Meanderthal

Comical Ignorance

Except it isn't funny.  Pitiful perhaps, dangerous maybe but, funny it aint.  "It" is the response of the reich-wing bloviators I half heard on CNN late at night responding to General Wesley Clark's well considered denunciation of the idea of flying and/or crashing a fighter plane as qualifying one for the job of POTUS.  I suppose it will come as a shock to no thinking person that General Clark is waaaaaayyy more likely to be right when it comes to military issues than the chickenhawk guild.  However, there are a couple of points worth expanding.

In the USN, unless you are the CO or XO of a squadron, a pilot is in command of nothing.  (S)He does not lead men and flying is not generally considered a command path.  Even the term/job "plane captain" does not refer to the pilot but instead, to the enlisted (wo)man who has the responsibility for just damn near everything on the bird except when it is actually in flight.  Yes, pilots are officers but, few of them turn out to be leaders.  Their training focuses on what they can do to avoid costing the U.S. and USN a shitload of money by giving gravity primary control of an airborne plane.(Such training apparently did not take with McSame as evidenced by his time as a POW.)  They also receive some training on delivering death, destruction and mayhem on command.  As a general rule, with acknowledged exceptions, O3 and below flyboys know less about leadership and command than your average E6 and up.  Yea, sure the E6 will have to salute the O3 but that is more tradition and general orders than it is respect.

"Line" officers are the command path officers.  They learn to drive boats and head up divisions on a ship and they cross train in a lot of different shit.  In running a division, they will be the leader of the enlisted men who make up that division (if the Chief lets them) and they can dream of their own command.  Interestingly enough, John Kerry was a line officer with command experience.  When he was being unfairly dissed and outright lied about by veteran and chickenhawk alike, such experience wasn't especially valuable to the GOP.  Even to the point of the rank and file rethugs making graphic fun of Purple Heart earners at the national convention. 

In short Barack Obama has just as much command experience as John McSame.  Both have "commanded" political campaigns.  It is comical ignorance indeed to believe that all military service is the same or that all military jobs are command prep.  But, these comically misinformed  individuals have huge misinformed audiences.  Even worse, none of them seem to even want to know the truth.  The relevant truth here is that Clark is right.  Flying and/or crashing airplanes is in no way, shape, form, or fashion, suitable or significant preparation for the job of POTUS.  Serving as a POW does not give one special insight into how to prosecute a war or, how to lead the nation in times of peace.  Physical suffering for one's nation does not entitle one to high political office.  It just doesn't.

I interacted with a lot of officers during my time in the military and, like just damn near any other enlisted puke, I learned to size them up pretty quickly.  If I was being recalled into the military tomorrow and I had to choose one of the two presidential candidates to be the officer I reported to, the nation would be in trouble because with my life on the line, I would pick the intelligent, analytical, clear-headed, quick thinking one of the two.  I'd pick Obama.

CAFKIA

cross posted to the American Patriot Institute

Debate, Discuss, Disagree

When Bush the smarter was running against Bill Clinton I made some observations I find interesting and relevant in the current presidential campaign.  During the GOP convention, every time a reporter would interview anyone, they appeared to be being really careful to stick with the party line.  The party planks were gospel and they agreed with anything Bush said.  Then came the Dem convention and it seemed as if every person interviewed made a point of telling what they disagreed with BC on and how they thought that he was the best choice anyway. 

The GOP attitude made me really nervous and I was much relieved when BC was announced the winner of the election.  I very much like the idea of a prez whose advisors are not afraid to give an honest opinion and/or disagree with their leader's assessment of a given situation.  I want there to be open and honest debate and discussion in the Whitehouse.  Yes, a leader has to know when to make a decision and sometimes, said leader must decide in opposition to advice (s)he has gotten.  But the leader must have as complete a picture as possible if they are to make good decisions.

