Saturday, November 14, 2009
A very smll elite rule everything!!
Wolf Blitzer questions why any one would defend Maj. Hasan.
Inside Britains's Israel Lobby
Is your physical Gold actually Gold plated Tungsten?
On Doing God’s Work
By: Rob Kirby
“Gold Finger - A New Take On Operation Grand Slam With A Tungsten Twist”
I’ve already reported on irregular physical gold settlements which occurred in London, England back in the first week of October, 2009. Specifically, these settlements involved the intermediation of at least one Central Bank [The Bank of England] to resolve allocated settlements on behalf of J.P. Morgan and Deutsche Bank – who DID NOT have the gold bullion that they had sold short and were contracted to deliver. At the same time I reported on two other unusual occurrences:
1] - irregularities in the publication of the gold ETF - GLD’s bar list from Sept. 25 – Oct.14 where the length of the bar list went from 1,381 pages to under 200 pages and then back up to 800 or so pages.
2] - reports of 400 oz. “good delivery” bricks of gold found gutted and filled with tungsten within the confines of LBMA approved vaults in Hong Kong.
Why Tungsten?
If anyone were contemplating creating “fake” gold bars, tungsten [at roughly $10 per pound] would be the metal of choice since it has the exact same density as gold making a fake bar salted with tungsten indistinguishable from a solid gold bar by simply weighing it.
Unfortunately, there are now more sordid details to report.
When the news of tungsten “salted” gold bars in Hong Kong first surfaced, many people who I am acquainted with automatically assumed that these bars were manufactured in China – because China is generally viewed as “the knock-off capital of the world”.
Here’s what I now understand really happened:
The amount of “salted tungsten” gold bars in question was allegedly between 5,600 and 5,700 – 400 oz – good delivery bars [roughly 60 metric tonnes].
This was apparently all highly orchestrated by an extremely well financed criminal operation. Within mere hours of this scam being identified – Chinese officials had many of the perpetrators in custody. And here’s what the Chinese allegedly uncovered:
Roughly 15 years ago – during the Clinton Administration [think Robert Rubin, Sir Alan Greenspan and Lawrence Summers] – between 1.3 and 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten blanks were allegedly manufactured by a very high-end, sophisticated refiner in the USA [more than 16 Thousand metric tonnes]. Subsequently, 640,000 of these tungsten blanks received their gold plating and WERE shipped to Ft. Knox and remain there to this day. I know folks who have copies of the original shipping docs with dates and exact weights of “tungsten” bars shipped to Ft. Knox.
The balance of this 1.3 million – 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten cache was also plated and then allegedly “sold” into the international market. Apparently, the global market is literally “stuffed full of 400 oz salted bars”.
Makes one wonder if the Indians were smart enough to assay their 200 tonne haul from the IMF?
A Slow Motion Train Wreck, Years in the Making
An obscure news item originally published in the N.Y. Post [written by Jennifer Anderson] in late Jan. 04 has always ‘stuck in my craw’:
DA investigating NYMEX executive - Manhattan, New York, district attorney's office, Stuart Smith - Melting Pot - Brief Article – Feb. 2, 2004
A top executive at the New York Mercantile Exchange is being investigated by the Manhattan district attorney. Sources close to the exchange said that Stuart Smith, senior vice president of operations at the exchange, was served with a search warrant by the district attorney's office last week. Details of the investigation have not been disclosed, but a NYMEX spokeswoman said it was unrelated to any of the exchange's markets. She declined to comment further other than to say that charges had not been brought. A spokeswoman for the Manhattan district attorney's office also declined comment.
The offices of the Senior Vice President of Operations - NYMEX – is exactly where you would go to find the records [serial number and smelter of origin] for EVERY GOLD BAR ever PHYSICALLY settled on the exchange. They are required to keep these records. These precise records would show the lineage of all the physical gold settled on the exchange and hence "prove" that the amount of gold in question could not have possibly come from the U.S. mining operations – because the amounts in question coming from U.S. smelters would undoubtedly be vastly bigger than domestic mine production.
We never have found out what happened to poor ole Stuart Smith – after his offices were "raided" – he took administrative leave from the NYMEX and he has never been heard from since. Amazingly [or perhaps not], there never was any follow up on in the media on the original story as well as ZERO developments ever stemming from D.A. Morgenthau’s office who executed the search warrant.
Are we to believe that NYMEX offices were raided, the Sr. V.P. of operations then takes leave - all for nothing?
These revelations should provide a “new filter” through which Rothschild exiting the gold market back in 2004 begins to make a little more sense:
“LONDON, April 14, 2004 (Reuters) - NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd., the London-based unit of investment bank Rothschild [ROT.UL], will withdraw from trading commodities, including gold, in London as it reviews its operations, it said on Wednesday.”
