« August 2006 | Main | October 2006 »

September 28, 2006

Here’s the Official ACLU Wheel of Torture...

Some fun from the humor-in-truth file

 

 

 

Uncovered from the secret vaults of the ACLU:

 

 

Lock Islamofascist terrorist in a room by himself without a Koran. Means: Torture of Islamofascist. Fix: Sue to force government to supply Koran to Islamofascist.

Lock a non-Muslim religious pro-life activist in a room by himself with a Bible. Means: Torture of atheists who know that someone somewhere may have a Bible when it was preventable. Fix: Sue to remove Bible on grounds of church-state separation.

Beat and starve practitioner of any religion regardless of age or gender in China. Means: Matter of sovereignty and diversity. Fix: The US government should respect other cultures; sue to nullify the Taiwan treaty, which unduly places pressure on China for obviously racist reasons, which is a violation of international law (Justice Kennedy will like this one).

A serial child-rapist has been sentenced to death after the brutal assault and murder of a precious child. Means: Torture of child-rapist. Fix: Appeal on grounds sex offender is victim of society (in particular, non-Islamofascist religious people) and get the sentence, the death penalty statute, and the outlawing of all forms of assault on children ruled as unconstitutional restrictions of free speech and invasions of privacy. While the appeals are pending, get the judge to order free satellite TV, Game Cubes, and unfiltered internet access to all offenders on death row, along with the ability to vote; and allow the accused rapist to sue the parents of dead child for defamation while speaking out on Nancy Grace and Oprah, and otherwise interfering with his fundamental rights by not having more children and making them available to him.

Church displays cross on private property but in public view. Means: Torture of lone atheist living in van down by the river at the edge of town (and by extension, every oppressed person in world history). Fix: Sue on grounds offender causes undue emotional torment by public display, implicitly reminding lone atheist (and the greater offended class) there may be a hell, an absolute right and wrong, and that consequences for certain completely lawful choices may be unpleasant. Further, offender cannot be a victim of religious persecution and is in fact the cause of all ills from slavery to misogyny to the global warming that caused Katrina. Therefore, offender should be responsible for in addition to damages paying reparations for every act of oppression or environmental damage perpetrated by every non-muslim or non-communist (who are victims) anywhere in the world since records-keeping was invented. Additionally, the state should pay damages for allowing lawyers for the defendant and the defendants themselves to use government resources via the courts to defend a religious cause, and the US Constitution should be found unconstitutional for allowing them to do so. Since the signers of the Constitution were also oppressors (e.g. owners of slaves) and it is obvious they wrote the constitution with malice toward the oppressed groups of the world, their descendants must pay reparations also to every tribe and tongue offended.

 

 

RELATED: Check out the latest Stop the ACLU blogcast going on at A Lady’s Ruminations. Apparently some ACLU members have broken away from their leadership and are demanding an end to the hypocrisy. Good luck Trotskyites; stay out of Mexico.

 

 

Posted by Martin at 07:21 PM | Comments (4)

Satellite Spying: From Absurd to Alarming

 Starlight, starbright, stars in numbers watching earth tonight

 

 

Jeepers creepers!

 

Image courtesy Metroactive News & Issues. Click to view related article.It may only be a matter of time before Google finds itself in hot water, as the satellite imaging quality of popular mapping software Google Earth continues to improve. As the Daily-Mail mentions in an article today, users are already able to spot sunbathers camped out on rooftops in the Hague. And the Daily-Mail should know about the potential for eavesdropping – one of its writers was a Soviet agent back in the Cold War days, outed by the defector Vasili Mitrokhin.

 

People who before expected a certain amount of privacy when going about their business in their own back yards may soon be shocked to realize they’ll need to get themselves fixed up for public approval before stepping outside. And forget the dark socks and shorts.

 

The question is whether Google will find itself on the nasty end of law suits or other action in the US or other countries alleging privacy invasion. Needless to say, Barbara Streisand will probably have a literal cloven-hooved cow (very easy for her) when all of this occurs to her.

 

While it is true that airplanes often fly over back yards, they do usually also give a bit of warning and generally don’t snap photos for public consumption.

 

We’ve known for some time that “Google” was antonymous with privacy. Whether this will rise to the level of starting a big kerfuffle will eventually have to be seen.

 

 

China firing on, blinding US Mil sats

 

Perhaps Google can alert the public when its satellites are passing overhead so we can use lasers like Google’s friend the Chinese military, which is presently using them (as I predicted here and followed up on here) to interfere with the ability of photographic satellites to do their jobs.  

 

The Daily Telegraph reports today that China is indeed aggressively using lasers to blind US satellites passing overhead, according to a Pentagon report largely squelched by the Bush administration eager not to offend the rising Asian threat (in Carter/Nixon-Kissinger vs. the Soviets fashion).

 

When I read things like this, it honestly makes me worry about our current US policymakers and whether there is anything rattling around in there at 1600 Penn.

 

There do seem to be some people with good sense in the Pentagon, however. They fought tooth and nail to get a single-sentence mention of this aggressive and openly hostile series of acts by the Chinese in the most recent annual China threat assessment. And, as I predicted here and here, we’ve begun an aggressive new spy drone program, which may offer advantages over the predictable patterns of satellites in some areas, at least. But the administration's efforts to avoid honesty in an effort to pursuade the Chinese to be our partners against North Korea even while they are in bed with North Korea (and possibly to make corporate interests invested in China happy) means our future enemy is losing for us more of what we need them to have to ensure peace: respect. Clinton's policies caused the Islamofascists to lose it for us and we know the results. Bush needs to sit up and pay attention during class. So remember kids, when China decides to nuke LA, we shouldn’t respond because it will upset our cooperative effort on North Korea. And besides, we had no business trying to see what the Chinese military was up to either.