I disagree with Barack Obama on some issues.  I have since I started paying attention to him.  I actually find some comfort in that.  Were I to completely agree with him I would doubt my own objectivity.  It would make it uncomfortable in the least and, most likely impossible to share my opinion.  I don't want Prez Obama to have an Amen Chorus and if he does, I have neither desire nor intent to be a part of it.  Such opinions as I proffer will be honest ones.  So, even though I disagree with him on certain things, I am comfortable with the idea of him as the leader of the free world. (assuming we can regain that status after the idiocy of the Dim Son)  I certainly am more comfortable with the idea of BO as leader of the free world than I am with any of the rethugs and more than a couple of the Dems. 

I hope to disagree with him for the next 8 years or so.

CAFKIA

Why Are They Mad at Hillary?

I have taken part in a number of conversations over the past few days, online and in person, where Hillary was being excoriated or, where some one wanted to know what all the anger at Hillary was about.  Some are asking why Obama supporters can't just be happy "he won" and go celebrate.  Why must they (I say they because I never viewed myself as a Hillary hater.  I was/am an Obama preferer.)  I posted the quote below in a comment on the knoxviews discussion blog and the more I look at it, the more I like it and the more I think I may have something there.

Wining the primary was not/is not the goal. It was probably a requirement if the goal is to be reached but winning the primary and winning the White House are not the goals. Winning is a republican goal. It is one of the reasons they are good at it. Nothing matters to them but the winning and anything they do that results in winning is therefore justified. Liberals are supposed to be different. Winning and losing take a backseat to moving the nation forward. They are nothing compared to individual rights, respect for the Constitution, and ensuring that children don't die simply for choosing stupid parents. I'm no mind reader but, I think perhaps the rancor against Hillary is rooted in that it appeared that she took a very republican approach to winning, a scorched earth policy that does not serve to move us any closer to respectable, deserving Liberal ideals.

We haven't won shit.

CAFKIA

Above All Else, Irony

Mike Huckabee did it as a joke.  An unfunny, ill-advised, sick, racist joke but still, he claims it was a joke.  Hillary Clinton says she was using it as a time line statement to justify her staying in a race she has already lost.  The references to assassination should not have come from any politician regarded as astute yet, within a day or two of each other, two of our candidates for president of the nation have made just such a reference. 

Republicanism isn't funny.  Sure it is frustrating, annoying, deceptive, and several other unflattering adjectives but, funny just isn't one of them.  A reference to the possible lynching of a black presidential candidate made to a gathering of paranoid, xenophobic racists is particularly not funny.

Unfortunately, all to frequently the path democraticism takes to funny goes right through irony.  In my experience of direct conversations as well as what I have overheard and read, Hillary is hated and feared by the Reich-wing above all else.  I don't know why and efforts to explain it to me haven't clarified shit but, it is so.  Given the attitude of that wing of American politics toward her, it seems incredibly unlikely that any plan to eliminate Obama by assassination would be timed so as to help Hillary Clinton an any way.  And there indeed is the irony.  As long as Hillary is his presumed replacement, Obama is likely safe from any organized attack.  (One can never discount possible actions from individual psychos.) 

Irony is tough.

CAFKIA

Answering Bartcop

I could probably find the original question but I don't feel it is worth the effort.  In essence, the author of the Bartcop, militant liberal humor website, asked why black Americans so readily deserted the Clintons and ran to the camp of a relative unknown, political newby.  I think the question is flawed  but, I will try to address it anyway.

In a lot of ways, Bill Clinton was one of us.  His two major advantages of birth were being born white and really freakin' smart,  His disadvantages, single mother, poor, small town, Arkansas, were easily enough to offset the advantages.  For whatever reason, and I sure do not know how he acquired the skill, Bill Clinton appeared to be able to comfortably be the only white guy in a room full of of blacks.  Somehow, he doesn't even stick out in such a situation, it appears to be the most natural thing in the world.  A lot of black people learn this skill early (well, the reverse).  We learn it through constant repetition, or at least I did, as well as by having some natural "talent" for it. 