Interestingly, GATA’s Bill Murphy speculated about this back in 2004;
“Why is Rothschild leaving the gold business at this time my colleagues and I conjectured today? Just a guess on my part, but suspect:”
*SOMETHING IS AMISS. THEY KNOW A BIG GOLD SCANDAL IS COMING AND THEY WANT NO PART OF IT. …”
“ROTHSCHILD WANTS OUT BEFORE THE PROVERBIAL "S" HITS THE FAN.” BILL MURPHY, LEMETROPOLE, 4-18-2004
Coincidentally [or perhaps, not?], GLD Began Trading 11/12/2004
In light of what has occurred – regarding the Gold ETF, GLD – after reviewing their prospectus yet again, it becomes pretty clear that GLD was established to purposefully deflect investment dollars away from legitimate gold pursuits and to create a stealth, cesspool / catch-all, slush-fund and a likely destination for many of these “salted tungsten bars” where they would never see the light of day – hidden behind the following legalese “shield” from the law:
Excerpt from the GLD prospectus on page 11:
http://www.spdrgoldshares.com/media/GLD/file/SPDRGoldTrustProspectus.pdf
Gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket may not meet the London Good Delivery Standards and, if a Basket is issued against such gold, the Trust may suffer a loss. Neither the Trustee nor the Custodian independently confirms the fineness of the gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket. The gold bars allocated to the Trust by the Custodian may be different from the reported fineness or weight required by the LBMA’s standards for gold bars delivered in settlement of a gold trade, or the London Good Delivery Standards, the standards required by the Trust. If the Trustee nevertheless issues a Basket against such gold, and if the Custodian fails to satisfy its obligation to credit the Trust the amount of any deficiency, the Trust may suffer a loss.
The Fed Has Already Been Caught Lying Liberty Coin’s Patrick Heller recently wrote,
Earlier this year, the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA), filed a second Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Federal Reserve System for documents from 1990 to date having to do with gold swaps, gold swapped, or proposed gold swaps.
On Aug. 5, The Federal Reserve responded to this FOIA request by adding two more documents to those disclosed to GATA in April 2008 from the earlier FOIA request. These documents totaled 173 pages, many parts of which were redacted (covered up to omit sections of text). The Fed's response also noted that there were 137 pages of documents not disclosed that were alleged to be exempt from disclosure.
GATA appealed this determination on Aug. 20. The appeal asked for more information to substantiate the legitimacy of the claimed exemptions from disclosure and an explanation on why some documents, such as one posted on the Federal Reserve Web site that discusses gold swaps, were not included in the Aug. 5 document release.
In a Sept. 17, 2009, letter on Federal Reserve System letterhead, Federal Reserve governor Kevin M. Warsh completely denied GATA's appeal. The entire text of this letter can be examined at http://www.gata.org/files/GATAFedResponse-09-17-2009.pdf.
The first paragraph on the third page is the most revealing. Warsh wrote, "In connection with your appeal, I have confirmed that the information withheld under exemption 4 consists of confidential commercial or financial information relating to the operations of the Federal Reserve Banks that was obtained within the meaning of exemption 4. This includes information relating to swap arrangements with foreign banks on behalf of the Federal Reserve System and is not the type of information that is customarily disclosed to the public. This information was properly withheld from you."
This paragraph will likely be one of the most important news stories of the year.
Though not stated in plain English, this paragraph is an admission that the Fed has in the past and may now be engaged in trading gold swaps. Warsh's letter contradicts previous Fed statements to GATA denying that it ever engaged in gold swaps during the time period between Jan. 1, 1990 and the present.
[Perhaps most importantly], this was GATA's second FOIA request to the Federal Reserve on the issue of gold swaps. The 173 pages of documents received for the 2009 FOIA request all pre-dated the 2007 FOIA request, which means they should have been released in the response to the earlier FOIA request. This establishes a likelihood that the Federal Reserve has failed to adequately search or disclose relevant documents. Further, the Fed response admitted that it had copies of relevant records that originally appeared on the Treasury Department Web site, but failed to include them in its response.
Now that Federal Reserve governor Warsh has admitted that the Fed has lied in the past about the Fed’s involvement with gold. It should now be very clear to everyone why the Fed is lying and the true nature of what they are hiding / withholding.
On Doing God’s Work
An important footnote to consider is the inter-twined-ness of the U.S. Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury [can anyone really tell them apart?] as well as this duopoly’s two principal agents – J.P. Morgan-Chase and Goldman Sachs. When one truly grasps the nature of these highly conflicted relationships it gives a fuller meaning to words recently uttered by Goldman head, Lloyd Blankfein, who claimed,
“I’m doing god’s work”
Does this really mean that Mr. Blankfein believes that the Federal Reserve is god? You can judge for yourself. While the Fed prints money like no one else could - except god almighty himself [or Gideon Gono, perhaps?] – I really doubt that was the intent back in 1864, when the U.S. adopted “In God We Trust” as their official motto.
And that’s my two cents worth for today.
Got [real] physical gold yet?
Rob Kirby
By: Rob Kirby
“Gold Finger - A New Take On Operation Grand Slam With A Tungsten Twist”
I’ve already reported on irregular physical gold settlements which occurred in London, England back in the first week of October, 2009. Specifically, these settlements involved the intermediation of at least one Central Bank [The Bank of England] to resolve allocated settlements on behalf of J.P. Morgan and Deutsche Bank – who DID NOT have the gold bullion that they had sold short and were contracted to deliver. At the same time I reported on two other unusual occurrences:
1] - irregularities in the publication of the gold ETF - GLD’s bar list from Sept. 25 – Oct.14 where the length of the bar list went from 1,381 pages to under 200 pages and then back up to 800 or so pages.
2] - reports of 400 oz. “good delivery” bricks of gold found gutted and filled with tungsten within the confines of LBMA approved vaults in Hong Kong.
Why Tungsten?
If anyone were contemplating creating “fake” gold bars, tungsten [at roughly $10 per pound] would be the metal of choice since it has the exact same density as gold making a fake bar salted with tungsten indistinguishable from a solid gold bar by simply weighing it.
Unfortunately, there are now more sordid details to report.
When the news of tungsten “salted” gold bars in Hong Kong first surfaced, many people who I am acquainted with automatically assumed that these bars were manufactured in China – because China is generally viewed as “the knock-off capital of the world”.
