| Monday August
2, 2004
There was considerable
mail over the weekend, as usual. Some of
it was on important subjects. One is a very
recent Baghdad sitrep.
One reason not
to answer in haste.
I wrote last week
a reply to Mr. Mangles on the
subject of transformations of forces and what can happen when republics
become empires. It was done quickly, and made some references to the
situation in the Balkans, where UN troops act as lords, and Serbia has been
subjected to a permit raj and political correctness at the hands of foreign
occupiers; it was a short reference, but I had forgotten European
sensitivities.
Then while on a flight trying to get
some of this cleared up, I forgot I had made that reference in a published
work. Thus this exchange:
On 1/8/04 19:49, "Jerry Pournelle" <jerryp@jerrypournelle.com>
wrote:
> As to the rest, who said anything abut
stripping it bare? I didn't and > the fact that you are certain I did is
curious >
Oh yes you did.
It's there in black and white.
You said (and I quote from your site) "...while our
troops conquer the enemies for you rational Enlightened people to occupy and
strip bare"
I am guilt of adding the word "it" between "strip" and
"bare". I plead guilt to that, which does not really change the meaning in
any way. The rest is all your own fair hand.
> If you are unaware of the situation in the UN
occupied areas of the > Balkans you should enlighten yourself.
I am aware, well enough. I think you clearly are not.
I think you speak in ignorance--profound ignorance--or you have been
seriously misinformed. I suggest you're the one who needs to do some
self-enlightening on this matter.
Apart from the fact that is was not "conquered" by US
troops, not least due to their total absence from the scene until the UN
occupation--not conquest--of Kosovo, the notion that there is or was
anything for any western nation that's worth stripping bare in these
backward and benighted places is just risible.
I really do believe for the first time we have been in
dialogue that you are talking utter twaddle, and I'd rather believe it is
from ignorance than maliciousness.
Which certainly takes care of me as a
reliable source, doesn't it? But there is more. I made the mistake of
another short answer:
On 2/8/04 3:17, "Jerry Pournelle" <jerryp@jerrypournelle.com>
wrote:
> Well all right. It was a sarcasm. But the
fact is that the UN lords > are living large in Kossovo, courtesy of our
defeating the Serbs, > which is a bit as if Paris bombed Washington DC in
support of illegal > Mexican immigrants in California. > > You seem to want
the US and Europe to run the world, US to supply the > muscle and Europe the
heart and brains and incidentally to take most > of the profits. > > Me I
want to come home
'It was a sarcasm' -- I like that; so if it had been
more than one it would have been 'It was two (or three, or whatever)
sarcasms'. And I'd always thought 'sarcasm' was like 'water': just
'sarcasm.'
As for UN lords in Kosovo: well maybe UN officials are
comfortable (I don't know) but I know for sure that Kosovo is not exactly
the favourite posting for British troops... not by a long shot; it's a
grimmer place to go to than Iraq, many say.
Oh, and by the way it would be a more accurate
metaphor to talk of Paris bombing Mexico City to discourage illegal Mexican
immigrants in California.
'...US to supply the muscle and Europe the heart and
brains...' Well, that inspires a sarcasm. Right now, the US Administration
might be considered to be a bit like Bungalow Bill: not a lot going on
upstairs. So it would be nice if someone supplied some brains.
I do not want the US & Europe (ie., NATO) to run the
world, but I fear something similar, incorporating Japan, Russia if it ever
develops into a truly open and democratic state, and other places too as
they mature enough--including, if possible, maybe 50 years from now,
China--is a geopolitical necessity in the 21st century. Such an alliance...
A 'coalition of the willing' if you will, would be able to stabilise the
peace and safety of world. That's not a new Roman Empire and neither yet is
it a world government, but it something achievable midway between--a
commonwealth.
We can't go home yet.
(BTW: WHAT profits?)
So. I give Mr. Mangles his gotcha, and
I have learned a lesson about short answers to mail.