 

Not only is Henry Kissinger the most boring person whose company I have ever had the experience of sharing, he and his imitators have never gotten it right in foreign policy when it comes to national security. There's nothing personally bad about many of them, they just shouldn't be left alone with power tools.   

 

 

 

Posted by Martin at 02:04 PM | Comments (0)

Quisling Down and Under

 

 

Ann Coulter proves again she is queen of snark in her latest column, “I Did Not Have Sex with that Nomad, Osama Bin Laden” (h/t to Lady Jane).  

 

Ann of course is a pro at lining up her facts and delivering them with style; however, this time she may have erred slightly (though maybe this was her way of being just a bit generous with the quarry of her vivisection): "The glassy-eyed Clinton cultists are insisting their idol's on-air breakdown during a "Fox News Sunday" interview with Chris Wallace was a calculated performance, which is a bit like describing Hurricane Katrina as a 'planned demolition.'" But Ann surely knows that Katrina was a planned demolition concocted by the evil racist Republicans in the White House...

 

No, seriously though, it's really a shame that while trying to kill Bin Laden poor Vince Foster accidentally got in the way. The libs not only lie, they tell big lies, absurd lies, lies requiring a poor public education system to make them believable to 20% of the American people. As Ann and so many others have ad nauseum pointed out since Sunday, Clinton’s lie that he was trying to kill Bin Laden is easily revealed by the fact it was at the time illegal to target enemies like Bin Laden for assassination. Not that the law ever really meant anything with the Clinton White House, but then again Clinton didn’t even attempt to remove or even minimize the capabilities of Bin Laden. If Clinton really wanted Bin Laden that badly, we can all be assured Bin Laden would have at least had bite marks on his upper lip, which was nearly the story for Chris Wallace, as Coulter points out. The fact that Clinton gets whatever he wants whenever he wants it bad enough shouldn’t be lost on anyone here. And if Clinton wanted a robust national security and a good defense against terrorists and spies, he wouldn’t have cut the CIA by nearly 80% and the armed forces in half. Sorry Bill, but those of us who lived through the Reagan experience know what a well-supported and well-prepared national security policy looks like.

 

Where history does not utterly ignore and shut out the Clintons, history will not cast a friendly eye to them or the traitors that scurried in their circle. From Russia and China to Osama Bin Laden, the Clintons did what Democrats do best: broadcast surrender to our enemies. Bin Laden’s view of Clintonian fortitude was literally broadcast around the world on several occasions during the 1990’s, so no one had delusions about which way the sewer water was flowing, unless of course one were delusional. Ann quotes Bin Laden in her article from an interview he graciously sat down for in 1998 with ABC News. While even Bin Laden managed to get through an entire interview with a member of the press without personally threatening the journalist or coming unhinged in response to simple questions, Bin Laden was able in the wake of our pullout from Somalia to declare triumphantly, “‘The youth were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat.’” Coulter also discusses the interview in her book How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must), which I talked about in 2004. But it's hard not to believe that it takes on more meaning each and every time we learn something new which shows just how devastating the Clintons were for our security.

 

I’m personally relieved Bill has once more on this occasion so kindly brought all of this to the fore. It's as painful as picking gravel out of a wound, but equally necessary. There are a lot of issues which we as a nation need to deal with collectively from the 1990’s, and one of them is the painful lesson that a nation can never rest or let down its guard or take the election of president lightly. As with the lesson of last year’s hurricane season, we must learn that when one storm ends, another is already on its way. Had we maintained a healthy, well-staffed, and alert intelligence apparatus and international posture, there’s no doubt we would have better weathered and even mitigated the terrorist storm, not to mention been able to forecast other weather systems which have been able to build steam on the horizon virtually unnoticed and ignored. Bill Clinton doesn’t deserve our praise, and he never had our enemies’ respect. No, history will not judge Mr. Clinton too kindly, I’m afraid; be that our history… or someone else’s.

 

 

RELATED: Dems take Clinton cue and follow up with more Fox abuse (after all, embarrassing questions should always be silenced as in any good dictatorship)... (h/t Michelle Malkin). How could anyone be outrageously rude to Fox News' Jane Skinner, one might ask? Well, it takes a dysfunctionate of the left, of course.

 

MORE: More trailer-trash antics live from inside the Clinton trailer library (2004). In this video Clinton says that an uptick in world opinion about him by the time he left office was more important than what the American people think. When Peter Jennings (by far no right-winger) focused on this, Clinton became visibly vulnerable and attacked ABC for being - yep - a right wing pawn. I guess all self-absorbed dictator wannabes have paranoia problems - it just comes with the territory. It's only sad we can't steam clean the Oval Office enough.

 

 

 

Posted by Martin at 02:27 AM | Comments (1)

September 26, 2006

Quotes of the Day: An Arm and a Legacy

 

 

Clinton presidential library…with real books and new-fangled computers!

 

 

I am fully unable to decide upon just one quote for today, thanks to the former president with the personal problems. Bill Clinton of course still thinks he has a legacy to save from the bonfires of history...and his vanity. So he thought he would waltz onto Chris Wallace’s show and talk about building more trailer parks to the 21st Century, never anticipating that someone would point out that the ex-president had no clothes (as too well we know). Therefore, in order of appearance are my favorite three quotes for today:

 

 

Bill Clinton to Chris Wallace: "I got closer to killin' [bin Laden] than [Bush]".