I do not doubt for one second, Hillary's bonifides as a liberal.  I believe that she is and has been concerned about the "less fortunate".  I don't doubt her sincerity or, believe that she is anything other than as presented. 

She isn't one of us and she never will be.  That is not meant as an insult or slight or as a pejorative at all.  It is simply an observation and acknowledgment of reality.  I do NOT know Hillary Clinton, I'm not psychic, I'm not privy to any insider information, this is my opinion formed from observation, reading, and essentially living through the last couple of decades and paying a relatively high level of attention.  I doubt that Hillary would be comfortable in that black crowd.  I don't see how she could avoid sticking out or, that it would appear to be a natural situation.  In short, Hillary isn't Bill.  It is an obvious statement but apparently one that needs to be said.  That doesn't mean anything that isn't said.  I'm relatively sure that one-on-one, HRC is comfortable interacting with a wide variety of ethnic groups, cultures, and nationalities.

In my opinion, "we" did not desert the Clintons.  We deserted Hillary.  We were behind Hillary, those of us who were, because of our fond memories of Bill, our disgust of republican policies, her position as the presumptive front runner, and the relative lack of another candidate we felt had the organization and support necessary to win in the general.  (ideologically, I supported Kucinich, pragmatically, I was behind Edwards)  Barack Obama was a name that some had heard but, it was news to me that he had a national following.  As he started showing stronger and stronger, it became increasingly difficult to justify not supporting him.  His political positions were certainly at least as close to mine as Hillary's were.  I obviously do not speak for all blacks but I imagine that many of us had discussions with ourselves asking why would we ask a white to make things right for us and our nation when we had an apparently competent and intelligent black who actually had a chance to win.  Why would we out ourselves to ourselves as an Uncle Tom?

If Obama had arrived in time to run for Bill's 2nd term, I doubt he would have gotten a majority of the black vote.  Hillary was never the president.  Our allegiance was simply not to her.  As we became informed about options open to us, a lot of us decided that for us and what we want for our nation, Obama was a better fit.  I read and hear about these Obamanics who have some ill-defined grudge and want to banish the Clintons.  I have never had one of them out themselves to me.  All of the Obama supporters I have spoken to in this primary season have only admitted to being FOR Obama. 

Insulting Bill and/or Hillary Clinton does not appear to be the primary goal of any of the blacks who have made their views on this election known to me whether by private conversation, blog, radio, editorial or what.  I'm on the verge of believing that I'm being insulted, that it is being said that I could not have higher motivations and/or that if I did, I could not satisfy them with a black person. 

Yea, that's insulting.

CAFKIA

Incompetents Giving Advice

Really, think about just who you might go to for advice.  Even within a specific subject group, we do not take advice from just anyone, we look for the successful, the accomplished, the knowledgeable.  One would have to be crazy to blindly take advice on one's health from a physician who had patients routinely and inexplicably die.  If a bum on the streets gives you financial advice, no one will think you are silly for ignoring it.  Guys with white canes, dark glasses and, dogs are not the goto folk for advice on how to run a particular NASCAR track. 

So why in the name of all that's holy and most that aint would anyone take advice from George W. Bush on how to effectively deal with terrorists, would be or actual?  Can you even think of anyone who is a more spectacular failure from a national security standpoint?  His methods, attitudes and, actions lead to the success for the worst act of terror on American soil in the last century or so.  He has failed to capture the primary planner and face of al Quaeda.  By the assessment of independent agencies, we are at best no safer and at worst, significantly less protected from attack now that Bush has had 7+ years to institute his policies.

Bush's comments to the Knesset were, in my opinion, inappropriate but even worse, they cannot help but lead thinking people to the observation that he is singularly unqualified to give the world advice on dealing with terrorists.  That he would presume to do so is a national embarrassment of unprecedented scope.

CAFKIA

What Does It Really Mean?