I have not the time to look up all the
incidents I have had reported to me that justify my remarks about UN forces
in Serbia, but I have a number of them. If one believes me mistaken in my
conclusion that all has not gone well there, it still does not change my
views at least that US forces applied to make the world better have not
uniformly done that very well -- the economy of the lower Danube was
devastated for months by the dropping of the bridges, and as to Kossovo as
recently as 1920 the majority was Serbian and no Albanians were legally
allowed to immigrate; the Albanian majority was seen by the Serbs as an
invading force. You make think of analogies to that in other lands.
The use of US forces to defeat other
lands for yet others to occupy does not strike me as building world
stability; I continue to agree with Talleyrand that you can do much with a
bayonet but you can't sit on it. Francis Fukuyama has a new book out on
world stability through "state building" in which those of us Enlightened
can share our systems with those who are benighted. I shouldn't put it that
way, because I agree with the Ancients: good government is a great and food
fortune, amounting to a blessing from God or the gods; but I am not at all
sure it is a gift within our ability to bestow.
The mission of the Roman People was to
protect the weak and make humble the proud; so said Virgil and Augustus was
much taken with the resulting vision. It is a vision, and it may even be
noble. After all I am a Fellow of the Augustan Society, although I may not
share all the views held by my colleagues on the nobility of Octavius Caesar
Augustus, but he certainly had some noble ambitions. The world may have
fared better under those visions of Roman order than it might otherwise.
But that was a long time ago and as
Mr. Mangles points out with increasing fervor, the US is not Rome.
I knew that. Nor will it become Rome.
But what it might become, and I am pretty certain it will become if our
governing vision ceases to be building a great example for others to follow
and becomes one of imposing order and stability on the world, may not be so
much to everyone's liking.
There is a logic to empire, and a
strong logic to governing without the consent of the governed : to believing
that one has the right and duty to govern without the consent of the
governed. Most people through history were so governed: the US created a new
order and started a long experiment that I suspect is now failing.
But enough. I write this in some haste
too. There is too much to do.
I give Mr. Mangles his points, and
apparently I have not learned my lesson since I am writing this answer in
counterpoint to increasingly shrill demands that I join my wife and dog for
a walk.
==
Having returned, I find I don't much
care to play these games.
It is probably true that most of the
Europeans who want US intervention to save the world (although Europe
certainly has the military means to do that so long as we don't interfere)
have very high minded motives and are certain that they do good, and thus
resent my references to profits. The facts on the ground are a bit
different. Our interventions in the Balkans were "new Democrat"
interventions of the "it's our army now" and also had very high minded
motives; as has been frequently observed, these were uses of American power
justified by the fact that we had no discernable national interest in the
conflicts.
Mr. Mangles says "We can't go home
yet." I wish him well of it; Europe certainly has both the manpower and the
economic means to go play all the world-saving games he likes.
American policy should be as it once
was: we are the the friends of liberty everywhere, but guardians only of our
own. Show us a threat we can deal with and we will (Afghanisan comes to
mind). Nation Building or as Fukuyama would have it State Building is
something to be left to others. We will be better off abolishing the TSA,
getting rid of much of the structure of Homeland Security, deploying our
military to defend our borders, enforcing immigration laws, and devolving as
much government and regulation to the states as we possibly can.
History shows that democracy is best
suited to small states; and of the wealthiest nations on Earth (per capita
wealth) most are small. Small wealthy states have ever had the problem of
avaricious neighbors (and avarice is a disorder any nation including
democracies can have: it's easy to blame one's comparative poverty on a
comparatively wealthier nation particularly if you have a big army and the
other guy does not). The US solved that by federalism, and that endured for
a long time.
The Civil War changed the nature of
the union in a fundamental manner; but it left us unique even so. It is
likely that if the US were as thoroughly ruled from Washington as France is
from Paris, the union would have broken apart despite the Civil War. Now we
have the national means of enforcing central government and Homeland
Security to show us how important it is that we be subjects and not
citizens, and things may fundamentally change. Are changing, even as
we watch.
So perhaps it is time to do
adventuring. But if the US does begin to do imperialism, we may learn how to
do it well. The Brits did not care for us much when they needed us. It will
be interesting to hear their views when we are overpaid, oversexed, and over
there with our boom boxes and rock music and other cultural weapons of mass
destruction, this time not in answer to a visible threat, but in the name of
"world stability."
