Thursday, April 29, 2004

Wednesday, April 28, 2004

Speaking of days gone by...

I used to be in a heavy metal band called "Wicked Bitch". We were named after our singer Dim's ex-girlfriend Meghan, who I had known since 7th grade and who was crazy.

Dim's real name was Tim: he was called Dim because he was none to bright. he liked to smoke crack. Meghan had always teetered on insanity but the straw that broke her mind was the crash. A few years before Wicked Bitch was even a gleam in our crackhead singer's eye, Dim got in an accident coming home from a gig in Narragansett Rhode Island. Drunk out of his mind, Dim ended up on the wrong side of the highway and plowed head on into an oncoming car. Five years after the accident, if you rubbed his forhead, you could feel the broken glass forever lodged under his skin.

My mom was nice enough to let us practice in her basement. At 24, Dim was the oldest memberof the band. I was 19 and barely out of high school. Our guitar players and the drummer were seniors. A number of kids from the high school woul hang out in the basement during practice, among them Mark Poland and his girlfirend Shannen Fitzpatrick. They were a few years younger than me. Mark was either a junior or a sophomore, a friend of one of my little sister's friends. He was a skinny 17 year-old metalhead with a blonde mullet. He was soft-spoken and non confrontational. I didn't know him too well, but what i knew of him I liked well enough. He never caused trouble in my mom's house or in my apartment. Shannen was either a freshman or a sophomorme. She was about 15, flatchested and as skinny as her boyfriend. Her hair was jet black and her eyes were icy blue, peering out from a faceful of freckles. I wouldn't have thrown her out of bed. She was my friend Johnny Fitz's cousin, and her dad was a cop. Typical Irish family.

Newport is listed on maps as a city, but really it's a large town. It is hard to think of distances between neighborhoods as miles, yet to measure distance in blocks seems a bit much. Suffice it to say in a neighborhood near mine there was a store called Rosie's, owned (aptly) by an old woman named Rosie. I remember the first girl i ever messed around with lived around the corner from that store. i was thirteen years old with a boner so exicted from the afternoon's activities that it wouldn't go away for hours, handing over a buck or so for a bottle of Dr. Pepper, some Funyuns and Twizzlers to muich on the way home.

One morning Newport woke up to find that Rosie had been robbed. Not only that, but the old lady had been brutally beaten with a cast iron frying pan, after which her throat had been cut before her assailant left her for dead. The cash register had been raided, and someone had tried unsuccessfully to open the safe. Rosie fought for life though, and was barely conscious when she was found and brought to the hospital. Within hours she had recovered enough to identify Mark and Shannen as her assailants. Soon after that, Rosie's niece, a friend of the couple, stepped forward to say that Shannen and Mark had learned that Shannen was pregnant and wanted to get an abortion. The girl told them where Rosie kept the money in th shop and suggested they rob her, but hadn't expected the assault. By this time the police were on the lookout for the couple, but by this time they had fled town in a stolen car. As a search fanned out around the region, more details came out: Mark had done the actual slashing as Shannen egged him on. Some people were saying that the murder side of things had been Shannen's idea, that she had pushed her boyfriend past any osrt of acceptable boundaries. Others said that Mark had snapped. I tended to side with the former: mark had never seemed the violent type to me. Quite the opposite: he was a little guy who, unlike me, attracted littkle to no attention from malicious minded jocks, probably because he took auto classes in the voc-tech department. And Shannen I knew to be a hellraiser.

They were finally caught about a month and a hlaf later somewhere in Indiana or Ohio. their keys had gotten locked in the latest car they had stolen, and the cop who stopped to help them unfortunately ran the plate. The were returned to Rhode Island to face trial, where Mark was given 15 years and Shannen got 18 monthsa in training school.

Tuesday, April 27, 2004

When I lived in my first apartment, my housemates were two metalheads who were best friends and polar opposites. Rob, my little sister's ex-boyfriend, was half-Filipino and quite verbally communicative, yet his dyslexia was so bad he could barely write his name and was functionally illiterate. He had tight kinky brown hair that he had tried to bleach blonde (it was, after all, 1989), but it had come out orange, so around the house we called him Ronald McDonald. Eric on the other hand, looked like a character from the Simpsons, sporting a blonde mullet and overbite that put Bart's to shame. Unlike Rob, Eric was nearly incapable of communicating in more than single syllables, but was a voracious reader. Both were from the deep south, with Rob more the "loud mouth good ol'boy" model, and Eric more the "sullen, mumbling guy from Deliverance". We shared a single bedroom, so if anyone got lucky, the other two guys crashed in the living room. We rarely got lucky however, so this wasn't a problem. The living room wasn't bad digs, because Eric kept it spotless: he got up before everyone else and combed the carpet and the clutter on the coffee table for roaches and scraps of marijuana.

Doing drugs in that apartment, which built into a peaked roof, was always a weird scene. The cheesy wood-paneled walls of the living rom conformed to the shape of the roof, so you felt like you were in a funhouse even if you WEREN'T fucked up. The kitchen was painted in an overly bright, almost paranoid, shade of yellow. When you're freebasing at 2:00 AM and you're out of beer, the single light dangling from the ceiling calls out every greasy dingy stain on the paint. A cop lived across the street, which made things all the more tense. I have no idea why the cops never paid us a visit. We were so sleazy and lame.

At one point we had a fourth roomate, the former captain of my high school wrestling team. Bull also happened to be up to his eyeballs in drugs and alcohol. He and Eric had a low-level but good-natured practical joke war going on. I can only remember two, both initiated by Eric. The first was meaningless enough: Bull had sex with some girl when she was having her period and told us, leading Eric to buy a box of maxi-pads. After drawing "period stains" on the maxi pads using a red magic marker, he taped them to the ceiling fan for Bull to see. Hilarity ensued.