Here’s what I now understand really happened:
The amount of “salted tungsten” gold bars in question was allegedly between 5,600 and 5,700 – 400 oz – good delivery bars [roughly 60 metric tonnes].
This was apparently all highly orchestrated by an extremely well financed criminal operation. Within mere hours of this scam being identified – Chinese officials had many of the perpetrators in custody. And here’s what the Chinese allegedly uncovered:
Roughly 15 years ago – during the Clinton Administration [think Robert Rubin, Sir Alan Greenspan and Lawrence Summers] – between 1.3 and 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten blanks were allegedly manufactured by a very high-end, sophisticated refiner in the USA [more than 16 Thousand metric tonnes]. Subsequently, 640,000 of these tungsten blanks received their gold plating and WERE shipped to Ft. Knox and remain there to this day. I know folks who have copies of the original shipping docs with dates and exact weights of “tungsten” bars shipped to Ft. Knox.
The balance of this 1.3 million – 1.5 million 400 oz tungsten cache was also plated and then allegedly “sold” into the international market. Apparently, the global market is literally “stuffed full of 400 oz salted bars”.
Makes one wonder if the Indians were smart enough to assay their 200 tonne haul from the IMF?
A Slow Motion Train Wreck, Years in the Making
An obscure news item originally published in the N.Y. Post [written by Jennifer Anderson] in late Jan. 04 has always ‘stuck in my craw’:
DA investigating NYMEX executive - Manhattan, New York, district attorney's office, Stuart Smith - Melting Pot - Brief Article – Feb. 2, 2004
A top executive at the New York Mercantile Exchange is being investigated by the Manhattan district attorney. Sources close to the exchange said that Stuart Smith, senior vice president of operations at the exchange, was served with a search warrant by the district attorney's office last week. Details of the investigation have not been disclosed, but a NYMEX spokeswoman said it was unrelated to any of the exchange's markets. She declined to comment further other than to say that charges had not been brought. A spokeswoman for the Manhattan district attorney's office also declined comment.
The offices of the Senior Vice President of Operations - NYMEX – is exactly where you would go to find the records [serial number and smelter of origin] for EVERY GOLD BAR ever PHYSICALLY settled on the exchange. They are required to keep these records. These precise records would show the lineage of all the physical gold settled on the exchange and hence "prove" that the amount of gold in question could not have possibly come from the U.S. mining operations – because the amounts in question coming from U.S. smelters would undoubtedly be vastly bigger than domestic mine production.
We never have found out what happened to poor ole Stuart Smith – after his offices were "raided" – he took administrative leave from the NYMEX and he has never been heard from since. Amazingly [or perhaps not], there never was any follow up on in the media on the original story as well as ZERO developments ever stemming from D.A. Morgenthau’s office who executed the search warrant.
Are we to believe that NYMEX offices were raided, the Sr. V.P. of operations then takes leave - all for nothing?
These revelations should provide a “new filter” through which Rothschild exiting the gold market back in 2004 begins to make a little more sense:
“LONDON, April 14, 2004 (Reuters) - NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd., the London-based unit of investment bank Rothschild [ROT.UL], will withdraw from trading commodities, including gold, in London as it reviews its operations, it said on Wednesday.”
Interestingly, GATA’s Bill Murphy speculated about this back in 2004;
“Why is Rothschild leaving the gold business at this time my colleagues and I conjectured today? Just a guess on my part, but suspect:”
*SOMETHING IS AMISS. THEY KNOW A BIG GOLD SCANDAL IS COMING AND THEY WANT NO PART OF IT. …”
“ROTHSCHILD WANTS OUT BEFORE THE PROVERBIAL "S" HITS THE FAN.” BILL MURPHY, LEMETROPOLE, 4-18-2004
Coincidentally [or perhaps, not?], GLD Began Trading 11/12/2004
In light of what has occurred – regarding the Gold ETF, GLD – after reviewing their prospectus yet again, it becomes pretty clear that GLD was established to purposefully deflect investment dollars away from legitimate gold pursuits and to create a stealth, cesspool / catch-all, slush-fund and a likely destination for many of these “salted tungsten bars” where they would never see the light of day – hidden behind the following legalese “shield” from the law:
Excerpt from the GLD prospectus on page 11:
http://www.spdrgoldshares.com/media/GLD/file/SPDRGoldTrustProspectus.pdf
Gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket may not meet the London Good Delivery Standards and, if a Basket is issued against such gold, the Trust may suffer a loss. Neither the Trustee nor the Custodian independently confirms the fineness of the gold bars allocated to the Trust in connection with the creation of a Basket. The gold bars allocated to the Trust by the Custodian may be different from the reported fineness or weight required by the LBMA’s standards for gold bars delivered in settlement of a gold trade, or the London Good Delivery Standards, the standards required by the Trust. If the Trustee nevertheless issues a Basket against such gold, and if the Custodian fails to satisfy its obligation to credit the Trust the amount of any deficiency, the Trust may suffer a loss.
The Fed Has Already Been Caught Lying Liberty Coin’s Patrick Heller recently wrote,
Earlier this year, the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA), filed a second Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the Federal Reserve System for documents from 1990 to date having to do with gold swaps, gold swapped, or proposed gold swaps.
On Aug. 5, The Federal Reserve responded to this FOIA request by adding two more documents to those disclosed to GATA in April 2008 from the earlier FOIA request. These documents totaled 173 pages, many parts of which were redacted (covered up to omit sections of text). The Fed's response also noted that there were 137 pages of documents not disclosed that were alleged to be exempt from disclosure.