==============
============
From Colonel
Haynes, a rather disturbing message:
This is a story that is being scrupulously ignored by
the main stream media, by the Republican National Committee and most other
information organizations. It makes these e-mail distributions the exact
equivalent of the Soviet era "zamisdat" news sheets. Those were typed or
mimeographed by the underground and hand distributed to circumvent Pravda
and the other Communist propaganda rags. Thank God the Internet arrived in
time for these electronic methods to become available.
If the media (or any of you!) consider these charges
untrue, there is an obligation to publish them where they will be examined
and if found to be false, publicly discredited. I sense a strong personal
obligation to help circulate these testimonials ... and I sincerely hope
that at least most of you to whom I choose to forward them think as I do.
Bill Haynes ===========
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Jim Mendrala" <j.mendrala@ieee.org>
Date: August 1, 2004 11:30:29 PM PDT Subject: 18 Swift Boat Veterans comment
on Kerry's war record
This was passed to me by a friend. Good
readings for veterans and the country. Jim
===========
18 Swift Boat Veterans comment on Kerry's war
record -- Regardless of your political views---this is worth reading !
"We resent very deeply the false war crimes
charges he made coming back from Vietnam in 1971 and repeated in the book
"Tour of Duty." We think those cast an aspersion on all those living and
dead, from our unit and other units in Vietnam. We think that he knew he was
lying when he made the charges, and we think that they're unsupportable. We
intend to bring the truth about that to the American people. We believe,
based on our experience with him, that he is totally unfit to be the
Commander-in-Chief."
-- John O'Neill, spokesman, Swift Boat Veterans
for Truth
"I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be
Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a
political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability,
loyalty and trust -- all absolute tenets of command. His biography, 'Tour of
Duty,' by Douglas Brinkley, is replete with gross exaggerations, distortions
of fact, contradictions and slanderous lies. His contempt for the military
and authority is evident by even a most casual review of this biography. He
arrived in-country with a strong anti-Vietnam War bias and a self-serving
determination to build a foundation for his political future. He was
aggressive, but vain and prone to impulsive judgment, often with disregard
for specific tactical assignments. He was a 'loose cannon.' In an
abbreviated tour of four months and 12 days, and with his specious medals
secure, Lt.(jg) Kerry bugged out and began his infamous betrayal of all
United States forces in the Vietnam War. That included our soldiers, our
marines, our sailors, our coast guardsmen, our airmen, and our POWs. His
leadership within the so-called Vietnam Veterans Against the War and
testimony before Congress in 1971 charging us with unspeakable atrocities
remain an undocumented but nevertheless meticulous stain on the men and
women who honorably stayed the course. Senator Kerry is not fit for
command."
-- Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman, USN (retired),
chairman, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth .
"During Lt.(jg) Kerry's tour, he was under my
command for two or three specific operations, before his rapid exit. Trust,
loyalty and judgment are the key, operative words. His turncoat performance
in 1971 in his grubby shirt and his medal-tossing escapade, coupled with his
slanderous lines in the recent book portraying us that served, including all
POWs and MIAs, as murderous war criminals, I believe, will have a lasting
effect on all military veterans and their families. Kerry would be described
as devious, self-absorbing, manipulative, disdain for authority, disruptive,
but the most common phrase that you'd hear is 'requires constant
supervision.'
-- Captain Charles Plumly, USN (retired)
"Thirty-five years ago, many of us fell silent
when we came back to the stain of sewage that Mr. Kerry had thrown on us,
and all of our colleagues ho served over there. I don't intend to be silent
today or ever again. Our young men and women who are serving deserve no
less."
-- Andrew Horne .
"In my specific, personal experience in both
coastal and river patrols over a 12-month period, I never once saw or heard
anything remotely resembling the atrocities described by Senator Kerry. If I
had, it would have been my obligation to report them in writing to a higher
authority, and I would certainly have done that. If Senator Kerry actually
witnessed or participated in these atrocities or, as he described them, 'war
crimes,' he was obligated to report them. That he did not until later when
it suited his political purposes strikes me as opportunism of the worst
kind. That he would malign my service and that of his fellow sailors with no
regard for the truth makes him totally unqualified to serve as
Commander-in-Chief."