A while back, there was this bar/restaurant I used to hang out in at all hours of the day.  If you are in a place as much as I was there, you will inevitably get to see them setting up for the day as well as closing the place down at night.  In the course of observing such, I noted that one of the jobs the servers had was to "marry" catsup bottles that were more than half empty.  That was actually the term that was commonly used for the process.  The servers were told to "marry" the bottles.  I never heard the instruction explained nor, did I need it explained to me.  It seemed fairly intuitive what they were talking about.

I have heard the word used that way in other applications and indeed, have done so myself.  I have no memory of ever actually looking up the words "marry" or "marriage" or any other variation.

So, it would seem that in my experience, the common knowledge, the assumed meaning, for marry and marriage, was that two or more things would be put together.  It is, or at least it should be, instructive that nowhere in my common definition does the word "man" or "woman" appear.  In my opening anecdote, there was no need of or place for gender identities.  When exactly pray tell, does one learn that "marriage" is between a man and a woman?  If it is such common knowledge, why are the words commonly used to describe things that have nothing to do with men and women?

I suspect that someone has been sold a bill of goods.  I have zero memory of hearing, reading, learning or knowing that marriage was between a man and a woman until, UNTIL, the possibility of gays and lesbians getting married became a public issue.  I suppose that someone will argue that it has been defined in one dictionary or another since 1203AD or something as the coupling of a man and a woman.  To that I would just have to ask, are you alleging that every thing in the dictionary is common knowledge and, are you willing to take a test to prove it?

Today, the CA Supreme Court ruled that same sex marriage was valid.  It would appear that the common knowledge is getting less common all the time.

CAFKIA

In Denial

I just saw a political cartoon that showed Uncle Sam pondering the issue of what to do about the energy crisis while sitting on a barrel labeled "Untapped Domestic Reserves".  Amazingly enough, the pundit signed his work (Gorrell) thereby letting us know that he is an idiot in denial.

India and China are quite literally, in the drivers seat on this issue.  Both nation's economies have the potential to reduce ours to insignificance.  As their middle class grows and they require more petroleum products to fuel their cars and produce geegaws and gadgets that they will spend their newfound disposable income on, they are the one's that will buy the oil at, for now, whatever price.  They will also not be exporting much, if any, of their domestically produced petroleum.  They are both in periods of significant and aggressive economic growth, a beast that demands to be fed energy

So, let's just use our imaginations for a minute.  Say that we go hog wild and drill in ANWR, construct coal liquification plants all over Pa and Wv, and develop the means to extract the petroleum form the oil shale reserves in Rockies.  What happens then?  Well, if it is damn near any capitalistic American and/or a company with shareholders, they will sell the final product where ever they can get the best price.  Alternatively, if they are existing oil companies, they will simply divert shipments that currently come here to other places that need them (say, for instance, China and India) so as to avoid "flooding" the market here and causing prices to drop.  They will NOT intentionally set up a situation wherein they make less money.  And you are an idiot if you think they will.  You're an idiot if you think they would be allowed to by their board of directors and/or shareholders.

The only way out of this conumdrum is to establish new energy sources from new and smaller companies.  One favored fantasy is roofing every house with solar panels and each household sells the excess power to the company that manages the grid to be redistributed where needed.  It might not happen exactly that way but, that is the kind of situation we need.  Multiple sources in an incredibly broad base that has nothing to do with established coal and petroleum providers.

Neither this nation nor the world, have any problems that can be solved by finding and using more oil.  Economic and environmental effects will ensure the truth of that statement.  Of course, any politician that tells you that truth or any of several others will probably not get your vote, much less be elected.

CAFKIA

Bush/neoCON tax cuts explained

If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.
Abraham Maslow

Private Thoughts

A long time ago I read a science fiction story that comes to mind today.  The basic plot line was that the earth had for thousands of years been in an interstellar fog of unknown make up.  The effect of this fog was that it disrupted the flow of thoughts outside one's head.  The edge of the fog was pretty sharp and within a few days, as the edge passed over, everyone could read other's thoughts.  Actually, that isn't well put.  Everyone broadcast all of their thoughts and everyone in range got them.  Neither sender nor receiver had any choice in the matter.