GATA appealed this determination on Aug. 20. The appeal asked for more information to substantiate the legitimacy of the claimed exemptions from disclosure and an explanation on why some documents, such as one posted on the Federal Reserve Web site that discusses gold swaps, were not included in the Aug. 5 document release.
In a Sept. 17, 2009, letter on Federal Reserve System letterhead, Federal Reserve governor Kevin M. Warsh completely denied GATA's appeal. The entire text of this letter can be examined at http://www.gata.org/files/GATAFedResponse-09-17-2009.pdf.
The first paragraph on the third page is the most revealing. Warsh wrote, "In connection with your appeal, I have confirmed that the information withheld under exemption 4 consists of confidential commercial or financial information relating to the operations of the Federal Reserve Banks that was obtained within the meaning of exemption 4. This includes information relating to swap arrangements with foreign banks on behalf of the Federal Reserve System and is not the type of information that is customarily disclosed to the public. This information was properly withheld from you."
This paragraph will likely be one of the most important news stories of the year.
Though not stated in plain English, this paragraph is an admission that the Fed has in the past and may now be engaged in trading gold swaps. Warsh's letter contradicts previous Fed statements to GATA denying that it ever engaged in gold swaps during the time period between Jan. 1, 1990 and the present.
[Perhaps most importantly], this was GATA's second FOIA request to the Federal Reserve on the issue of gold swaps. The 173 pages of documents received for the 2009 FOIA request all pre-dated the 2007 FOIA request, which means they should have been released in the response to the earlier FOIA request. This establishes a likelihood that the Federal Reserve has failed to adequately search or disclose relevant documents. Further, the Fed response admitted that it had copies of relevant records that originally appeared on the Treasury Department Web site, but failed to include them in its response.
Now that Federal Reserve governor Warsh has admitted that the Fed has lied in the past about the Fed’s involvement with gold. It should now be very clear to everyone why the Fed is lying and the true nature of what they are hiding / withholding.
On Doing God’s Work
An important footnote to consider is the inter-twined-ness of the U.S. Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury [can anyone really tell them apart?] as well as this duopoly’s two principal agents – J.P. Morgan-Chase and Goldman Sachs. When one truly grasps the nature of these highly conflicted relationships it gives a fuller meaning to words recently uttered by Goldman head, Lloyd Blankfein, who claimed,
“I’m doing god’s work”
Does this really mean that Mr. Blankfein believes that the Federal Reserve is god? You can judge for yourself. While the Fed prints money like no one else could - except god almighty himself [or Gideon Gono, perhaps?] – I really doubt that was the intent back in 1864, when the U.S. adopted “In God We Trust” as their official motto.
And that’s my two cents worth for today.
Got [real] physical gold yet?
Rob Kirby
Friday, November 13, 2009
Hoodwinked?
The latest a stunning refashioning of the events at Fort Hood may put another person in the spotlight. It has emerged that a previously unknown person may have fired shots that brought down Maj. Hasan. Kimberly Munley was the heroine America desperately sought in the hours after the massacre at the Fort Hood army base in Texas. Both shooters were armed, while on base, contrary to base policy. 2 or 3 shooters is now the re-versioned report being floated by the Army.
In this latest version a previously unknown person may in fact have fired the bullets that brought down Maj. Hasan, not Munley. A witness said it was unclear whether Munley fired off a shot before another person arrived, shooting Hasan until he fell to the ground. It is still unclear who actually shot him as both person claim to be the hero. In TV appearances, Munley and the other person have thus far failed to clear up exactly who shot him. Munley insisted that she fired at Hasan. The tale of Munley's apparent heroism roughly parallels the case of Jessica Lynch. It is becoming more plausible that Maj. Hasan was setup to be a patsy rather than an innocent hit by "friendly" fire. Until the forensic evidence is released to the special intelligence investigation no one will know the actual truth.
Contrary to all other previous claims by the Army, Hasan was born in the USA not Palestine. Maj. Hasan was born in the USA to Jordanian parents not Palestinian parents. On numerous occasions the Army has attempted to link him to Palestinian unrest, al-qaeda or other extremist groups. The links have here-to-for been floated by the Army's propaganda arm, USASOCOM have been proven to be unproductive.
In another more startling reversal for the Army. Contrary to their preposterous reports, Hasan's military personnel record indicates that he did not apply for an early discharge from the army, as a conscientious objector or for any reason as previously stated by the Army. He had never been written up for poor performance. Nearly every news item from the Army and has issued through USASOCOM has turned out to be false or misleading.
The investigation into the real circumstances surrounding the stories offered by the Army and USASOCOM are being investigated by John Brennan, an advisor on homeland security. The Intelligence investigation is being met with fierce resistance by the Army, because they claim it will interfere with the Army's criminal investigation. If it interferes with their criminal investigation, why were they constantly grandstanding in the "News Media"? Thus the intelligence investigation is being denied critical forensic evidence necessary to sort through the many versions of the Army's stories. According to "The Patriot Act" John Brennan has full authority to investigate any investigation being made by the Army. He will not be hoodwinked and he has the full faith of the Department of Homeland Security and the President and will receive all the support that he needs to ferret out the truth, irrespective of Army stonewalling.
In this latest version a previously unknown person may in fact have fired the bullets that brought down Maj. Hasan, not Munley. A witness said it was unclear whether Munley fired off a shot before another person arrived, shooting Hasan until he fell to the ground. It is still unclear who actually shot him as both person claim to be the hero. In TV appearances, Munley and the other person have thus far failed to clear up exactly who shot him. Munley insisted that she fired at Hasan. The tale of Munley's apparent heroism roughly parallels the case of Jessica Lynch. It is becoming more plausible that Maj. Hasan was setup to be a patsy rather than an innocent hit by "friendly" fire. Until the forensic evidence is released to the special intelligence investigation no one will know the actual truth.