-- Jeffrey Wainscott .
"I signed that letter because I, too felt a
deep sense of betrayal that someone who took the same oath of loyalty as I
did as an officer in the United States Navy would abandon his group here
(points to group photo) to join this group here (points to VVAW protest
photo), and come home and attempt to rally the American public against the
effort that this group was so valiantly pursuing. It is a fact that in the
entire Vietnam War we did not lose one major battle. We lost the war at
home... and at home, John Kerry was the Field General."
-- Robert Elder .
"My daughters and my wife have read portions of
the book 'Tour of Duty.' They wanted to know if I took part in the
atrocities described. I do not believe the things that are described
happened. Let me give you an example. In Brinkley's book, on pages 170 to
171, about something called the 'Bo De massacre' on November 24th of 1968...
In Kerry's description of the engagement, first he claimed there were 17
servicemen that were wounded. Three of us were wounded. I was the first..."
-- Joseph Ponder .
"While in Cam Rahn Bay, he trained on several
24-hour indoctrination missions, and one special skimmer operation with my
most senior and trusted Lieutenant. The briefing from some members of that
crew the morning after rvealed that they had not received any enemy fire,
and yet Lt.(jg) Kerry informed me of a wound -- he showed me a scratch on
his arm and a piece of shrapnel in his hand that appeared to be from one of
our own M-79s. It was later reported to me that Lt.(jg) Kerry had fired an
M-79, and it had exploded off the adjacent shoreline. I do not recall being
advised of any medical treatment, and probably said something like 'Forget
it.' He later received a Purple Heart for that scratch, and I have no
information as to how or whom. Lt..(jg) Kerry was allowed to return to the
good old USA after 4 months and a few days in country, and then he proceeded
to betray his former shipmates, calling them criminals who were committing
atrocities. Today we are here to tell you t! hat just the opposite is true.
Our rules of engagement were quite strict, and the officers and men of Swift
often did not even return fire when they were under fire if there was a
possibility that innocent people -- fishermen, in a lot of cases -- might be
hurt or injured. The rules and the good intentions of the men increased the
possibility that we might take friendly casualties."
-- Commander Grant Hibbard, USN (retired)
"Lt. Kerry returned home from the war to make
some outrageous statements and allegations... of numerous criminal acts in
violation of the law of war were cited by Kerry, disparaging those who had
fought with honor in that conflict. Had war crimes been committed by US
forces in Vietnam? Yes, but such acts were few and far between. Yet Lt.
Kerry have numerous speeches and testimony before Congress inappropriately
leading his audiences to believe that what was only an anomaly in the
conduct of America's fighting men was an epidemic. Furthermore, he suggested
that they were being encouraged to violated the law of war by those within
the chain of command. Very specific orders, on file at the Vietnam archives
at Texas Tech University, were issued by my father [Admiral Elmo Zumwalt]
and others in his chain of command instructing subordinates to act
responsibly in preserving the life and property of Vietnamese civilians."
-- Lt. Col. James Zumwalt, USMC (retired)
"We look at Vietnam... after all these years it
is still languishing in isolated poverty and helplessness and tyranny. This
is John Kerry's legacy. I deeply resent John Kerry's using his Swift boat
experience, and his betrayal of those who fought there as a stepping-stone
to his political ambitions."
-- Barnard Wolff
"In a whole year that I spent patrolling, I
didn't see anything like a war crime, an atrocity, anything like that. Time
and again I saw American fighting men put themselves in graver danger trying
to avoid... collateral damage. When John Kerry returned to the country, he
was sworn in front of Congress. And then he told my family -- my parents, my
sister, my brother, my neighbors -- he told everyone I knew and everyone I'd
ever know that I and my comrades had committed unspeakable atrocities."
-- David Wallace
"I served with these guys. I went on missions
with them, and these men served honorably. Up and down the chain of command
there was no acquiescence to atrocities. It was not condoned, it did not
happen, and it was not reported to me verbally or in writing by any of these
men including Lt.(jg) Kerry. In 1971, '72, for almost 18 months, he stood
before the television audiences and claimed that the 500,000 men and women
in Vietnam, and in combat, were all villains -- there were no heroes. In
2004, one hero from the Vietnam War has appeared, running for President of
the United States and Commander-in-Chief. It just galls one to think about
it."