 

– You got close and CHOSE not to do it. News Alert: That makes it by far much worse, Mr. Clinton; never mind the fact you did so on more than one occasion over eight years and after bin Laden had declared war on us and attacked us here and abroad. Of course, maybe if the Bush staff hadn’t needed to spend the first four months in the White House recovering from all of the deliberate acts of sabotage and vandalism your people left in their wake along with an uncooperative transition and that prolonged and obnoxious fight against the alleged Right Wing Conspiracy by your Vice President long after the election was decided, who knows what real conspiracies intelligence might have uncovered.

 

 

Another Clinton quote from Sunday’s interview: "I never criticized President Bush"

 

– Really? Is that another bold-faced lie or should we suppose this depends on the meaning of “never”? Bill Clinton: the only president in US history to have an asterisk automatically inserted after every sentence.

 

 

The last quote however comes to us from Sean Hannity, who was responding to a caller about our being shown the Clinton we’d all heard about but never had fully seen until Sunday’s meltdown: "Clinton exposed himself…"

 

– An unfortunate choice of words but true on all counts. While Bill had his front to Monica, his back was quite literally exposed to China, Russia, Iran, al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas… need I go on? This is why character matters. A president whose only regret is that he never inhaled should have never made it past bus driver. And he couldn't have done it without Ross Perot. Clinton’s outburst Sunday only showed to those who still doubted that you can take the boy out of the trailer park, but you can never get the trailer park out of the boy. Indeed, the legacy never falls far from the doublewide.

 

 

 

Posted by Martin at 02:15 AM | Comments (4)

September 25, 2006

Mens Rea? The Caper of the Clinton Cat

So tell us again what you think happened to that canary...

 

 

Ace of Spades blog absolutely demolishes Bill Clinton’s lying tirade from today’s Fox interview with Chris Wallace (video here, transcript here). Go and read it if you haven’t already done so. Here are some highlights (my emphasis in red).

 

First on the out-of-thin-air accusation that Republicans for the first time were against taking military action against a known terrorist when the opportunity presented itself Ace offers Bill some History 101:

 

 

The man simply lies. It is a breathtakingly stupid and mendacious claim that rightwingers, as he calls us, actually opposed his weak single effort to get bin Ladin. Throughout the late nineties, I was apoplectic we weren't doing anything at all about bin Ladin. We wanted more action. Not less.

 

Conservatives did not object to this attack. We were enraged, however, that the man refused to attack bin Ladin at all until he was motivated to action by a threat [aka Lewinsky] to his own political safety. […]

We strongly suspected he had any number of chances to kill bin Ladin before this. It turns out we were one-hundred percent right:

 

 

Mr. Clinton‘s administration had far more chances to kill Osama bin Laden than Mr. Bush has until this day… [W]e had at least eight to 10 chances to capture or kill Osama bin Laden in 1998 and 1999. And the government on all occasions decided that the information was not good enough to act…

 

It is absurd to even suggest that Republicans' beef with Clinton's feckless and vacillating anti-Al Qaeda efforts was that we craved even more fecklessness and vacillation.

 

Who the h**l does this narcissistic sociopath think he's fooling? Does he really imagine he can sell the American people on the proposition that Republicans were actually less committed to dropping bombs on "brown people" than he was?

 

 

If so, that’s a big backtrack from Clinton’s usual race-bating. On Clinton’s charge that he was afraid of political backlash for attacking bin Laden:

 

 

Let's say hypothetically this lying bastard is telling the truth. […] What the h**l is the Commander in Chief, then, doing bowing to political pressure to let a sworn enemy of the United States and mass-murderer of (then) hundreds of American lives live his life unmolested?

 

Is Clinton really claiming he let bin Ladin go on to murder three thousand people because he was afraid what Tom DeLay might say about him?

 

True fact: Clinton fought the Serbian War without an authorization for the use of military force from Congress and furthermore in direct violation of the War Powers Act. […]

 

He can do all that to defend KLA terrorists in Serbia but he can't lift a finger to kill bin Ladin for fear of Rush Limbaugh mocking him?

 

Either that, or he's the peace-at-any-cost bong-smoking hippie p***y we always suspected he was.

 

 

And finally, ACE nails it shut. The verdict, what we all knew: Clinton let bin Laden go (perhaps to kill him when the next scandal broke out). Ace saves the best for last; here’s a snippit:

 

 

The man let bin Ladin go. The man let bin Ladin plot and scheme and recruit and ultimately murder 3000 innocent civilians. And he blames his negligence and malfeasance on the Republicans?

 

And The Horse You Rode In On, Chief: Video of Osama bin Ladin caught in a Predator's camera.

 

The Predator was not armed, as most are now. But there was always the chance to arrange a quick missile attack.

 

Too bad Clinton wasn't in any legal jeopardy when this footage was taken (the Fall of 2000). Had he been in legal trouble, who knows, he might have actually have given the code to fire on bin Ladin and saved 3000 people.

 

I guess the real lesson of the nineties is that we didn't impeach Clinton frequently enough.

 

Clinton's rules? The CIA was not authorized to kill bin Ladin. Only to attempt to capture him.

 

As we have no Tomahawk missiles equipped with big butterfly nets, bin Ladin was let free, unharmed and alive, to continue plotting the murders of 3000.