Contrary to all other previous claims by the Army, Hasan was born in the USA not Palestine. Maj. Hasan was born in the USA to Jordanian parents not Palestinian parents. On numerous occasions the Army has attempted to link him to Palestinian unrest, al-qaeda or other extremist groups. The links have here-to-for been floated by the Army's propaganda arm, USASOCOM have been proven to be unproductive.
In another more startling reversal for the Army. Contrary to their preposterous reports, Hasan's military personnel record indicates that he did not apply for an early discharge from the army, as a conscientious objector or for any reason as previously stated by the Army. He had never been written up for poor performance. Nearly every news item from the Army and has issued through USASOCOM has turned out to be false or misleading.
The investigation into the real circumstances surrounding the stories offered by the Army and USASOCOM are being investigated by John Brennan, an advisor on homeland security. The Intelligence investigation is being met with fierce resistance by the Army, because they claim it will interfere with the Army's criminal investigation. If it interferes with their criminal investigation, why were they constantly grandstanding in the "News Media"? Thus the intelligence investigation is being denied critical forensic evidence necessary to sort through the many versions of the Army's stories. According to "The Patriot Act" John Brennan has full authority to investigate any investigation being made by the Army. He will not be hoodwinked and he has the full faith of the Department of Homeland Security and the President and will receive all the support that he needs to ferret out the truth, irrespective of Army stonewalling.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Petraeus Says Afghan Logistics Make Buildup Difficult
C-J
General Petraeus is a master of the understatement, when compared to the master of grandstanding McCrystal. McCrystal disembled infront of Congress when he talked about his part in the Pat Tillman Fraud. He should be fired and dishonorably discharged. In any profession there are 2 parts to your responsibilities: (Ethics) and (Competence) General McCrystal showed he was incompetent nd unethical when he signed the Pat Tillman Fraudulent report. General McCrystal has a 12 to 1 numerical advantage over the Taliban and Al Quaeda plus an overwhelming technological advantage. What he doesn't have is a reliable supply line and the ability to efficiently use the troops he already has.
REAL MEN LOVE LOGISTICS
If the Afghan War was ever winnable the Cheney-Bushistas (bullshistas) would have done so, because they wanted and craved the glory. They soon discovered, after a few staged and super-hyped "successes", that they couldn't win their war and were mired down. To distance themselves from the looming catastrophe, they made a name change from American Forces to NATO Forces. To escape even more embarrassment, for their reckless adventure in Afghanistan, they "ginned up" and super-hyped another war to find those "WMD's" that were here or there and maybe even everywhere. In quick succession they began appointing a series of new NATO and American Commanders in 2 "theaters" of war. (They were all American Generals) Unfortunately all these Generals in Command have adopted historically failed military strategies. They should have read "The Art of War" or the military strategies of Alexander The Great. The Cheney-Bushistas last desperate act before the 2008 elections was to download their unfinished business onto another Presidency and blame it for the loss.
Because the Cheney-Bush Presidency didn't negotiate long term leases with Kyrgyzstan, (A logistical blunder with imminent consequences) the Government of Kyrgyzstan will close the US military base in Manas to Americans. They have virtually ordered the Americans (NATO) out of their Country, shutting an indispensable supply line for America(NATO). The only remaining land supply lines are through the steep gorges and nearly indefensible high mountain passes like the Khyber Pass between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The steep and narrow valley gorges between Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Afghanistan are already under siege and effectively closed. The Taliban have demonstrated they can close any high mountain pass between Afghanistan and Tajikistan or Pakistan, almost at will. America (NATO) may have to fight it's way out of Afghanistan through Pakistan. This is a Military Planer's nightmare and it could come true. Lets hope not, but the logistical odds are against us, about 10 to 1.
If the passes were cut off, then the only exit would be by expensive, cumbersome and limited airlift, leaving most of the heavy weapons and materials behind. Only a moron would deploy forces into areas without reliable logistical support. But that's exactly what the Cheney-Bush Presidency did. The 103,000 troops under McChrystal's command in Afghanistan, include 63,000 Americans, more than half of whom arrived this year as part of an escalation strategy begun under the previous Cheney-Bush Presidency. Under the Obama Presidency the force is set to rise to 110,000 including 68,000 Americans by December 2009.
If you have Google Earth I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the countries on all sides of Afghanistan and ask yourself the following question; How can I give adequate logistical support to the present forces or more forces in the future? Then take a ground eye view of the Khyber Pass and ask yourself; How could I move thousands or even 10 troops through this natural killing field? You can't and you shouldn't because these passes can close at any time for any reason. Currently all passes between Afghanistan and Pakistan are closed because of an "agriculture inspection" quarrel. These switchback passes are narrow and enclosed within steep gorges and high canyon walls. Vulnerable bridges can be closed by landslides, earthquakes, snow, rain, mud slides, flash floods, Taliban attacks or simple quarrels between neighboring tribes. Any of which can disable or wipe out infrastructure for weeks at a time. Imagine the predicament of a battalion including heavy vehicles and tanks caught between two non-existent bridges and a steep cliff on one side and a deep gorge on the other. Do you begin to see their vulnerabilities, now just add rain or snow. Would the Taliban allow them to pass without a single casualty? Even if 1 tank were simply disabled could the others continue unhindered?
