thomas Rid said: “Al-Qaeda are too stupid and China doesn’t want to do it.”

Dr Rid, a reader in war studies at King’s College, London, was briefing the Public Accounts Committee.


The General Keith Shoeshine Showfrom the archives.

03.16.13

Straight outta WhiteManistan

Posted in WhiteManistan at 10:52 am by George Smith

To be read with this account at the Post.

So psychologically twisted it literally makes your skin crawl.

03.15.13

Cult of EMP Crazy recedes

Posted in Crazy Weapons, Culture of Lickspittle, Psychopath & Sociopath, WhiteManistan at 3:22 pm by George Smith

When Roscoe Bartlett, mainstay of the Cult of Electromagnetic Pulse Crazy, had his House career ended in the November election it dealt a heavy blow to the lobbying group. With Newt Gingrich being run off the national stage yet again, two of its most vigorous personalities were cut down.

Although Bartlett never got any legislation passed he did pursue the cause of defending the nation against electromagnetic pulse doom with dogged tenacity.

And he was not as much a totally lousy Congressman and fool as birther Trent Franks, his successor in the obscure electromagnetic pulse caucus.

Franks is a nobody with no pull, someone his own party hardly pays attention to. Which means any movement of electromagnetic pulse defense legislation either quickly dies in committee or is summarily wiped off the bottom of Congressional shoes like a mildly annoying bit of dog excrement.

This week the National Journal ran a piece on the fate of the electromagnetic pulse caucus. It noted the caucus had expanded its membership from 11 to 18.

However, it’s leader, Trent Franks, is such a busted screwdriver he doesn’t even list it under his tabs for committees and caucuses on his home page.

From the National Journal:

Doomsday preppers or congressional visionaries?

A small but growing cadre of House members is set to relaunch efforts to protect the nation against what they say is a very real threat: the unleashing of an electromagnetic pulse either by a solar storm or a nuclear-armed foe that could cripple much of the nation’s electrical infrastructure.

“I realize there is skepticism, and I understand it’s easy to dismiss this as something coming from people who might go around wearing tinfoil hats,” said Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., one of the leaders of the little-known bipartisan congressional Electromagnetic Pulse Caucus …

The caucus is bipartisan in that it includes two nobodies from the other side of the aisle as tokens, Yvette Clark and Loretta Sanchez.

More infamous members are crackpot Steve King, recently in the news as one of the people Karl Rove has targeted as a nuisance politician who won’t be able to win a Senatorial run in Iowa because “he is the poster boy for over the top, racially tinged rhetoric in his attacks on President Barack Obama,” notes the Grio.

“Not only has King compared the president to Saddam Hussein, and called the president ‘very, very urban,’ on the House floor, he has also said, ‘The president has demonstrated that he has a default mechanism in him that breaks down the side of race on the side that favors the black person,’ ” it continues.

Like Franks, Steve King is a birther.

Also on the caucus is Paul Broun, another raging GOP sociopath (there are many), in the news for great quote like:

“I was the first Member of Congress to call [Obama] a socialist who embraces Marxist-Leninist policies like government control of health care and redistribution of wealth.


“All that stuff I was taught about evolution and embryology and Big Bang theory, all that is lies straight from the pit of hell.”

One of the many liabilities of the Cult of Electromagnetic Pulse Crazy lobby is that, robot-like, it still refers to the “Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States From Electromagnetic Pulse Attack.” Originally written in 2004 and revised in 2008, it’s now nine years old, five if you’re feeling generous.

The Commission principal was William Graham, an old Reagan adviser and peddler of the “Star Wars” missile defense program.

It’s a twin problem, not only because of now creaking antiquity, but because of the solid impression, one the caucus and Franks cannot escape, that it’s just part of the missile defense lobby.

Prior to Roscoe Bartlett’s defeat in November, the EMP Crazy lobby generally tried to get at least one opinion or mainstream article on electromagnetic pulse doom ending civilization into the news feed at least once a week.

Since the election all the mojo is gone.