 

The fact that BC tried to physically intimidate Wallace proves the ex-prez knew the facts weren’t on his side. BC is scared, and it’s obvious. Now what could scare BC that bad one may ask? Well, sure, part of it is his legacy which is already well on its way to the smoldering ash heap of history (who was the president preceding Roosevelt and WWII?), but Bill Clinton apparently knows there’s also something out there that could land him in serious hot water. Something important enough to have Sandy Burglar attempt to smuggle out top-secret documents in his socks before the 9/11 Commission had a chance to get their eyes on them. Maybe it’s just that Clinton dropped the ball far worse than we know, or maybe it’s more. Either way, history will find it. I just hope it’s during our lifetimes so we can watch that smug, lying traitor and his friends get their legal comeuppance. What was it that Al Gore used to say about "no controlling legal authority"? Oops.

 

 

Posted by Martin at 01:38 AM | Comments (0)

September 24, 2006

The Life and Times of a Puny Putintate Putz

Stupid Move #619: Putintate's Policies in a Pickle

 

 

I said in the previous post I couldn't have made up the outrageous story surrounding the Turkish author Elif Shafak. Comedian Jay Leno couldn't have made this one up: A H/T to Debbie at Right Truth and La Russophobe for er, uncovering the latest human rights outrage coming out of what LR has pinned as Vladimir Putin’s Neo-Soviet State; a state in which anyone who criticizes the government is arrested or assassinated, Cheka-style.

 

For those of you wondering, I make it a rule never to do juvenile (and not so professional) photoshops like the one to the left, but since I guess we all now know that this sort of satire pushes Putin to cower in the fetal position in a dark corner somewhere, I'm rather obliged to play it to the hilt!*

 

Anyway, Last week Russian blogger Vladimir Rakhmankov was arrested in violation of Article 319 (not to be confused with Turkey’s Article 301 – apparently free speech suppression laws are similar everywhere) for his relatively tame political satire of Russian dictator-unofficiale, comparing Putin to a phallic symbol (and there are so many jokes with the Russian president's name alone that are unfortunately far beneath me). Rakhmankov made the comparison during the government’s recent public campaign to increase the Russian birth rate. Vladimir Putzin, (well, except for that one) still suffering from his Khodorkovsky complex was not amused, though so far Rakhmankov isn’t dead unlike twelve other journalists who are.

 

Ironically, before Rakhmankov was arrested, hardly anyone took ponderous note (especially outside of Russia) of his Putzin post, but now thanks to the magic of technocratic color, the whole world knows... and laughs, which is another example of why repression  backfires.

 

The Velvet (Underwear) Terror continues... but now with a strange and somewhat amusing twist (though there is nothing amusing about the repression and murder of dissidents). While Article 301 in Turkey was certainly in bad taste for freedom-lovers everywhere, Russia's Article 319 proves a bitter dill. But don't get mad, get Vlad!

 

 

 

 

 

EARLIER: Blogbat on the Russian Intelligence State with the Sluzhba Vneshney Razvedki (SVR) as resurgent KGB surpassing its predecessor.

 

 

CULTURAL NOTE: ”Putin padovis!” (pah-doe-VEES) has been a popular slogan in Russia for protestors and dissidents alike since Putin's first days re-Stalinizing the country. Made famous by pensioners in 2002 angry over severe cuts in winter staples, protestors demonstrated across Russia before Putin began terrorizing the populous into dhimmitude...or commietude... The expression literally means, “choke and die”. Say it however you mean it.

 

*p.s. Let's see the coward Putin try to put this pony back in the barn...  

Posted by Martin at 10:55 AM | Comments (2)

September 22, 2006

Turkey Haggles over Sophia

Gobble, gobble... free speech... gobble, gobble...

 

 

Turkey, which has been trying to come out of the oven as it attempts to qualify for entry into the EU despite strong opposition from a majority within several EU countries, took a huge step for human rights and free speech this week.

 

At issue was a rather sizable flap over whether an author could be prosecuted for defaming Turkish ancestors or for criticizing the well-known atrocities committed against ethnic Armenians over the centuries. The law, Article 301, was used by hard-line prosecutors to go after popular writer of fiction Elif Shafak for “Insulting Turkishness”; however, the judge disagreed, dismissing the case. The prosecutors then stormed out of the courthouse, accusing the judge of being a strange bird dropping the charges, and claiming that roasting Turkey should do more than make one sleepy.

 

The BBC says that,

 

The charge related to her latest novel The Bastard of Istanbul. [Order it now through Barnes & Noble]

 

The novel centres on two families - one Turkish, one Armenian - and includes discussion of the mass killing of Armenians in the dying days of the Ottoman  [and La-Z-Boy] Empire.

 

Armenia insists Turkey recognise that as genocide.

 

The report goes on to say that prosecutors claim that it’s a cultural thing, and we just don’t understand:

 

"In our culture no-one can brand their ancestors murderers or accuse them of genocide," Kemal Kerincsiz insisted ahead of the trial.

 

[…]

 

 "Maybe in the West they're more tolerant, but here we can't accept those comments as criticism."

 

I can’t make this up. No word whether Article 301 also includes mention of Turkey's past performance in football tournaments.

 

Fortunately, Elif Shafak is now resting at home with her husband Eyup and new baby (the latter she was bringing into the world as the trial was undergoing in her absence) and  delighted to hear the judge has agreed that prosecutors were simply pursuing an untamed ornithoid.