The story was a treatment of what happens when the social filters are taken away from communication.  Most of us think things that we would never say out loud.  Things like, "Damn that is the ugliest child I have ever seen!" or "This moron is as dumb as a box of hammers.  Why in the hell am I still listening to him?".  I could go on but you get my drift.  We pick and choose what to make public because we want to avoid hurting someone or, we don't want to start a fight or, we are ashamed of an action etc.  Whatever the reason, we count on our ability to filter our thoughts so that what is communicated is appropriate for the mores and sensitivities of our target audience.  In the scifi story, society degenerated pretty quickly and all anyone wanted was the ability to mute the incoming thoughts.  They wanted to not be able to hear what others were thinking.

When Rev Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama's friend and former pastor, delivered his now infamous sermon that included the statement that God would damn America for it's treatment of a variety of peoples, he had an appropriate set of filters for his target audience.  Those folks in the pews understood what he was saying and they understood why.  Many of those not born to privilege that I have spoken with on this matter understand.  Those who through the use of technology, have listened in after the fact, those who have actively circumvented the social filters, are in effect eavesdropping.  They are choosing to listen to thoughts not meant for them and then they are choosing to be insulted and appalled that they could possibly hear something  that describes them in less than complimentary terms when they do.  They are idiots.  They are con men.

It matters not what Wright said.  At issue in this situation is what was at issue in the scifi story.  Do you want to hear the raw thoughts of everyone or, would you perhaps rather wait for the socially filtered version that streams from their mouths, pens, or computers?  I'm not even a little bit conflicted on this.  I don't need your thoughts.  I'll happily hold on for the words.

CAFKIA

Can Something be a Greater Degree of Dead ?

2 terms in the United States House of Representatives, over 21 years as a member of the United States Senate, son and grandson of admirals of the United States Navy, graduate of the Naval Academy, one of the richest members of the Senate, owns approximately 8 homes and, has a nice little blonde trophy heiress at home and he accuses Barack Obama of being elitist.   The super rich, privileged, connected, white guy thinks that the guy born of a mating and failed relationship of a native African and a white Kansan, is elitist.

We all know that the GOP has killed irony.  That happened quite a while ago.  But apparently there are varying degrees of deas because there is no way irony can't be more dead after McCain's verbal idiocy.

Of course, the greatest blow to irony will be the number of people that idiotic statement makes sense to.  Oh sure, it was dead already but that's still a helluva lick.

CAFKIA

The following is a poem by Langston Hughes that I have stolen from the Group News Blog.  If you are having some trouble relating to the support that Rev. Jermiah Wright receives in the black community.  Read this a couple of times.  Hughes died in '67 so, obviously, for us, this issue isn't new and neither is the sentiment  he expressed.

Let America be America again.
Let it be the dream it used to be.
Let it be the pioneer on the plain
Seeking a home where he himself is free.

(America never was America to me.)

Let America be the dream the dreamers dreamed--
Let it be that great strong land of love
Where never kings connive nor tyrants scheme
That any man be crushed by one above.

(It never was America to me.)

O, let my land be a land where Liberty
Is crowned with no false patriotic wreath,
But opportunity is real, and life is free,
Equality is in the air we breathe.

(There's never been equality for me,
Nor freedom in this "homeland of the free.")

Say, who are you that mumbles in the dark?
And who are you that draws your veil across the stars?

I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,
I am the Negro bearing slavery's scars.
I am the red man driven from the land,
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek--
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak.

I am the young man, full of strength and hope,
Tangled in that ancient endless chain
Of profit, power, gain, of grab the land!
Of grab the gold! Of grab the ways of satisfying need!
Of work the men! Of take the pay!
Of owning everything for one's own greed!

I am the farmer, bondsman to the soil.
I am the worker sold to the machine.
I am the Negro, servant to you all.
I am the people, humble, hungry, mean--
Hungry yet today despite the dream.
Beaten yet today--O, Pioneers!
I am the man who never got ahead,
The poorest worker bartered through the years.