His second prank wasn't so well received. One evening Bull never came home until the next afternoon, when he arrived crowing, "Dudes! I just had the best night!! I met this chick named Grain, and we got a hotel room last night! man, you know i was BANGING it all night!" He brought back Grain later that night and I realized I knew her: she was one of three or four girls that hung out with the punkers and metalheads, and we all knew them as runaways from a home for troubled girls. She was blonde and curvy, with a David Letterman-style gap between her front teeth.

I guess it was a day or so after we met Grain that Bull woke us up one morning at 5:00 AM or so, screaming bloody murder from the bathroom. "Oh man, my dick my dick, it hurts to fucking pee, what the fuck..."

Rob's eyes got all wide. "Dude, y'all gotta get y'ass to the doctor, man, you got some kinda vd!" It came out "veee deeee." Eric began to chant "doctor doctor, bull gotta go doctor." Bull just looked terrified and nodded his head. He pulled on his clothes and left. A few hours later, he returned the color of cigarette ashes. "You won't believe what just happened..."and went onto a description of chlamydia. They did a blood test, gave him a shot, and then laid him on a gurney with handlebars on the sides, like on a bike. "Don't look down," the doctors told him, "for God's sake, don't look down. That's when the doctor took a long Q-tip, and briskly swiped the swab all the way down to the bottom of Bull's dickhole. "NOOOOO, NOO" we all screamed, instinctively grabbing our crotches. "Dude, I got it from that chick Grain. Holy shit! I shoulda worn a fucking condom... Anyway, I gotta get to work," and he left for his job as assistant manager at the Pizza Hut.

When Bull returned at 2:00 AM, Eric had decorated our ceiling fan with Q-tips and condoms. Words were spoken; threats were rejoined with threats; fists were thrown; and finally, Bull threw a chair at Eric, who ducked. The chair went smashing into the window, as Bull went stormed out of the house yelling "Fuck you guys! I'm outta here!"

The last I heard he had joined the airforce and moved to Alaska.

Friday, April 23, 2004

Been about week since I blogged. Melissa and Sam are in town from Canada, and I've been occupied.
She's out watching the hockey game (actually, she shoulda been home by now), so I have some blog time.
This site just about says it all for 2004.

The New York Times, at least today, is WAY off the reservation, as we can see by two op-eds by lefties Ryan Lizza (who really ain't all that left) and Josh Marshall (who kinda sorta is; Marshall, by the way, publishes talkingpointsmemo, one of my favorite sites). This is on the heels of resident Bush critic, Paul Krugman, who has a fine editorial today, and a scathing leading editorial, "The Real War." These come a day after yesterday's brutal "Which Powell Is Which?"

Yes, you can say "Well, it's the New York Times," but their stance on Bush has been wishy washy at best.

So anyway... there's an entry. I'll write more in the week to come. I promise. not that anyone is actually reading this shit....

Thursday, April 15, 2004

Well, which is it?

Bush now: "I am satisfied that I never saw any intelligence that indicated there was going to be an attack on America -- at a time and a place." "There was nothing in there that said, you know, there's an imminent attack."

Bush then: "Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have the terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike?"

Which is it?

Tuesday, April 13, 2004

all of these are from the text of Bush's remarks, posted the the New York Times.
Some of the following comments are long. they are worth it though.

QUESTION: Mr. President, before the war, you and members of your administration made several claims about Iraq: that U.S. troops would be greeted as liberators with sweets and flowers; that Iraqi oil revenue would pay for most of the reconstruction; and that Iraq not only had weapons of mass destruction but, as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said, we know where they are.

How do you explain to Americans how you got that so wrong? And how do you answer your opponents who say that you took this nation to war on the basis of what have turned out to be a series of false premises?


BUSH: Well, let me step back and review my thinking prior to going into Iraq.

First, the lesson of September the 11th is that when this nation sees a threat, a gathering threat, we got to deal with it. We can no longer hope that oceans protect us from harm. Every threat we must take seriously.

Saddam Hussein was a threat. He was a threat because he had used weapons of mass destruction on his own people. He was a threat because he coddled terrorists. He was a threat because he funded suiciders. He was a threat to the region. He was a threat to the United States.

QUESTION: Mr. President, I'd like to follow up on a couple of these questions that have been asked.

One of the biggest criticisms of you is that whether it's WMD in Iraq, postwar planning in Iraq, or even the question of whether this administration did enough to ward off 9-11, you never admit a mistake. Is that a fair criticism, and do you believe that there were any errors in judgment that you made related to any of those topics I brought up?


this is where things begin to get funny
BUSH: Well, I think, as I mentioned, you know, the country wasn't on war footing, and yet we're at war.

And that's just a reality, Dave. I mean, that was the situation that existed prior to 9-11, because the truth of the matter is most in the country never felt that we'd be vulnerable to an attack such as the one that Osama bin Laden unleashed on us.

We knew he had designs on us. We knew he hated us. But there was nobody in our government, at least, and I don't think the prior government that could envision flying airplanes into buildings on such a massive scale.

The people know where I stand, I mean, in terms of Iraq. I was very clear about what I believed. And, of course, I want to know why we haven't found a weapon yet. But I still know Saddam Hussein was a threat. And the world is better off without Saddam Hussein.

I don't think anybody can -- maybe people can argue that. I know the Iraqi people don't believe that, that they're better off with Saddam Hussein -- would be better off with Saddam Hussein in power.

I also know that there's an historic opportunity here to change the world. And it's very important for the loved ones of our troops to understand that the mission is an important, vital mission for the security of America and for the ability to change the world for the better.

Let's see. Ed?