All domestic costs including Congressional allocations of about a hundred or so billion dollars a year, will be between $3 to $6 trillion dollars. This is equal to 1/4 to 1/2 our Gross Domestic Production. Most if not all of our domestic programs, including Medi-Care and Social Security will become impossible. Afghanistan will be politically fatal for this and future Presidencies. All choices will end in tears. Now the logical question arises; "Should we bet the farm and go for it"? Unfortunately the Cheney-Bush Presidency already did and the farm is in jeopardy
In the background we can still hear the apoplectic Pentagon shill, Dick Cheney, shouting out his constant and reckless drivel, desperately continuing to shift the blame onto the following Presidency. He is obviously and irresponsibly defending his fabricated justifications for invading Afghanistan and Iraq. There was no meaningful reason to invade Afghanistan. I agree with George F. Will, "Only Pakistan really mattered".
In a recent article by James Cordesman he lays out his reasons for the apparent failures up to today. The main point I would make about his article is; He is fully vested in failed policies and was a prominent talking head during the cheer leading portion of the run-up to the Afghan and Iraqi wars. He also lays out the same tired and discredited view that it's ”Not our fault”. (When will they ever take responsibility for their job?) It is my recollection that during every funding request, they were given more money than they asked for and they spent it. I remember seeing pallets of money being unloaded in Baghdad and it simply disappeared without any accounting, whatsoever. Maybe Afghanistan became the stepsister of Iraq, but they had a job to do and they are now whining about not having sufficient support. Well here is the best advice that the Military/Industrial Complex can get; “Get out now and take responsibility for your failure”.
One correction is necessary. The Cheney-Bushistas knew that the recent history of Afghanistan proved a war was unwinnable and they betray their fore-knowledge by trying to make it Obama's war. President Obama was barely 100 days into his Presidency when the Military-Industrial-GOP complex named it "Obama's War". If it were winnable they would have taken the credit, instead they download their sack of manure on America and call it their patriotic duty.
C-J
By Tony Capaccio
Nov. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Afghanistan’s infrastructure makes any buildup of troops there difficult, General David Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command, said today.
“The reality of Afghanistan is that it’s all hard, all the time,” Petraeus said at a Bloomberg conference in Washington. He said that U.S. forces had “learned a great deal about irregular warfare” from the surge of U.S. troops in Iraq.
Former President George W. Bush’s surge aided social stability in Iraq and reduced the level of violence in the country, Petraeus said.
“The surge was really a surge of ideas as much as it was a surge of forces,” he said. War violence in Iraq is down 90 percent from the spring of 2007, he said.
Petraeus was speaking at a conference held by Bloomberg Ventures, a unit of Bloomberg LP, parent of Bloomberg News.
He said counterinsurgency steps like those used in Iraq can be applied to the conflict in Afghanistan.
“The concepts, the importance of securing and serving the population, helping Afghans with a government that can be seen as legitimate” can be applied while “implemented with a really nuanced understanding of Afghanistan,” Petraeus said.
Petraeus declined to address specifics of the Obama administration’s debate on how many troops to add in Afghanistan over the 68,000 now in place.
In Afghanistan, it would be more difficult than it was in Iraq to quickly build up U.S. forces if Obama decides to send more troops.
“It is really hard to get additional forces in, compared with what we were able to do in Iraq,” Petraeus said. Logistics in Iraq were aided by U.S. infrastructure in Kuwait, he said.
In contrast, he said “there are enormous challenges in that respect in Afghanistan, but the enemy has enormous challenges as well.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Anthony Capaccio in Washington at acapaccio@bloomberg.net
General Petraeus is a master of the understatement, when compared to the master of grandstanding McCrystal. McCrystal disembled infront of Congress when he talked about his part in the Pat Tillman Fraud. He should be fired and dishonorably discharged. In any profession there are 2 parts to your responsibilities: (Ethics) and (Competence) General McCrystal showed he was incompetent nd unethical when he signed the Pat Tillman Fraudulent report. General McCrystal has a 12 to 1 numerical advantage over the Taliban and Al Quaeda plus an overwhelming technological advantage. What he doesn't have is a reliable supply line and the ability to efficiently use the troops he already has.
REAL MEN LOVE LOGISTICS
If the Afghan War was ever winnable the Cheney-Bushistas (bullshistas) would have done so, because they wanted and craved the glory. They soon discovered, after a few staged and super-hyped "successes", that they couldn't win their war and were mired down. To distance themselves from the looming catastrophe, they made a name change from American Forces to NATO Forces. To escape even more embarrassment, for their reckless adventure in Afghanistan, they "ginned up" and super-hyped another war to find those "WMD's" that were here or there and maybe even everywhere. In quick succession they began appointing a series of new NATO and American Commanders in 2 "theaters" of war. (They were all American Generals) Unfortunately all these Generals in Command have adopted historically failed military strategies. They should have read "The Art of War" or the military strategies of Alexander The Great. The Cheney-Bushistas last desperate act before the 2008 elections was to download their unfinished business onto another Presidency and blame it for the loss.
Because the Cheney-Bush Presidency didn't negotiate long term leases with Kyrgyzstan, (A logistical blunder with imminent consequences) the Government of Kyrgyzstan will close the US military base in Manas to Americans. They have virtually ordered the Americans (NATO) out of their Country, shutting an indispensable supply line for America(NATO). The only remaining land supply lines are through the steep gorges and nearly indefensible high mountain passes like the Khyber Pass between Afghanistan and Pakistan. The steep and narrow valley gorges between Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Afghanistan are already under siege and effectively closed. The Taliban have demonstrated they can close any high mountain pass between Afghanistan and Tajikistan or Pakistan, almost at will. America (NATO) may have to fight it's way out of Afghanistan through Pakistan. This is a Military Planer's nightmare and it could come true. Lets hope not, but the logistical odds are against us, about 10 to 1.