Yet I'm the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the Old World while still a serf of kings,
Who dreamt a dream so strong, so brave, so true,
That even yet its mighty daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That's made America the land it has become.
O, I'm the man who sailed those early seas
In search of what I meant to be my home--
For I'm the one who left dark Ireland's shore,
And Poland's plain, and England's grassy lea,
And torn from Black Africa's strand I came
To build a "homeland of the free."

The free?

Who said the free? Not me?
Surely not me? The millions on relief today?
The millions shot down when we strike?
The millions who have nothing for our pay?
For all the dreams we've dreamed
And all the songs we've sung
And all the hopes we've held
And all the flags we've hung,
The millions who have nothing for our pay--
Except the dream that's almost dead today.

O, let America be America again--
The land that never has been yet--
And yet must be--the land where every man is free.
The land that's mine--the poor man's, Indian's, Negro's, ME--
Who made America,
Whose sweat and blood, whose faith and pain,
Whose hand at the foundry, whose plow in the rain,
Must bring back our mighty dream again.

Sure, call me any ugly name you choose--
The steel of freedom does not stain.
From those who live like leeches on the people's lives,
We must take back our land again,
America!

O, yes,
I say it plain,
America never was America to me,
And yet I swear this oath--
America will be!


Out of the rack and ruin of our gangster death,
The rape and rot of graft, and stealth, and lies,
We, the people, must redeem
The land, the mines, the plants, the rivers.
The mountains and the endless plain--
All, all the stretch of these great green states--
And make America again!

Of course, in the final analysis I have to say that for six years, Rev. Wright stood shoulder to shoulder as a Marine with other Marines ready to fight, bleed, and/or die for your right to speak as you wish.  If you seek to restrict is freedom of speech, I'm just one of those you will have to fight.

CAFKIA

For the Willfully Ignorant

The New York Times has a report on the navel gazing being done by mid level Army officers in schools at Ft Leavenworth.  By current wingnut standards, all of these officers are traitors and phonies.  They are discussing who is at fault for the clusterfuck that is the war in Iraq.

FORT LEAVENWORTH, Kan. — Here at the intellectual center of the United States Army, two elite officers were deep in debate at lunch on a recent day over who bore more responsibility for mistakes in Iraq — the former defense secretary, Donald H. Rumsfeld, or the generals who acquiesced to him.

“The secretary of defense is an easy target,” argued one of the officers, Maj. Kareem P. Montague, 34, a Harvard graduate and a commander in the Third Infantry Division, which was the first to reach Baghdad in the 2003 invasion. “It’s easy to pick on the political appointee.”

“But he’s the one that’s responsible,” retorted Maj. Michael J. Zinno, 40, a military planner who worked at the headquarters of the Coalition Provisional Authority, the former American civilian administration in Iraq.

No, Major Montague shot back, it was more complicated: the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the top commanders were part of the decision to send in a small invasion force and not enough troops for the occupation. Only Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, the Army chief of staff who was sidelined after he told Congress that it would take several hundred thousand troops in Iraq, spoke up in public.

The complete article is worth a read.  It is encouraging to know that the Army is taking an honest look at the war and are openly and frankly discussing issues that will affect our nation for years to come.  For me, the showstopper is at the end of the article.

One question that silenced many of the officers was a simple one: Should the war have been fought?

“I honestly don’t know how I feel about that,” Major Powell said in a telephone conversation after the discussions at Leavenworth.

“That’s a big, open question,” General Caldwell said after a long pause.

So, how will the wingnuts spin this?  How can they say they support the troops if they disagree with the assessment of the war that the "boots on the ground" are making?  Oh yea, since the NYT is a well known liberal rag, no repugnantcant is going to read it.  Right?

CAFKIA

Why the Secrets?

So, lets say that you're a guy, a single guy.  And let's say that you have a bit of a thing for the feel of women's undies on your skin.  It is a relatively lightweight quirk and certainly harms no one.  However, knowing that it could be somewhat embarrassing if certain of your manly men buddies found out about it, you only do this occasionally and only in a windowless room in your home.  Call it a large closet if you will.  You are always alone and no pictures are taken.