The majority of pieces on electromagnetic pulse doom are now all published by WND.com, the right wing conspiracy website most famous as the parking stall of Ted Nugent’s weekly column cursing the president, and peddling Jerome Corsi, yet another crackpot who promotes “a staggering number of outlandish conspiracies about the president, including that Obama has a fake birth certificate and stolen Social Security number; that Obama is both secretly gay and secretly Muslim; and that Obama and his family have lied about the true identity of his father, who may be either communist writer Frank Marshall Davis or ‘some Indonesian.'”

The Cult of Electromagnetic Pulse Crazy has always been horribly tainted by its weird and extreme membership. But the departure of Roscoe Bartlett really hurt because he occasionally came off as a reasonable and kindly old man.

Not someone preparing for the collapse of US civilization, like the unavoidable-on-trash-television-and-YouTube, tribe of end-timers called doomsday preppers. Which is what his gig became last year when he realized his political career was coming to a close.

Another veteran member of the Cult has been Frank Gaffney. But in the last three years Gaffney has spent much more time convincing Tea Party legislators in red states that shariah law is coming to the United States.

That campaign has been far more fruitful than anything mounted by House electromagnetic pulse caucus.

Trent Franks had tried to keep the ball rolling on electromagnetic pulse doom defense.

But as notes the Journal:

Franks said he had been led to believe last session that his bill would be brought to the House floor for a vote. But he said House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., let it die in committee. He said he has been unable to get an explanation from Upton.

They just can’t get no respect. Not even from their own, anymore.


From the archives — on the Cult of EMP Crazy.

Deluded

Posted in Culture of Lickspittle at 1:01 pm by George Smith

North Koreans, apparently. More planning than went into the catastrophic remake of Red Dawn. Small chance they’ll get additional audience because of North Korea crazies in news.

Morgan Freeman, the pop culture face of presidential gravity.

03.14.13

Pasadena in grip of joint paramilitary task force

Posted in Crazy Weapons, War On Terror at 4:57 pm by George Smith

This afternoon, your host, along with thousands of others ran right into it. The Pasadena police, sheriffs, the FBI anti-gang unit, associated SWAT teams, and the Pasadena air force — a chopper, were used to block off and patrol a large part of the center of the city on both sides of the 210 highway, from Wilson to Hill Streets, west and east, north to Orange Grove and over the freeway to the south side service road.

Which may not have encompassed all of it.

At “rush hour,” which goes from just before three to past dark, the traffic blockade and police perimeter paralyzed traffic in town.

The operation, which apparently started as an anti-gang sweep, escalated when a car with two suspects collided with a police vehicle.

The suspects fled on foot, engaging in a gun battle.

No one was hit but they remain at large, according to this story.

“The Pasadena Police Department BearCat armored vehicle was deployed as were K-9 units from both the Pasadena and Alhambra police department. Officers from Pasadena walked the area searching for the gunman with assault rifles,” reads the piece.

BearCats went into service in urban police forces during the war on terror. Department of Homeland Security grants are often used to pay for them.

Right now I’m having a Rolling Rock. Rolling Rock was a Pennsy beer when I came of age. These days it’s just one of the anonymous lager swills owned by Anheuser-Busch InBev. Nice green cans and bottles, though. Clearly, I have low standards.

03.13.13

Your midnight shoeshine

Posted in Cyberterrorism, Shoeshine at 11:05 pm by George Smith


Can’t you see where we were attacked by cyber and financial weapons?

From CNN:

Cyberattacks pose more of a threat to the United States than a land-based attack by a terrorist group …

The warning by Director of National Intelligence James Clapper came in his annual report to Congress on the threats facing the United States.

“Attacks, which might involve cyber and financial weapons, can be deniable and unattributable,” Clapper said in prepared remarks before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

However, there is only a “remote chance” of a major cyberattack on the United State that would cause widespread disruptions, such as regional power outages, [the] report says

Now it’s financial weapons.

Could be anything. Like the twelve biggest banks in the world colluding to fix global interest rates, aka the LIBOR case?

Remember, financial weapons, the new buzz term.

Tuesday’s designated shoeshine man, another very important and esteemed white guy 99 percent of Americans have never heard of, on the ramparts.

« Previous Page« Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries »Next Page »