QUESTION: Mr. President, good evening. I'd like to ask you about the August 6th PDB.

BUSH: Sure.

QUESTION: You've mentioned it at Fort Hood on Sunday. You pointed out that it did not warn of a hijacking of airplanes to crash into buildings, but that it warned of hijacking to obviously take hostages and to secure the release of extremists that are being held by the U.S.

Did that trigger some specific actions on your part in the administration, since it dealt with potentially hundreds of lives and a blackmail attempt on the United States government?


And I asked for the briefing. And the reason I did is because there had been a lot of threat intelligence from overseas. And so, I -- part of it had to do with the Genoa G-8 conference that I was going to attend. And I asked at that point in time, let's make sure we are paying attention here at home, as well. And that's what triggered the report.

The report itself, I've characterized it as mainly history. And I think when you look at it, you'll see that it was talking about a '97 and '98 and '99.

It was also an indication, as you mentioned, that bin Laden might want to hijack an airplane but, as you said, not to fly into a building, but perhaps to release a person in jail. In other words, he would serve it as a blackmail.

And of course that concerns me. All those reports concern me. As a matter of fact, I was dealing with terrorism a lot as the president when George Tenet came in to brief me. I mean, that's where I got my information.

I changed the way that the relationship between the president and the CIA director. And I wanted Tenet in the Oval Office all the time. And we had briefings about terrorist threats. This was a summary.

Now, in the -- what's called the PDB, there was a warning about bin Laden's desires on America. But, frankly, I didn't think there was anything new. I mean, major newspapers had talked about bin Laden's desires on hurting America.

What was interesting in there was that there was a report that the FBI was conducting field investigations. And that was good news, that they were doing their job.

The way my administration worked, Ed, was that I met with Tenet all the time. I obviously met with my principals a lot. We talked about threats that had emerged. We have a counterterrorism group meeting on a regular basis to analyze the threats that came in. Had there been a threat that required action by anybody in the government, I would have dealt with it.

In other words, had they come up and said, this is where we see something happening, you can rest assured that the people of this government would have responded and responded in a forceful way.

I mean, one of the things about Elizabeth's question was, I stepped back and I've asked myself a lot, is there anything we could have done to stop the attacks? Of course I've asked that question, as have many people in my government. Nobody wants this to happen to America.

And the answer is that had I had any inkling whatsoever that the people were going to fly airplanes into buildings, we would have moved heaven and earth to save the country, just like we're working hard to prevent a further attack.
[...]

BUSH: Maybe I can best put it this way, why I feel so strongly about this historic moment. I was having dinner with Prime Minister Koizumi, and we were talking about North Korea, about how we can work together to deal with the threat. The North Korea leader is a threat.

And here are two friends, now, discussing what strategy to employ to prevent him from further developing and deploying a nuclear weapon. And it dawned on me that, had we blown the peace in World War II, that perhaps this conversation would not have been taking place.

It also dawned on me then that when we get it right in Iraq, at some point in time an American president will be sitting down with a duly elected Iraqi leader, talking about how to bring security to what has been a troubled part of the world.

The legacy that our troops are going to leave behind is a legacy of lasting importance, as far as I'm concerned. It's a legacy that really is based upon our deep belief that people want to be free and that free societies are peaceful societies.

Some of the debate really centers around the fact that people don't believe Iraq can be free; that if you're Muslim, or perhaps brown-skinned, you can't be self-governing or free. I'd strongly disagree with that.

I reject that. Because I believe that freedom is the deepest need of every human soul, and if given a chance, the Iraqi people will be not only self-governing, but a stable and free society.

Let's see here, hold on. Michael?

QUESTION: Mr. President, why are you and the vice president insisting on appearing together before the 9-11 commission? And, Mr. President, who will we be handing the Iraqi government over to on June 30th?

BUSH: We'll find that out soon. That's what Mr. Brahimi is doing. He's figuring out the nature of the entity we'll be handing sovereignty over.

And, secondly, because the 9-11 commission wants to ask us questions, that's why we're meeting. And I look forward to meeting with them and answering their questions.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) I was asking why you're appearing together, rather than separately, which was their request.

BUSH: Because it's a good chance for both of us to answer questions that the 9-11 commission is looking forward to asking us. And I'm looking forward to answering them.

Let's see. Hold on for a minute. Let's see. Oh, Jim.
[...]
and now the roller coaster REALLY begins...

QUESTION: You have been accused of letting the 9-11 threat mature too far, but not letting the Iraq threat mature far enough. First, could you respond to that general criticism?

And, secondly, in the wake of these two conflicts, what is the appropriate threat level to justify action in perhaps other situations going forward?

BUSH: Yes. I guess there have been some that said, well, we should've taken pre-emptive action in Afghanistan, and then turned around and said we shouldn't have taken pre-emptive action in Iraq.

And my answer to that question is, is that, again I repeat what I said earlier, prior to 9-11, the country really wasn't on a war footing. And the, frankly, mood of the world would have been astounded had the United States acted unilaterally in trying to deal with al-Qaida in that part of the world.

It would have been awfully hard to do, as well, by the way. We would have had -- we hadn't got our relationship right with Pakistan yet. The Caucus area would have been very difficult from which to base. It just seemed an impractical strategy at the time. And, frankly, I didn't contemplate it.

I did contemplate a larger strategy as to how to deal with al-Qaida. You know, we were shooting cruise missiles and with little effect. And I said, if we're going to go after al-Qaida, let's have a comprehensive strategy as to how to deal with it, with that entity.

After 9-11, the world changed for me, and I think changed for the country. It changed for me because, like many, we assumed oceans would protect us from harm. And that's not the case. It's not the reality of the 21st century. Oceans don't protect us. They don't protect us from killers.