 

Another positive development during the trial was the number of democratic supporters amassed outside the courthouse to show their solidarity with Shafak; many of whom along with EU officials in Brussels are calling for the elimination of Article 301. Turkish officials may be considering that necessary revision in the intervening weeks.

 

 

Blogbat of course is happy to see all of these developments despite the fact that on the scale of tolerence Turkey isn't exactly at the Pope level (and most certainly not at the Danish cartoonist or Dutch movie director level), though it is good progress to pass the author of fiction milestone. While human rights did certainly take a hit at the fall of Constantinople, it seems possible that finally after five hundred years of decay and abuse, Istanbul may once more be reemerging out of the shadows as a place people can actually live and offer...thanksgiving.

 

 

Posted by Martin at 08:05 PM | Comments (0)

September 21, 2006

Notes from the Garden Journal: Real Martyrs

 

 

Islamofascists calling themselves martyrs for blowing up babies have without question bastardized* the meaning of the word meant for those who peacefully sacrifice their lives at the hands of their persecutors rather than forfeiting their convictions.

 

A blog called Strange Fire posts the moving lyrics of a song reminding all of us what a real martyr is. The song is called “Cassie”. Go have a read.

 

More examples of true martyrs can be found here, here, and here.

 

Believers of many faiths in China understand Cassie’s plight. Graphic photos of Chinese officials torturing religious dissidents were smuggled out of the brutal regime, showing the inhuman fashion in which the Communist government treats those of faith irrespective of age or gender. Something to consider the next time you have the chance to influence Western companies interested in investing in China’s suffering.

 

 

 

 

 

 

* The scam of Islamofascist martyrdom is further destroyed by the repeated reality that blowing yourself up for Allah is never quite so popular among Islamofascist puppeteers, like the leaders of al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, Syria, et al, who instead hope their blind, frothy, sword-wielding followers will willingly give up their lives as they murder innocent people for a false and evil cause, while these leaders themselves immediately break down in tears and beg for their lives upon capture, telling all they know often within only seconds of the gentlest of persuasion. The distinction therefore is indisputable in light of history with respect to the true and noble nature of the martyr that Islamofascism, far from passing muster, is an insult to those who truly have died in defense of their faith. The fact such people immediately begin to persecute non-Muslims at the first sight of the slightest provocation further proves this point. Radical Islam, rather than being a den of martyrs, is instead the reason (along with the corruption of other religions, the Paganism of Nazi Germany, and the anti-religious zealotry of Communism) that so many millions around the world have added to their numbers true martyrs in the past centuries.

Posted by Martin at 04:30 PM | Comments (4)

September 20, 2006

Russia: Secrets Well-Ignored and Poorly-Kept

 

 

 

Is Putin’s Russia becoming the first major intelligence regime? And if so, what does this portend to future Russian political and military ambitions across the globe if the regime is now run by a not-so-nascent espionage political class?

 

Recently the person we’ve come to know as the last Soviet dictator, Mikhail Gorbachev expressed a few regrets about his time at the head of the USSR, most notably, that he was not as strong or strict as Putin. But Putin too has his regrets: he has openly expressed regret at the demise of the Soviet Union (calling it a "national tragedy of enormous scale"), so much so that he's brought back many of the former institutions. Russians today would feel completely at home with their parents’ generation in many respects. On the glasnost (or appearance – not openness) side of things, Russians once again sing the Soviet national anthem as their own. They look out in the “near-abroad” and call it the Commonwealth of Independent States (similar to one name given internally for the Soviet Union in its time). But more substantially, while internally freedoms and descent are being quashed under what I’ve recently dubbed as Putin’s “velvet terror” (exacerbated no doubt by his “Khodorkovsky complex” – similar to Andropov’s “Hungarian complex”), externally Moscow is using whatever means available to throw its weight around, extending its influence far beyond the CIS and Eastern Europe.

 

Today Russia is still a big player in providing arms, advisors, and influence in regimes set diametrically against Western interests. Russia is also a big player in keeping Europe in tow through the domination of its fossil fuel giant Gazprom, which is essentially a state-run enterprise from top to bottom, and filled from top to bottom with Putin’s political yes-men and SVR (Sluzhba Vneshney Razvedki), Russia’s successor to the KGB.

 

Many experts agree and for good reason that the Soviet Union was the world’s greatest counterintelligence state. Indeed, even despite the failures caused by the elimination of ¾ of Soviet intelligence agents during Stalin’s purges, the Kremlin’s failure to properly assess information gathered by agents in the field because the information did not conform to existing Party biases and assumptions (Stalin’s costly denials about imminent Nazi German intentions and the demand for devotion of ever greater resources to his paranoia about the British come to mind), the Soviet Union had without argument the most extensive and highly successful human intelligence network anywhere in the world.  

 

From early on Soviet NKVD and OGPU agents succeeded in penetrating the “commanding heights” of any power they wished. Britain and its security and intelligence services were not immune, nor in Washington the White House, State Department, War Department, and OSS (World War II predecessor to the CIA), nor either were the governments of Italy, France, Spain, and anyone else, including Nazi Germany, from the placement of agents at the most sensitive positions within the inner circles of power. In the UK among the many the Soviets had cultivated, were the so-called “Magnificent 5”, five British university students who later entered various important positions in British government, including at Whitehall. Among the likes of Kim Philby were those responsible for handing over so much political and technical secret information that Stalin knew more about the meeting at Yalta with Churchill and Roosevelt than did Churchill or Roosevelt; as well he knew more about the British TUBE ALLOYS project to develop a nuclear bomb than did many among the most privy in British government. Kim Philby was later placed in charge of MI6 Section IX, which was the British anti-Soviet counterintelligence directorate, with obviously unpleasant consequences for the West.