If the passes were cut off, then the only exit would be by expensive, cumbersome and limited airlift, leaving most of the heavy weapons and materials behind. Only a moron would deploy forces into areas without reliable logistical support. But that's exactly what the Cheney-Bush Presidency did. The 103,000 troops under McChrystal's command in Afghanistan, include 63,000 Americans, more than half of whom arrived this year as part of an escalation strategy begun under the previous Cheney-Bush Presidency. Under the Obama Presidency the force is set to rise to 110,000 including 68,000 Americans by December 2009.
If you have Google Earth I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the countries on all sides of Afghanistan and ask yourself the following question; How can I give adequate logistical support to the present forces or more forces in the future? Then take a ground eye view of the Khyber Pass and ask yourself; How could I move thousands or even 10 troops through this natural killing field? You can't and you shouldn't because these passes can close at any time for any reason. Currently all passes between Afghanistan and Pakistan are closed because of an "agriculture inspection" quarrel. These switchback passes are narrow and enclosed within steep gorges and high canyon walls. Vulnerable bridges can be closed by landslides, earthquakes, snow, rain, mud slides, flash floods, Taliban attacks or simple quarrels between neighboring tribes. Any of which can disable or wipe out infrastructure for weeks at a time. Imagine the predicament of a battalion including heavy vehicles and tanks caught between two non-existent bridges and a steep cliff on one side and a deep gorge on the other. Do you begin to see their vulnerabilities, now just add rain or snow. Would the Taliban allow them to pass without a single casualty? Even if 1 tank were simply disabled could the others continue unhindered?
All domestic costs including Congressional allocations of about a hundred or so billion dollars a year, will be between $3 to $6 trillion dollars. This is equal to 1/4 to 1/2 our Gross Domestic Production. Most if not all of our domestic programs, including Medi-Care and Social Security will become impossible. Afghanistan will be politically fatal for this and future Presidencies. All choices will end in tears. Now the logical question arises; "Should we bet the farm and go for it"? Unfortunately the Cheney-Bush Presidency already did and the farm is in jeopardy
In the background we can still hear the apoplectic Pentagon shill, Dick Cheney, shouting out his constant and reckless drivel, desperately continuing to shift the blame onto the following Presidency. He is obviously and irresponsibly defending his fabricated justifications for invading Afghanistan and Iraq. There was no meaningful reason to invade Afghanistan. I agree with George F. Will, "Only Pakistan really mattered".
In a recent article by James Cordesman he lays out his reasons for the apparent failures up to today. The main point I would make about his article is; He is fully vested in failed policies and was a prominent talking head during the cheer leading portion of the run-up to the Afghan and Iraqi wars. He also lays out the same tired and discredited view that it's ”Not our fault”. (When will they ever take responsibility for their job?) It is my recollection that during every funding request, they were given more money than they asked for and they spent it. I remember seeing pallets of money being unloaded in Baghdad and it simply disappeared without any accounting, whatsoever. Maybe Afghanistan became the stepsister of Iraq, but they had a job to do and they are now whining about not having sufficient support. Well here is the best advice that the Military/Industrial Complex can get; “Get out now and take responsibility for your failure”.
One correction is necessary. The Cheney-Bushistas knew that the recent history of Afghanistan proved a war was unwinnable and they betray their fore-knowledge by trying to make it Obama's war. President Obama was barely 100 days into his Presidency when the Military-Industrial-GOP complex named it "Obama's War". If it were winnable they would have taken the credit, instead they download their sack of manure on America and call it their patriotic duty.
C-J
By Tony Capaccio
Nov. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Afghanistan’s infrastructure makes any buildup of troops there difficult, General David Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command, said today.
“The reality of Afghanistan is that it’s all hard, all the time,” Petraeus said at a Bloomberg conference in Washington. He said that U.S. forces had “learned a great deal about irregular warfare” from the surge of U.S. troops in Iraq.
Former President George W. Bush’s surge aided social stability in Iraq and reduced the level of violence in the country, Petraeus said.
“The surge was really a surge of ideas as much as it was a surge of forces,” he said. War violence in Iraq is down 90 percent from the spring of 2007, he said.
Petraeus was speaking at a conference held by Bloomberg Ventures, a unit of Bloomberg LP, parent of Bloomberg News.
He said counterinsurgency steps like those used in Iraq can be applied to the conflict in Afghanistan.
“The concepts, the importance of securing and serving the population, helping Afghans with a government that can be seen as legitimate” can be applied while “implemented with a really nuanced understanding of Afghanistan,” Petraeus said.
Petraeus declined to address specifics of the Obama administration’s debate on how many troops to add in Afghanistan over the 68,000 now in place.
In Afghanistan, it would be more difficult than it was in Iraq to quickly build up U.S. forces if Obama decides to send more troops.
“It is really hard to get additional forces in, compared with what we were able to do in Iraq,” Petraeus said. Logistics in Iraq were aided by U.S. infrastructure in Kuwait, he said.
In contrast, he said “there are enormous challenges in that respect in Afghanistan, but the enemy has enormous challenges as well.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Anthony Capaccio in Washington at acapaccio@bloomberg.net
Losing Capitalism
We lost capitalism a long time ago. We have become fascist, as Lenin predicted would happen as capitalism failed.
The hallmarks of a fascist economy are the privatization of profit but the socialization of losses. That's what the bailouts are doing.