We're an open country. And we're a country that values our openness. And we're a hard country to defend. And therefore, when we see threats overseas, we've got to take them -- look at them in a new light. And I've given my explanation of Iraq.

Your further question was, you know, how do you justify any other pre-emptive action?

The American people need to know my last choice is the use of military power. It is something that -- it's a decision that is a tough decision to make for any president, because I fully understand the consequences of the decision.

And therefore, we'll use all other means necessary when we see a threat to deal with a threat that may materialize. But we'll never take the military off the table.

We've had some success, Bill, as a result of the decision I took. Take Libya, for example. Libya was a nation that had -- we viewed as the terrorist -- a nation that sponsored terror, a nation that was dangerous because of weapons. And Colonel Gadhafi made the decision, and rightly so, to disclose and disarm for the good of the world.

By the way, they found, I think, 50 tons of mustard gas, I believe it was, in a turkey farm, only because he was willing to disclose where the mustard gas was. But that made the world safer.

The A.Q. Khan bust, the network that we uncovered thanks to the hard work of our intelligence-gathering agencies and the cooperation of the British, was another victory in the war against terror.

This was a shadowy network of folks that were willing to sell state secrets to the highest bidder. And that, therefore, made the world more unstable and more dangerous.

You've often heard me talk about my worry of weapons of mass destruction ending up in the hands of the wrong people. Well, you can understand why I feel that way, having seen the works of A.Q. Khan. It's a dangerous -- it was a dangerous network that we unraveled, and the world is better for it.

And so what I'm telling you is, is that sometimes we use military as a last resort, but other times we use our influence, diplomatic pressure and our alliances to unravel, uncover, expose people who want to do harm against the civilized world.

We're at war. Iraq is a part of the war on terror. It is not the war on terror; it is a theater in the war on terror. And it's essential we win this battle in the war on terror. By winning this battle, it will make other victories more certain in the war against the terrorists.

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.

Sir, you've made it very clear tonight that you're committed to continuing the mission in Iraq, yet, as Terry pointed out, increasing numbers of Americans have qualms about it. And this is an election year.... Will it have been worth it, even if you lose your job because of it?


BUSH: I don't plan on losing my job. I plan on telling the American people that I've got a plan to win the war on terror. And I believe they'll stay with me. They understand the stakes.

Look, nobody likes to see dead people on their television screens. I don't. It's a tough time for the American people to see that. It's gut-wrenching.

One of my hardest parts of my job is to console the family members, who've lost their life. It's a chance to hug and weep and to console, and to remind the loved ones that the sacrifice of their loved one was done in the name of security for America and freedom for the world.

One of the things that's very important, Judy, at least as far as I'm concerned, is to never allow our youngsters to die in vain. And I made that pledge to their parents. Withdrawing from the battlefield of Iraq would be just that, and it's not going to happen under my watch.

The American people may decide to change. That's democracy. I don't think so. I don't think so. And I look forward to making my case. I'm looking forward to the campaign.

Now's the time to talk about winning this war on terror. Now's the time to make sure that the American people understand the stakes and the historic significance of what we're doing.

And no matter where they may stand on this war, the thing I appreciate most about our country is the strong support given to the men and women in uniform. And it's vital support. It's important for those soldiers to know America stands with them, and we weep when they die, and we're proud of the victories they achieve.

One of the things I'm also proud of is what I hear from our soldiers. As I mentioned, I pinned the Purple Heart on some of the troops at the hospital there at Fort Hood, Texas. A guy looks at me and says, I can't wait to get back to my unit and fulfill the mission, Mr. President.

The spirit is incredible. Our soldiers who have volunteered to go there understand the stakes, and I'm incredibly proud of them.

Text of President Bush's Press Conference

Published: April 13, 2004


(Page 10 of 12)



You've often heard me talk about my worry of weapons of mass destruction ending up in the hands of the wrong people. Well, you can understand why I feel that way, having seen the works of A.Q. Khan. It's a dangerous -- it was a dangerous network that we unraveled, and the world is better for it.

And so what I'm telling you is, is that sometimes we use military as a last resort, but other times we use our influence, diplomatic pressure and our alliances to unravel, uncover, expose people who want to do harm against the civilized world.

Advertisement


We're at war. Iraq is a part of the war on terror. It is not the war on terror; it is a theater in the war on terror. And it's essential we win this battle in the war on terror. By winning this battle, it will make other victories more certain in the war against the terrorists.

Let's see here. Judy?

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.

Sir, you've made it very clear tonight that you're committed to continuing the mission in Iraq, yet, as Terry pointed out, increasing numbers of Americans have qualms about it. And this is an election year.

BUSH: Yes.

QUESTION: Will it have been worth it, even if you lose your job because of it?

BUSH: I don't plan on losing my job. I plan on telling the American people that I've got a plan to win the war on terror. And I believe they'll stay with me. They understand the stakes.

Look, nobody likes to see dead people on their television screens. I don't. It's a tough time for the American people to see that. It's gut-wrenching.

One of my hardest parts of my job is to console the family members, who've lost their life. It's a chance to hug and weep and to console, and to remind the loved ones that the sacrifice of their loved one was done in the name of security for America and freedom for the world.

One of the things that's very important, Judy, at least as far as I'm concerned, is to never allow our youngsters to die in vain. And I made that pledge to their parents. Withdrawing from the battlefield of Iraq would be just that, and it's not going to happen under my watch.

The American people may decide to change. That's democracy. I don't think so. I don't think so. And I look forward to making my case. I'm looking forward to the campaign.

Now's the time to talk about winning this war on terror. Now's the time to make sure that the American people understand the stakes and the historic significance of what we're doing.