 

The KGB also pioneered the art of agent provocateur to a degree of success never before seen on the world stage, as well as that of organizing terrorist proxies working on its behalf, such as Palestinian groups who received direct funding and material support from Lubyanka. Work done by Nazi Germany to destabilize the Sudetenland, Austria, and Poland prior to the Wehrmacht invasion pales by comparison.

 

And Soviet agents ran their networks effectively unopposed until the start of the Cold War, but still enjoyed an SIS and CIA severally throttled by political elements within both Western countries until the Reagan/Thatcher era, enabling the Soviets to run arms and personnel even into the US homeland across Mexican and Canadian borders and sea ports (though the Soviets found it harder to place illegals (illegally present operatives operating under false papers) in the US later on than in the Soviet Union’s ideological heyday). At the same time however, Soviet successes in stealing Western technology were legend in the vastness of their success. By some estimates, stolen Western technology made up for over 70% of Soviet technological advances and saved the cash-starved regime billions of dollars – no doubt helping to keep it on life support for many more years than might otherwise have been sustainable. Though most of its agents became more interested in working for cash than politics, this shortcoming was easy to overlook since because of the lax realities of Western counterintelligence, risks were relatively slim and the payout was not.

 

The main obstacle for the most successful intelligence state in world history however was not nearly so much the man in the field as the political bosses at the top who refused and at times severely punished the messenger when he brought information which did not connect with prior political assumptions.

 

This main obstacle is no longer in the way. In an even much greater way than former Soviet leader Yuri Andropov (an ex-KGB chief) could have imagined, the government under Vladimir Putin (also a former KGB man) has unfettered latitude to follow the policies dictated by thorough and correct intelligence analysis. No longer forced to comport information with ideology, spies and analysts are the true beneficiaries of Gorbachev’s “glasnost” and “perestroika” movements.

 

 

At a time with US human information gathering at one of its weakest partly due to Clinton-era cutbacks in CIA manpower (by some accounts up to 80%), not much is known of Russian activities apart from the occasional spy we’ve managed to catch in the past few years or evidence of SVR background work in Iran, Saddam’s Iraq, Syria, and other hotspots. This lack of eyes coupled with a general lack of interest in political circles in the West also aid the SVR phoenix in its daily tasks.

 

It may strike some as remarkably naïve that President Bush would claim to have looked into Putin’s soul and seen only goodness, particularly since the first President (and former head of CIA) Bush was no stranger to the world of deception. But George W. Bush would not be alone in making too brief an assessment of his Muscovite counterpart. One must only look at the administrations of Johnson, Nixon, Ford, and Carter to see this apathy in the West – even in the face of a full-scale Cold War – is nothing new. But time may be the only thing that tells. We do know there has yet been very little movement to harden assets against Chinese espionage – a force which promises and in many respects is outdoing the old KGB in the sophistication and success of its work, and one can only imagine that interest in Russian activity may be even further pushed back on the list of priorities among many in Washington. But we do both at our peril. While many may believe that the military coup failed when the KGB led by Vladimir Alexandrovich Kryuchkov attempted it against Gorbachev in 1991, what they may not see is that what failed was a coup against a coup (as Khrushchev learned, Soviet coups didn’t always involve tanks). As Alexei Yegorov then-head of counterintelligence said after taking part in the failed military coup in ’91 as he was being led away: “Everything is clear now. I am such an old idiot. I’ve really f****ed up.” As Christopher Andrew Points out in “The Sword and the Shield”, “Instead of repudiating its Soviet past, however, the SVR saw itself as the heir of the old FCD (First Chief Directorate – foreign intelligence)”. Russian secret services today are nothing more than the proud heirs of their KGB legacy, but they no longer work as mere caretakers of the asylum.

 

As such, it could be reasoned that the most productive of KGB tactics still prevail today in Putin’s Russia and with its influence abroad, but perhaps with greater freedom and efficiency than in former times. The Russian mob today is likely little more than the “dirtyworks” operating arm of the SVR, where everything from assassinations and kidnappings to nuclear technology sales can be conducted in such a way that responsibility is sidestepped and focus is not seriously drawn or couched in foreign governments as a national security threat emanating out of Moscow. But this tactic too is nothing new: As one senior Italian diplomat (and honeytrap victim) discovered during the Cold War, Soviet agents were quite adept at this. After he was lured into an illicit affair with a female KGB swallow, it was then discovered that embarrassingly compromising photographs were surreptitiously taken. The diplomat was told that these photographs of him (being seduced by a Soviet agent) had actually been taken by a criminal gang(1) and that Soviet officials acting allegedly as the white-hatted intermediary would be happy to step in and prevent their publication by these criminal elements, provided the Italian diplomat cooperate by working for the KGB. Blackmail of corporate interests of course also went on both as a key source of S&T and as a way to get those corporations to ply political pressure on their Western governments in support of Soviet aims. As Bill Gertz mentions in his new book “Enemies: How America's Foes Steal Our Vital Secrets--and How We Let It Happen”, along with a human spying campaign that equals if not exceeds that undertaken by the Soviets, Russian SIGINT agents today together with other operations additionally continue to aggressively hack into US government computer networks. What's more, Russia still refuses to outlaw spamming by Russian "criminal" elements (a technique infamous for taking advantage of using malicious code embedded into e-mail which can then be used to break into a computer or computer network and steal or alter information). Many of the most aggressive hacking attempts have been noted as coming out of Russia and Eastern Europe (as well as China). With the pilfering of government and private personnel and client records (as I covered extensively here) also comes another asset: blackmail – an invaluable asset for an intelligence organization whose historical use of the tactic is pro forma. The plundering of our national secrets today surely has Ronald Reagan spinning in his grave but he may be the lucky one.