Imagine then, that one day a neighbor with whom you have been friendly, lets slip to someone else about your little quirk.  Yes, you would be mad as hell and as stated, embarrassed.  But even more, you want to know how the hell the neighbor knew.  The fact that he knew is going to change your habits an make you tear your place apart looking for the source or conduit of his information.  Whatever it was, you WILL fix.  His information source is dead, gone, kaput. 

Had the neighbor been smart, he would have held the information in reserve for a time when it might have been useful to him.  Perhaps he would need a loan or was having friends over and wanted to use your pool or park cars in your yard.   But, it is too late for any of that.  The opportunity has been wasted. 

Now imagine such a thing on an international scale.

My fellow API scholar Gordon over at the Alternate Brain blog, noted an occurrence of that very thing in this post which quoted a Washington Post article.

A small private intelligence company that monitors Islamic terrorist groups obtained a new Osama bin Laden video ahead of its official release last month, and around 10 a.m. on Sept. 7, it notified the Bush administration of its secret acquisition. It gave two senior officials access on the condition that the officials not reveal they had it until the al-Qaeda release.

Within 20 minutes, a range of intelligence agencies had begun downloading it from the company's Web site. By midafternoon that day, the video and a transcript of its audio track had been leaked from within the Bush administration to cable television news and broadcast worldwide.

The founder of the company, the SITE Intelligence Group, says this premature disclosure tipped al-Qaeda to a security breach and destroyed a years-long surveillance operation that the company has used to intercept and pass along secret messages, videos and advance warnings of suicide bombings from the terrorist group's communications network.

There are more than one reason why a bit of information might be classified.  A bathtub recipe for nerve gas would be classified because the information itself is dangerous in the hands of the curious or mal-intentioned.  The information that the Queen of England is wearing frilly peach colored underwear today would be classified because we absolutely would not want our friends in England to know that we had the capability or the will to acquire such information.  The fact of some tidbit of information being common knowledge does not, DOES NOT, mean that it is silly to classify it or that government agents or employees can speak freely about it.  When we got the information, how we got the information, why we got the information, that we got the information,  are all bits of information about our intelligence capabilities. 

Like the neighbor in my hypothetical above, there could well have been a time when the capability to acquire this information would have come in handy but, that is dead now.  If the source/conduit does not appear to have changed due to this (mis)administration's stupidity, you would have to be a fool to trust any information coming through.  They WILL either seal the leak or use it to pump bogus or useless garbage to you. 

If someone says things like this are "no big deal", they are either stupid, lying, or some combination of the two.  There are no other alternatives.

CAFKIA

I'm in!

First let me say that I am honored and appreciative that the esteemed members of the American Patriot Institute have seen fit to inaugurate me as a full Resident Scholar.  The group is comprised of veterans who remember that their allegiance is to The Constitution of the United States and not to a party or to a politician.  We are strong personalities unwilling to kneel before the false gods of militarism and fear.  We are veterans and as such, tend to have some idea of the true costs of war.  We are also adults.  The youthful enthusiasm for wasted lives and civic resources, is gone along with the naivete so useful to those who would profit from the suffering and sacrifices of others.  Don't get me wrong, all of us stand ready to contribute such as is needed from us should a credible threat to The Constitution arise, foreign or domestic in nature.  Barring that, we will continue to do the important work of attempting to ensure that the sacrifices so many young people make, are not laid at the altar of corporate profit or, that those who would so corrupt such a noble thing are held accountable.

The other scholars are linked below.  I will attempt to get them in the side bar as well.  They are deserving of a click and a read and perhaps a comment.  You are not required to agree with anyone but either way, it should be your thoughts you express not talking points published and repeated ad nauseum by any political viewpoint.

Kitchen Window Woman
Bulldog
Deuddersun
Fixer
Gordon
Moderate
Scroff
Spadoman

CAFKIA