As to Beck's book - I had no intention of reading it. The day I need a pundit's reference guide to defend my positions within our friendship is the day when I ... well ... end up defending Joseph McCarthy fireside in your backyard (intoxicated as I was). No thanks, been there, done that, I'll draw my own conclusions. As to the mayor/poverty rates ... come on, you can't on the one hand say that "well there are city councils, Burroughs etc" to relieve those 10 mayors of their culpability, then turn right around and give Kotch (whom I personally like, how could you not) full credit for a healthy economy when he had those same bureaucracies. Either they are responsible or they are not. And I didn't mention this out of partisanship. I'm speaking to the ideology of enhancing the human experience through government - the DNC just happens to be the vehicle. Growing up so close to New Orleans i was continually shocked that people would continue to elect leadership (in their case nearly the entire city bureaucracy) that created an atmosphere which repelled new business but attracted new criminals. Look, if the PoTUS is going to get credit or be assigned blame for the vast economy of the United States, then surely mayors have a high level of responsibility as well. And I found it an interesting and indicting fact that the ten worst cities - economically - have been ran by those embracing a left of center ideology 92% of the time since 1965 (a date chosen, I assume, due to the huge expansion in social programs during the latter half of that decade). Don't brush that aside as partisan tripe. It's a real world example of an dysfunctional (in my opinion) ideology. Certainly if the ten best economies were run by Dems since 1965 you'd have no trouble embracing that.
The NIE ... "Houston we have a problem." Subsequent to my "NIE" post of the other day i have learned some disturbing news. I refer you to an editorial by the Wall street Journal entitled High Confidence Game, which raises some startling suspicions first broached in the NY Sun. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119682320187314033.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks
Here's just a taste, but I urge you to read the entire thing ... As recently as 2005, the consensus estimate of our spooks was that "Iran currently is determined to develop nuclear weapons" and do so "despite its international obligations and international pressure." This was a "high confidence" judgment. The new NIE says Iran abandoned its nuclear program in 2003 "in response to increasing international scrutiny." This too is a "high confidence" conclusion. One of the two conclusions is wrong, and casts considerable doubt on the entire process by which these "estimates" -- the consensus of 16 intelligence bureaucracies -- are conducted and accorded gospel status.
I find that disturbing in the extreme. in fact the last four NIE's have directly contradicted this latest. Lets put aside my claim that the Iraq invasion, the "shock and awe", is what got Iran's attention and caused them to rethink their illicit nuke program - I'm at the point, after an hour of various researching, that I don't even believe they've halted the program. Add to that the more passive, "let's do a tenth round of inspections" IAEA went on record to say that they don't buy into our estimate quote, "100%."
It gets more disturbing. There are three authors of this report whom are responsible for gathering the Intel of the various 16 agencies, and putting it into one cohesive form. More from the Journal: Our own "confidence" is not heightened by the fact that the NIE's main authors include three former State Department officials with previous reputations as "hyper-partisan anti-Bush officials," according to an intelligence source. They are Tom Fingar, formerly of the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research; Vann Van Diepen, the National Intelligence Officer for WMD; and Kenneth Brill, the former U.S. Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
They went on to describe why they are in fact "anti-Bush", how they were either fired, or ideas passed over. As a side note they detailed what "international pressure" was being brought on Iran in 2003, when they supposedly suspended the program, and the Europeans were just beginning their pressure, the only other thing going on was our invasion so your estimation that it was "renewed international pressure" is simply not supported by the facts, but it's neither here nor there, I believe no suspension occurred at all). Even more disturbing then these "disgruntled" partisans is that one of the authors of this report is said to be an advocate of Iran's sovereign "right" to develop nuclear technology. Has the Bush administration no control over who writes or reviews these reports? Again, from the Journal: ... the indications that the Bush Administration was surprised by this NIE, and the way it scrambled yesterday to contain its diplomatic consequences, hardly inspire even "medium confidence" that our spooks have achieved some epic breakthrough. The truth could as easily be that the Administration in its waning days has simply lost any control of its bureaucracy...
This now has people within our own country (namely the Dem presidential candidates) and more around the world, screaming that we should now negotiate, without condition, with Iran (whose secret police, The Iranian Revolutionary Guard, was recently labeled via a congressional vote, including Hillary, a "terrorist organization"). This, despite the fact that ... ... the real issue is not Iran's nuclear weapons program, but its nuclear program, period. As the NIE acknowledges, Iran continues to enrich uranium on an industrial scale -- that is, build the capability to make the fuel for a potential bomb. And it is doing so in open defiance of binding U.N. resolutions. No less a source than the IAEA recently confirmed that Iran already has blueprints to cast uranium in the shape of an atomic bomb core. The U.S. also knows that Iran has extensive technical information on how to fit a warhead atop a ballistic missile. And there is considerable evidence that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps has been developing the detonation devices needed to set off a nuclear explosion at the weapons testing facility in Parchin...
This entire fiasco raises several issues of immense importance. 1.) Exactly what is the state of our current ability to gather and vet intelligence? 2.) How will US and international pressure be brought to bare on Iran to dismantle her nuclear program if the global consensus is to take the "suspension" portion of this report as gospel? 3.) Is Israel once again left to defend herself and will she eventually need to send in her F-16's, perhaps setting off a new region-wide war? 4.) If we wake up to a Iran weeks away from nuclear armament due to intelligence failures, will our military be able to open up a second, deadly front in that region?
As you ponder these questions and this entire scenario keep this in mind - EVERY SINGLE nuclear power the world had ever seen has become so in secret, including us.
FR
No comments:
Post a Comment