 

While we would enjoy the idea of better opportunities for relations between Westerners and the average Russian, the Putin government is proving to be nothing more than the old barn with a new paint job; a dictatorship of the intelligence officer.

 

 

RELATED: The entire Matt Drudge radio interview with Bill Gertz recorded three days ago can be found at a blog called "Drudge Report Archives". (DRA appears to be unafilliated with Matt Drudge's show or website The Drudge Report.)

 

 

Posted by Martin at 04:29 AM | Comments (5)

September 13, 2006

PLANET MORONIA: More Rope-Weaving at Google

 

 

I’m sure many of us have read from Drudge today that Google is set to start a for-profit charity to supposedly fix poverty, and the far-left’s “new AIDS” global warming.* Part of that plan, according to the NYT piece mentioned by Drudge, is to develop a super-fuel efficiant car, which in turn might be offered to countries like China at substantial profit for Google: "Six months into the job, [Google.org executive director Dr. Larry Brilliant] has traveled […] to China to discuss clean energy alternatives," for the allegedly altruistic reason of helping the environment. Of course, contrary to what many may think about any charity Jesse Jackson may have founded, Google is actually officially planning to establish this as a for-profit entity, which would of course help to keep it out of trouble later on when its "charity" work was disovered to have added to other Google-babies which will in fact be passing profits back to the founders.

 

Naturally a lot of questions will come about from a for-profit corporation founded with $1 billion for questionable ends, though there isn’t necessarily anything inherently wrong with the concept founding a charity on a for-profit basis. But there’s little doubt the Chinese will be able to offer extensive consultation for this based on much experience, perhaps as a way to say “thanks” for being the handmaiden in oppressing and censoring China's own people or as a simple gesture of fraternity in worldview. Maybe other Google groupies like Hu Jintao will even come to the ribbon-cutting ceremony.

 

The report says that the purpose of the for-profit status is to allow “it to fund startup companies, form partnerships with venture capitalists, and even lobby Congress”. I wonder where Google learned that trick. So this “charity”, given Google’s dubious record and loyalties, essentially plans to start up what amount to front organizations, attempt to entangle honest businesses into uncomfortable alliances, and apply pressure on political officials in a potential three-way quid pro quo of quantifiable questionability.

 

While I have no problem with charities' inherent right to exercise free speech (I would be very happy to see current tax restrictions on 501(c)(3) type groups stricken, which currently prevent those groups from making their Constitutionally protected voices heard), Google however should be viewed with suspicion, if for no other reason than its ability to leverage massive amounts of information which in turn could be used to pressure elected officials or others into giving it what it wants. Further, as a part of its parent Google, such a charity, though public, would be able to conceal details of its earnings as part of those of Google's overall. What's more, Its founders have proven the parent company incredibly dishonest and given to extreme ideological pursuits in the past and actively supporting the extremism of others (such as cooperating with oppressive regimes in acts of oppression and refusing to cooperate with Western governments during reasonable inquiries and basically giving aid to dangerous criminals, infringing on user-privacy across the board, being caught in blatant hypocrisy in that area, censoring advertisers with which it does not agree, and a host of other far-left political activities). And the latest news from the Mountain View, CA based company which might at some point open doors for Google and other Western companies and interests (who tow the line to Google et al) to provide cleaner energy in China seems to indicate we can expect nothing less than more of the same.

 

 

 

 

 

* Blogbat has labeled global warming the left’s “new AIDS” because of how cynically the left has used AIDS over the past two decades and its suffering victims to advance its own agenda that, as history has shown us, leads only to indignity, poverty, violence, and poor health among its realm of subjects. Naturally, when it no longer suited the left to promote the needs of AIDS sufferers, it quickly fell out of the left's favor, just like the famines and atrocities still raging in Africa.

 

Posted by Martin at 11:39 PM | Comments (1)

September 11, 2006

September 11: Five Years Yet Remembered

 

 

Remembering September is not such a hard thing to do anymore, and especially this year. Five years after the attacks killing thousands in New York, Washington DC, and Pennsylvania, most of us remember why we are fighting now.

 

In memory of those who sacrificed everything that day however, I’ve put together a video montage of the more memorable moments from that day and the days which immediately followed. (watch video below) The song which plays during the slide show was recorded by Julie Miller on her “Broken Things” album in 1999.

 

 

 

Let us not forget to pray for the families affected by 9/11, or those now sacrificing and serving with our armed forces.

 

 

UPDATES:

 

Commemorating...

 

New Yorker Angel at WOTS blog has written one of the most eloquent and heartfelt personal accounts from 9/11; it is really worth your read.

 

Atlas Shruggs posts a magnificant collection of the most powerful and stirring images from 9/11, along with a somber reminder of the nature of our conflict.

 

On the warfront...