And no matter where they may stand on this war, the thing I appreciate most about our country is the strong support given to the men and women in uniform. And it's vital support. It's important for those soldiers to know America stands with them, and we weep when they die, and we're proud of the victories they achieve.

One of the things I'm also proud of is what I hear from our soldiers. As I mentioned, I pinned the Purple Heart on some of the troops at the hospital there at Fort Hood, Texas. A guy looks at me and says, I can't wait to get back to my unit and fulfill the mission, Mr. President.

The spirit is incredible. Our soldiers who have volunteered to go there understand the stakes, and I'm incredibly proud of them.

John?

goes round a serious bend over here...

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President.

In the last campaign, you were asked a question about the biggest mistake you'd made in your life, and you used to like to joke that it was trading Sammy Sosa.

You've looked back before 9-11 for what mistakes might have been made. After 9-11, what would your biggest mistake be, would you say, and what lessons have learned from it?


BUSH: I wish you'd have given me this written question ahead of time so I could plan for it. [is he really saying this? i cannot believe this!]

John, I'm sure historians will look back and say, gosh, he could've done it better this way or that way. You know, I just -- I'm sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with answer, but it hadn't yet.

I would've gone into Afghanistan the way we went into Afghanistan. Even knowing what I know today about the stockpiles of weapons, I still would've called upon the world to deal with Saddam Hussein.

See, I'm of the belief that we'll find out the truth on the weapons. That's why we sent up the independent commission. I look forward to hearing the truth as to exactly where they are. They could still be there. They could be hidden, like the 50 tons of mustard gas in a turkey farm.

One of the things that Charlie Duelfer talked about was that he was surprised of the level of intimidation he found amongst people who should know about weapons and their fear of talking about them because they don't want to be killed.

You know, there's this kind of -- there's a terror still in the soul of some of the people in Iraq.

BUSH: They're worried about getting killed, and therefore they're not going to talk. But it'll all settle out, John. We'll find out the truth about the weapons at some point in time.

However, the fact that he had the capacity to make them bothers me today just like it would have bothered me then. He's a dangerous man. He's a man who actually not only had weapons of mass destruction -- the reason I can say that with certainty is because he used them.

And I have no doubt in my mind that he would like to have inflicted harm, or paid people to inflict harm, or trained people to inflict harm, on America, because he hated us.

I hope -- I don't want to sound like I have made no mistakes. I'm confident I have. I just haven't -- you just put me under the spot here, and maybe I'm not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one.

Yes, Ann?

QUESTION: Looking forward about keeping United States safe, a group representing about several thousand FBI agents today wrote to your administration begging you not to split up the law enforcement and the counterterrorism ...because they say it ties their hands, it gives them blinders, that they're partners.

Yet you mentioned yesterday that you think perhaps the time has come for some real intelligence reforms. That can't happen without real leadership from the White House.

Will you? And how will you?
That's why I'm pressing the Greater Middle East Reform Initiative to work to spread freedom, and we will continue on that. So long as I'm the president, I will press for freedom. I believe so strongly in the power of freedom.

You know why I do? Because I've seen freedom work right here in our own country. I also have this belief, strong belief, that freedom is not this country's gift to the world. Freedom is the Almighty's gift to every man and woman in this world.

And as the greatest power on the face of the earth, we have an obligation to help the spread of freedom. We have an obligation to help feed the hungry. I think the American people find it interesting that we're providing food for the North Korea people who starve.

We have an obligation to lead the fight on AIDS, on Africa. And we have an obligation to work toward a more free world. That's our obligation. That is what we have been called to do, as far as I'm concerned.

And my job as the president is to lead this nation and to making the world a better place. And that's exactly what we're doing.

Weeks such as we've had in Iraq make some doubt whether or not we're making progress. I understand that. It was a tough, tough period. But we are making progress.

And my message today to those in Iraq is, we'll stay the course, we'll complete the job.

My message to our troops is, we'll stay the course and complete the job, and you'll have what you need.

And my message to the loved ones who are worried about their sons, daughters, husbands, wives is, your loved one is performing a noble service for the cause of freedom and peace.

BUSH: Let's see. Last question here. Hold on for a second. Those who yell will not be ask -- I tell you a guy who I have never heard from.

Don?

QUESTION: Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.

BUSH: This was -- it's a well-received ...

QUESTION: Following on both Judy and John's questions, and it comes out of what you just said in some ways, with public support for your policies in Iraq falling off the way they have, quite significantly over the past couple of months, I guess I'd like to know if you feel, in any way, that you have failed as a communicator on this topic.

BUSH: Gosh, I don't know. I mean ...

QUESTION: Well, you deliver a lot of speeches, and a lot of them contain similar phrases and may vary very little from one to the next. And they often include a pretty upbeat assessment of how things are going, with the exception of tonight. It's pretty somber.





BUSH: Well, you're talking about one aspect of possible -- I think you're referring to what they call the MI5. And I heard a summary of that from Director Mueller, who feels strongly that we -- and he'll testify to that effect, I guess tomorrow. I shouldn't be prejudging his testimony.

But my point was that I'm open for suggestions. I look forward to seeing what the 9-11 commission comes up with. I look forward to seeing what the Silberman-Robb commission comes up with. I'm confident Congress will have some suggestions.

What I'm saying is, let the discussions begin, and I won't prejudge the conclusion. As the president, I will encourage and foster these kinds of discussions, because one of the jobs of the president is to leave behind a legacy that will enable other presidents to better deal with the threat that we face.

We are in a long war. The war on terror is not going to end immediately. This is a war against people who have no guilt in killing innocent people. That's what they're willing to do. They kill on a moment's notice, because they're trying to shake our will, they're trying to create fear, they're trying to affect people's behaviors. And we're simply not going to let them do that.