Then there is the corporatism which is the political foundation of fascism (as Mussolini points out), in which corporations and government align together against the general population. That is what we are seeing with the mandatory health insurance.
The hallmarks of a fascist economy are the privatization of profit but the socialization of losses. That's what the bailouts are doing.
Then there is the corporatism which is the political foundation of fascism (as Mussolini points out), in which corporations and government align together against the general population. That is what we are seeing with the mandatory health insurance.
Trial of Fort Hood shooting suspect could be lengthy affair
C-J
In other words, the Army's case is already starting to fall apart. I would like to see the forensics, especially the firing pin, land and groove and extractor marks on all of the "recovered" shell casings that probably would prove that there was more than 1 shooter. I would also like to see the bullet entry and paths in Maj. Hasan's body to see if they came from the exact same angle as those of a 105lb armed? private security guard and Jessica Lynch standin.
But just like the jet engine serial numbers from 9/11 they will never see the light of day. They are now a "State Secret". The Army's case is becoming more laughable everyday and they can't back down. They also allege that this trial could drag on for years depending on the "defendants" health. If he had died or if he dies they will wrap it up in a few minutes. The most likely scenario is 2 or more years of unattributed leaks from "informed" sources that will continue the slanders of Maj. Hasan.
If there is a change of venue the most probable place it will go is Fort Bragg N.C. and the home of American Military Special Operations and Psyops. (USASOCOM). Since USASOCOM is probably behind this Psyops in the first place they will have more opportunities to slander Maj. Hasan. Would the Army ever lie for political reasons? DUHH!! Two individual cases come to my mind, Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman.
C-J
By Anthony Spangler | The Fort Worth Star-Telegram
FORT WORTH — Complicated by a federal investigation into possible terrorist ties and the prospect of mental issues, the prosecution of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan will likely be a lengthy and intricate process, military legal experts say.
Hasan has been identified by military officials as the lone suspect in the Fort Hood shootings last week that left 13 dead and more than 30 wounded — the deadliest mass shooting at a U.S. military installation.
A former Army staff judge advocate and military law expert at Texas Tech University suggests that it could take about two years to go to the military equivalent of a trial, depending on the defendant's health. And the outcome of the case would likely end up mired in complex appeals.
"We never had a case quite like this before . . . because of pretrial publicity, it will create a lot of complications," said Richard Rosen, vice chairman of the university’s law school and former military justice attorney at Fort Hood.
Many factors will make the legal process challenging for prosecutors and defense attorneys: the number of witnesses, whether the actions were related to terrorism, mental capacity and the prospect of the death penalty. What may be the most difficult decision, military legal experts say, is whether the case will be tried at Fort Hood.
The convening authority in the case, which will be one of Hasan's commanders, could request a change of venue.
Still, Rosen said, Hasan could get a fair trial.
"There could be a lot of prejudice there and, because of the tremendous pretrial publicity, there could be pressure to move the case elsewhere," he said. "But experience has been that military jurors are an independent bunch. The military jurists are smart people. The officers will all be college-educated and people with advanced degrees."
In other words, the Army's case is already starting to fall apart. I would like to see the forensics, especially the firing pin, land and groove and extractor marks on all of the "recovered" shell casings that probably would prove that there was more than 1 shooter. I would also like to see the bullet entry and paths in Maj. Hasan's body to see if they came from the exact same angle as those of a 105lb armed? private security guard and Jessica Lynch standin.
But just like the jet engine serial numbers from 9/11 they will never see the light of day. They are now a "State Secret". The Army's case is becoming more laughable everyday and they can't back down. They also allege that this trial could drag on for years depending on the "defendants" health. If he had died or if he dies they will wrap it up in a few minutes. The most likely scenario is 2 or more years of unattributed leaks from "informed" sources that will continue the slanders of Maj. Hasan.
If there is a change of venue the most probable place it will go is Fort Bragg N.C. and the home of American Military Special Operations and Psyops. (USASOCOM). Since USASOCOM is probably behind this Psyops in the first place they will have more opportunities to slander Maj. Hasan. Would the Army ever lie for political reasons? DUHH!! Two individual cases come to my mind, Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman.
C-J
By Anthony Spangler | The Fort Worth Star-Telegram
FORT WORTH — Complicated by a federal investigation into possible terrorist ties and the prospect of mental issues, the prosecution of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan will likely be a lengthy and intricate process, military legal experts say.
Hasan has been identified by military officials as the lone suspect in the Fort Hood shootings last week that left 13 dead and more than 30 wounded — the deadliest mass shooting at a U.S. military installation.
A former Army staff judge advocate and military law expert at Texas Tech University suggests that it could take about two years to go to the military equivalent of a trial, depending on the defendant's health. And the outcome of the case would likely end up mired in complex appeals.
"We never had a case quite like this before . . . because of pretrial publicity, it will create a lot of complications," said Richard Rosen, vice chairman of the university’s law school and former military justice attorney at Fort Hood.
Many factors will make the legal process challenging for prosecutors and defense attorneys: the number of witnesses, whether the actions were related to terrorism, mental capacity and the prospect of the death penalty. What may be the most difficult decision, military legal experts say, is whether the case will be tried at Fort Hood.
The convening authority in the case, which will be one of Hasan's commanders, could request a change of venue.
Still, Rosen said, Hasan could get a fair trial.
"There could be a lot of prejudice there and, because of the tremendous pretrial publicity, there could be pressure to move the case elsewhere," he said. "But experience has been that military jurors are an independent bunch. The military jurists are smart people. The officers will all be college-educated and people with advanced degrees."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