 

Michelle Malkin tackles the conspiracy theorists

 

Davids Mediankritik blog exposes the nonsensical anti-Bush German media circus that still wishes Kerry had been elected, supposing him able to go back in time and undo 9/11. (German)

 

How did and does most of the media in the Muslim world cover 9/11? Captain's Quarters links to a documentary recently produced by the Middle East Research Institute.

 

Right Truth on "What we have learned since September 11".

 

 

 

Posted by Martin at 05:53 AM | Comments (4)

September 08, 2006

PLANET MORONIA: Anyone Surprised?

Clintons call to censor ABC 9/11 drama

 

 

 

The New York Post has posted a story that reports, “A furious Bill Clinton is warning ABC that its mini-series ‘The Path to 9/11’ grossly misrepresents his pursuit of Osama bin Laden - and he is demanding the network ‘pull the drama’ if changes aren't made.” The article went on to say,

 

Clinton, whose aides first learned from a TV trailer about a week ago that the miniseries would slam his administration, was "surprised" and "incredulous" when told about the film's slant, sources said.

 

Of course they were, all these years they thought ABC was on their side.

 

Albright and former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger also dashed off letters to Iger [at ABC], accusing the network of lying in the miniseries and demanding changes.

 

Apparently Maddeningly Not-So-Bright and Handy Sandy the Burglar were upset because the movie failed to show how she gave nuclear technology to the North Koreans, who in turn shared it with terrorist-sponsoring states in the Middle East; or Burglar’s famous scene where he stuffed evidence of Clintonian incompetence and treason into his socks to keep it out of sight of the 9/11 Commission et al.

 

Maybe the Clintons should hire their (and Handy Burglar’s) good friends the Chinese to shut down ABC like the regime just did with the outspoken website run by Huang Liantian. Or it could get Google or Yahoo to pull any advertising. I admit it might be strange having the Chinese working for the Clintons instead of the other way around, but surely something between old friends can be worked out.

 

I love Clintonian logic, especially where it enters discussion on political speech and the Constitution: When CBS aired a factually seriously flawed miniseries on President Reagan, the Clintons were silent. But if anyone dare consider airing a perspective on the Clinton White House not officially sanctioned by the commissariat, it must be banned… or edited to remove any material deemed offensive to the Clinton Committee.

 

The difference between the Reagan and the Clinton pieces is that the details going into much of the Reagan miniseries were crafted in spite of personal accounts by those close to the Gipper, whereas the 9/11 movie’s details were drawn from personal accounts by those close to the Clintons and their staff among other reliable accounts, of which some were offered under oath.

 

But it’s nothing new to find the radical among liberals trying to silence speech with which they do not agree, particularly when it is the political or religious speech actually explicitly protected by the First Amendment, as we’ve seen over the years by watching the witch hunts undertaken by the ACLU. The ACLU and the far left in America have much in common in this area with four other groups: common criminals and thugs, the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and Islamofascists. The fact therefore that once again, the champions of political censorship attempt to silence their opposition or anything which contradicts the official party line should be of no surprise.

 

 

RELATED: On free speech, Angel at WOTS has dug up some notable quotes, even as ABC and Disney have caved for likely fear of having their collective kneecaps broken. As Ann Coulter says...

 

AND ANOTHER THING: I forgot to add this earlier - a link to Mark Levin's blog, where he posted some of those pesky facts the "Clintonoids" are denying.   

 

 

Posted by Martin at 02:50 PM | Comments (2)

September 04, 2006

Blogbat's Shot of the Week: Labor Pains

Sending mixed messages?

 

 

I gleefully snapped this whilst inside a local Micro Center computer store yesterday. The sign seemed to say, "come for service, upgrades, and repairs... but get one of these instead". An unfortunate mixed message to be sure!

 

Yes, Labor Day - the day on which most everyone else doesn’t work either, and therefore a perfect time to post this pic, n'est ce pas? Given the abundant state of poor technology customer service these days, maybe the sign was a Freudian slip. But Micro Center has one big thing going for it: It's not Comp USA (which was rated among the worst in customer service more than once; also see here, here, here, here, here, and here) or Fry's Electronics (see previous Shot of the Day: Buyer Be Wearied).

 

Happy Belabored Day, kids!

 

 

Posted by Martin at 01:28 AM | Comments (2)

September 01, 2006

Quote of the Day: Vicenté Fox

 

 

Whoever attacks our laws and institutions also attacks our history and Mexico.

 

– Mexican President Vicenté Fox, upset today that leftist legislators in Mexico prevented his final state of the nation address by storming the podium.

 

Either what’s good for the goose is good for the gander or El Presidente is just another iteration of a long list of rabid fascist nationalists (somewhat in the vein of Mussolini, Hitler, et al) which look on other nations and their laws and values as inferior to their own. Naturally, we’ve known for awhile that:

 

     Mexico uses its armed troops to prevent foreigners from illegally crossing into its country, but doesn’t seem to believe anyone else should be able to enforce similar policies in any fashion,

 

     Mexico does not even allow naturalized Mexicans born elsewhere to vote, yet expects other countries to give the vote to Mexican nationals even if they do not naturalize,

 

      Mexico forbids entry by foreigners into Mexico unless they can prove they have their own financial and healthcare resources, have no crime record, will provide for their own children’s education, and be a benefit to Mexico even as the Mexican government expects other countries not to demand the same of visitors from Mexico.

 

This quote by Fox of course makes for a great case in point of what a Mexifascist leader is all about: lies and double standards. It also shows clearly once again why we don’t need another Jimmy Carter in the White House.

 

 

 

Posted by Martin at 11:18 PM | Comments (2)