And my fear, of course, is that this will go on for a while, and therefore, it's incumbent upon us to learn from lessons or mistakes, and leave behind a better foundation for presidents to deal with the threats we face. This is the war that other presidents will be facing as we head into the 21st century.

One of the interesting things people ask me, now that we're asking questions, is, can you ever win the war on terror? Of course you can.

That's why it's important for us to spread freedom throughout the Middle East. Free societies are hopeful societies. A hopeful society is one more likely to be able to deal with the frustrations of those who are willing to commit suicide in order to represent a false ideology.

A free society is a society in which somebody is more likely to be able to make a living. A free society is a society in which someone is more likely to be able to raise their child in a comfortable environment and see to it that that child gets an education.










I am in awe after tonight's press conference, and once transcripts are available, I will be posting selct gems.
But in a word, Mr. Bush seems to be losing his marbles.
The difference perhaps wasn't his standard delivery of catchphrases; it was rather that he was being asked real questions. For instance, after he dropped the now-standard line about "had we known airplanes would be flown into buildings" line, the follwo-up asked about the free trade summit in genoa, in which the skies were patrolled and antiaircraft systems were set up because of the threat of an attack.

Most odd, Bush rambled nonsensically for minutes at a time, like the crazy person in the back of the bus. To be honest, watching it kind of made me nervous. I'm not sure how well it played; guess we'll find out tomorrow.
He used "decepted" as a word: I believe this is some new past-tense form of "deceive," but I can't be sure. I will post more as the transcripts become available. But man, this was a turning point. Bush didn't come across as dishonest: he came across as totally fucking insane.

Monday, April 12, 2004

Sunday, April 11, 2004

Tiny article (found it at Washington Monthly)

In his first comments since Saturday's release of the presidential daily brief, Bush said the document contained "nothing about an attack on America."

What part of "Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Ladin since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US" do you not understand?

The man is either stupid or insane. The only explanation I can come up with for this comment is that he simply hasn't read the briefing. If that's the case, what is he doing sitting in the President's chair?
I guess it was some kind of masochistic inclination that led me to read Charles Krauthammer's latest offering in the Washington Post (aside from Charlie's drivel, there are actually quite a lot of article worth reading in the Post today, including Series of U.S. Fumbles Blamed for Turmoil in Postwar Iraq, What About Iran?, and Bush Gave No Sign of Worry in August 2001). If you're familiar with Sour Kraut's column, you know why I use the word "masochistic": he's intellectually dishonest, petty, and uses his background as a psychologist to argue that anyone who disagrees with the Bush Administration as mentally ill (an ethics violation, as helpfully explained at buzzflash).

In any event, I am glad that I read Krauthammer's column today, because I think I have just put my finger on the right wing's fallacy of choice: no matter what you do, you are not allowed to change your mind.
Sour Kraut writes, "When Hubert Humphrey said this almost 40 years ago, concern about the wretched of the earth was the almost exclusive preserve of American liberalism...." launching into a discussion of liberal (read "Democrat-led" because in the world of the contemporary American conservative, all democrats are liberals and all republicans are conservatives) plans to help the poor: foreign aid, the Marshall Plan (which I think is misrepresented here), the United Nations, etc.

We now know that the secret to curing hunger and poverty is capitalism and free trade. We have seen that demonstrated irrefutably in East Asia, which has experienced the greatest alleviation of poverty in history. In half a century, places such as Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea have gone from subsistence living to First World status. And now free markets and free trade are lifting tens of millions of people out of poverty in India and China.

And what has been the Democratic reaction to the prospect of fulfilling Humphrey's (and their party's) great dream? Fear and loathing. Democrats today thunder against the scourge of "outsourcing" -- American firms giving (what would otherwise be American) jobs to Indians and Chinese and other menacing foreigners.

The anti-outsourcing vogue is part of a larger assault on free trade, which until recently -- meaning the Clinton administration -- Democrats had supported. Remember Al Gore's televised debate with Ross Perot, in which Gore demolished Perot's anti-free-trade arguments? Which makes the recent Democratic assault on free trade so jarring, never more so than when John Edwards and John Kerry competed with each other before Super Tuesday to see who was against more trade agreements with more Third World countries.


I never agreed with NAFTA: in fact, it was the major factor in my decision not to vote for a second Clinton term, because I knew that American blue-collar jobs would be shipped off to Mexico. As an aside, it's interesting to note that as soon as Mexican living standards rose, the corporations that shipped Joe Beercan's job to Juarez are now shipping Jose Cerveza's job off to China, where wages and environmental standards are even lower, pissing off the Mexican government.

I am no naif: politicians will do or say whatever they have to to get elected. I have no faith that John Kerry or John Edwards are going to be the scourge of outsourcing. However, I do believe it is possible for a thoughtful person to change their mind. if something doesn't work, or damages your country, there is no point in "clapping harder" as some have put it.

Krauthammer, and those in his camp, seem to believe that once you've taken a stand, that's it. There can be no turning back. By this logic, George Wallace should have never renounced segregation. BP, Amoco, and Sunoco shouldn't be putting any of their R&D budget into hydrogen technology, solar, or alternative fuels, because just a few years ago they were denying global warming. Lead should never have been removed from gasoline, for that matter. I could go on, but the list would go on forever.

As a matter of fact, this administration takes this line of thought a step further. First, it undertakes legislation and allocates funds based on distorted or blatantly dishonest fundamentals (the war in Iraq, Medicare, No Child Left Behind), ramming through party-line votes. When the actual costs or facts on the ground are revealed, they accuse former supporters of flip-flopping. "You supported it then," they argue. "To change your mind, even if we lied to you to get our way, is flip-floppery of the flippiest variety!"

In essence then, the answer to hemoraging jobs is not to question whether this free trade thing is really working out for Americans. Rather, you should clap harder. Changing your mind is a symptom of creeping liberalism, in much the same way that rigidity of thought and devotion to dogma indicate a lack of creativity and an inability to think for oneself.

In today's era of right-wing echo chambers and dittoheads, this is an apt description of the right-wing.

Saturday, April 10, 2004

The Whiskey Bar is becoming a favorite blog.

In Canary in the Mine, Bill (I don't even know this guy's real name), writes of Howard Fineman'ss recent criticism of the Bush administration, Fineman really is the proverbial canary in the mine. If he's turning, then Bush has probably lost the media whores. And if he's loses the media whores, then he will have finally burned through the toughest part of his teflon coating.

What's next -- a blistering critique from Cokie Roberts?

I know, I know: that's pretty far-fetched. But keep an eye out, particularly if Shrub's poll numbers continue heading south, because I don't think any media whore wants to be the last one off a sinking presidency.


This inspired me: someone should get a pool going. Who'll be the last to jump ship? Charles Krauthammer? George Will? David Brooks (josh marshall's calling him Baghdad Brooks)?

I think Jonah Goldberg will hang on until the bitter end. And what kind of end will that be?
Josh Marshall: update from a friend who's actually a security contractor. You've seen me get super critical and almost apathetic about the deaths of the mercenaries in fallujah. I still feel the same way: however, my feelings about private armies in no way negate my stronger feelings about eyewitness acoounts.

Countdown to Failure holds a lot of food for thought.
Haven't been by Andrew Sullivan's site in a while. After some time off, you being to realize what an awful writer he is.
Like Joan Rivers, but a guy. "Iraq has been a free country for a single year after decades of fascism, mass murder, communal paranoia, hysteria, random violence, and economic collapse. Did we expect the place to become Toledo overnight ?" Can we tawwwk?
And what's this this weird apocalyptic bullshit? That's just fucked up.
"The president and his White House aides have not
> changed their public claims that the uprising in Iraq
> is the work of a relatively small number of extremists
> who will inevitably be crushed. But, in private, Bush
> is apparently expressing a more grim view. According
> to the Kremlin, he placed a 20-minute call to Russian
> President Vladimir Putin yesterday, and "serious
> distress was expressed" about the "escalation of
> violence." Bush aides refused to discuss the details
> of the conversation.
>
> While the White House has been sanguine about the
> turmoil in Iraq, some of its allies are calling for a
> more frank acknowledgment of trouble. Kenneth Adelman,
> a Reagan administration official who is close to
> several Bush officials, said he is surprised that
> "it's a lot tougher slogging than I expected" in Iraq.
> He said Bush should make new overtures both to
> Democrats and to traditional allies urging them to
> condemn the violence. He should tell them that "now is
> not the time to say I told you so,
and urge the allies
> to become more heavily involved," he said."
>
> Adelman is one of these neoconservative pricks. You
> know, the ones who were SO smart, the ones who asked
> "why do you hate America" whenever they were
> questioned.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> I told you so.
> (I just kept hitting CTRL-V, I didn't go all Jack
> Nicholson on you)
In the inevitable debate with George Bush, i would like to hear John Kerry talk about sitting down with people like Sistani, Sadr (or their representatives if as is rumored the two men despise each other), Pachachi, Chalabi, and whoever represents the Kurds (I confess I need to catch up a bit as usual) and discuss a "New Deal" for Iraq. After the past four years of the Bush "doctrine:"

An impartial adjudicator must be agreed upon.
Sorry, just got caught up in this article. Yowza.
I liked this article by Alan Gilbert.

I got in a drunken conversation with some guy tonight about Condi, ending with "She'd be national hero if she turned on the administration."

The trouble is, she can't. Condi played along with the game. By denying any responsibility, she's eradicated her credibility. She is taking the fall.

Perhaps life is just a big chess game; wars both economic and military, terrorism, trade merely tactics. In very narrow terms, you might argue they didn't expect 9/11. But perhaps its not too much too argue that they had an eye out for something over the course of the year, and had a preplanned agenda.

BushCo kills its own...

Wednesday, April 07, 2004

It gets worse:

FALLUJAH, Iraq - U.S. Marines in a fierce battle for this Sunni Muslim stronghold fired rockets that destroyed part of a wall surrounding a mosque compound filled with worshippers Wednesday, and witnesses said as many as 40 people were killed. Shiite-inspired violence spread to key cities in Iraq... The strike came as worshippers had gathered for afternoon prayers, witnesses said. Temporary hospitals were set up in private homes to treat the wounded and prepare the dead for burial....Scores of Iraqis also have been wounded, as mosques called for a holy war against Americans and women carried guns in the streets of Fallujah.

How the hell are we going to handle this? If you can believe Juan Cole (a regular on the Lehrer Show), there's intense fighting going on in two districts in Baghdad; Sadr's taken Najaf (confirmed by CNN yesterday); the Ukrainians have ceded Kut (confirmed by the New York Times); there's fighting in Karbala involving the Poles; there's fighting in Nasiriyah involving the Italians; fighting in Amara against the British; fighting between the Spanish and Sadr's militia in Diwaniyah; and fighting with the British in Basra.
Mission accomplished, eh George?
And an even more troubling question: what do we do now?

Tuesday, April 06, 2004

Confirmed: Blackwater security consultants make far more than the marines (up to $15K per month): from daily kos

"Locals often mistake the guards for special forces or CIA personnel, which makes active-duty military troops a bit edgy. "Those Blackwater guys," says an intelligence officer in Iraq, "they drive around wearing Oakley sunglasses and pointing their guns out of car windows. They have pointed their guns at me, and it pissed me off. Imagine what a guy in Fallujah thinks." Adds an Army officer who just returned from Baghdad, "They are a subculture."

Indeed, the relationship between the private soldiers and the real ones isn't always collaborative. "We've responded to the military at least half a dozen times, but not once have they responded to our emergencies," says Custer. "We have our own quick-reaction force now."

Must suck to be facing death as you avenge people you don't even like...

Monday, April 05, 2004

And another thing,

You know the stupidest thing about this war is there's literally no one to root for. If you're still deluding yourself that the war in Iraq was initiated for anything other than the interest of political points and payback to camapign supporters, you're crazy. Certainly all the rhetoric about "freeing the Iraqis" and "spreading democracy" came pretty late in the game, long after everything else didn't pan out. While I have a lot of sympathy for our troops, I simply cannot root for the Bush administration, its ideologues, and corporate cronies. BOOOO! You get the gas face!

On the other hand, this whole "let's make Iraq a fundamentalist theocracy" movement can also go fuck itself. My understanding is that Iraq was a largely secular nation, where women were far more equal to men than in the neighboring theocracies. The rise of theocrats in Iraq is largely, it has been argued, a consequence of 12 years of sanctions. You keep reading stories from across the country of men forcing women to wear the veil etc; this is just obnoxious. So BOOOO! You get the gas face too, theocrats!
Here's an interesting story from the Sydney Morning Herald. I've only seen it at one or two blogs (I got it at UnFair Witness.com)

US Apache helicopters sprayed fire on the private army of radical Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr during fierce battles today in the western Baghdad district of Al-Showla, witnesses and an AFP correspondent said.

"Two Apaches opened fire on armed members of the Mehdi Army," said Showla resident Abbas Amid.

The fighting erupted when five trucks of US soldiers and the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps (ICDC) tried to enter the district and were attacked by Sadr supporters, Amid said.

Coming under fire, the ICDC, a paramilitary force trained by the Americans, turned on the US soldiers and started to shoot at them, according to Amid.

The soldiers fled their vehicles and headed for cover and then began to battle both the Mehdi Army and the ICDC members, he said. Their vehicles were set ablaze.


This isn't a good sign is it?
NPR is on, and no mention. Might be a little early though.
More on my mixed feelings about my Blackwater rant. It is true that the 4 "security contractors" from the Blackwater Corporation (mercenaries, as it were) who
were killed were paid far better and have better benefits than our own troops. Why are the US marines responsible for avenging the deaths of employees of a private corporation? Their job is tough enough without having to carry out a corporation's personal vendetta.

Sunday, April 04, 2004

I have particularly ambivalent
feelings about my latest rant about the 4 killed in
fallujah. I don't express myself well at all in that
rant. What i find so shocking is that people are
shocked by brutal behavior in a power/ security/
stability vaccuum. No matter what you think oft he
war, there is no denying that the iraqis have been
brutalized since 1968, and before: by the british
empire, by saddam hussein and baath, by sanctions,a nd
by war. this is not to excuse disgusting behavior,
but under enough stress, people fucking snap. The
same people who a few months ago were saying "we've
changed the rules to pre-emptive war" are wringing
their hands saying "how can you do this? there are
rules you know..."
The current situation just has me so angry, it's hard
to hold back when I get self-righteous.
> > Dear David Brooks,
> >
> > I have written you several emails in the past, expressing my deep and sincere loathing for you. I find the topics you choose to discuss in your weekly New York Times column to be either fawning of the administration, specious, overly broad, or utterly irrelevant. Your appearances on the Jim Lehrer News Hour are, to my mind, embarrassing: you come off as partisan and pathetic, grasping at straws as your ees art from side to side like a bad Cagney imitator under the third degree.
> >
This perception of untrustiworthiness is only enhanced by your omnipresent five o'clock shadow. It follows you everywhere, calling to mind Homer Simpson or Barney Rubble. Whenever I see you on the television, all I can think is "there's that guy desperate to sell me a car." You are like that guy from Glengary Glen Ross they spoof on "The Simpsons.".
> >
David, for the love of God make up your mind: either shave off that thing before you go on the air or grow a full beard. While your decision will not make me think you suck any less (as my previous emails to you probably indicate), at least you won't look like you have a perpetual hangover.
> >
Yours,
Brendan Skwire

Saturday, April 03, 2004

I've been keeping up with, if not blogging, the recent violence in Fallujah. It's getting ugly, isn't it.
First there was the violence against the four American mercen-- I mean contractors. That's the word we use now, right? Although I guess the company that provided them is calling them volunteers -- I had no idea these guys were doing what they were doing for free [insert sarcasm here].
Now the US military and our talking heads are making lots of noise about payback, using some of my FAVORITE terms: "we have to sanitize Fallujah" "clean it up" and, from the LA Times, "Fallouja is a barrier on the highway to progress. We're going to eliminate that barrier without damaging the highway."

I'm not excusing the behavior of the Iraqis who did the killing and dismembering, but I sure as hell have NO sympathy for the four unfortunate bastards who got torn to shreds either. All four of these people knew what they were getting into when they signed up for this. All were employees of Blackwater Security Consulting, a company that hires former military members "to provide the client with veteran military, intelligence and law enforcement professionals with demonstrated field operations performance tempered with mature experience in both foreign and domestic requirements... all drawn from various U.S. and international Special Operations Forces, Intelligence and Law Enforcement organizations." When you are deliberately in harm's way, you can't act all shocked when something horrible happens. It's sad that yet another person is dead in this whole miserable affair Iraq, but when you make yourself a candidate for the Darwin Awards, don't get mad when Charlie D. calls you home to Jesus...