-- Captain George Elliott, USN (retired)
"During the Vietnam War I was Task Force
Commander at An Thoi, and my tour of duty was 13 months, from the end of Tet
to the beginning of the Vietnamization of the Navy units. Now when I went
there right after Tet, I was restricted in my movements. I couldn't go much
of anyplace because the Vietcong controlled most of the area. When I left, I
could go anywhere I wanted, just about. Commerce was booming, the buses were
running, trucks were going, the waterways were filled with sampans with
goods going to market, but yet in Kerry's biography he says that our
operations were a complete failure... He also mentions a formal conference
with me, to try to get more air cover and so on. That conference never
happened..."
-- Captain Adrian Lonsdale, USCG (retired)
"I was in An Thoi from June of '68 to June of
'69, covering the whole period that John Kerry was there. I operated in
every river, in every canal, and every off-shore patrol area in the 4th
Corps area, from Cambodia all the way around to the Bo De River. I never
saw, even heard of all of these so-called atrocities and things that we were
supposed to have done. This is not true. We're not standing for it. We want
to set the record straight."
-- William Shumadine
"In 1971, when John Kerry spoke out to America,
labeling all Vietnam veterans as thugs and murderers, I was shocked and
almost brought to my knees, because even though I had served at the same
time and same unit, I had never witnessed or participated in any of the
events that the Senator had accused us of. I strongly believe that the
statements made by the Senator were not only false and inaccurate, but
extremely harmful to the United States' efforts in Southeast Asia and the
rest of the world. Tragically, some veterans, scorned by the antiwar
movement and their allies, retreated to a life of despair and suicide. Two
of my crewmates were among them. For that there is no forgiveness. "
-- Richard O'Meara
"My name is Steve Gardner. I served in 1966 and
1967 on my first tour of duty in Vietnam on Swift boats, and I did my second
tour in '68 and '69, involved with John Kerry in the last 2 1/2 months of my
tour. The John Kerry that I know is not the John Kerry that everybody else
is portraying. I served alongside him and behind him, five feet away from
him in a gun tub, and watched as he made indecisive moves with our boat, put
our boats in jeopardy, put our crews in jeopardy... if a man like that can't
handle that 6-man crew boat, how can you expect him to be our
Commander-in-Chief?"
-- Steven Gardner
"I served in Vietnam as a boat officer from
June of 1968 to July of 1969. My service was three months in Coastal
Division 13 out of Cat Lo, and nine months with Coastal Division 11 based in
An Thoi. John Kerry was in An Thoi the same time I was. I'm here today to
express the anger I have harbored for over 33 years, about being accused
with my fellow shipmates of war atrocities. All I can say is when I leave
here today, I'm going down to the Wall to tell my two crew members it's not
true, and that they and the other 49 Swiftees who are on the Wall were then
and are still now the best."
-- Robert Brant
"I never saw, heard of, or participated in any
Swift boat crews killing cattle, poisoning crops, or raping and killing
civilians as charged by John Kerry, both in his book and in public
statements. Since we both operated at the same time, in the same general
area, and on the same missions under the same commanders, it is hard to
believe his claims of atrocities and poor planning of Sea Lord missions. I
signed this letter because I feel that he used Swift boat sailors to
proclaim his antiwar statements after the war, and now he uses the same
Swift boat sailors to support his claims of being a war hero. He cannot have
it both ways, and we are here to ask for full disclosure of the proof of his
claims."
-- James Steffes
*************************************
Now what are the odds that ALL these fine men are
lying and Kerry is telling the truth? Or is it more likely that another
Democrat "can't remember shit" and lies through his teeth! Can you read this
and tell any of these 18 men they are wrong about Kerry. Kerry shouldn't
even be a Senator ~~ he should be court-martialed.
Wm Haynes Aerospace Systems Analyst
==================
I wasn't there, and know little about
that part of the campaign, although my friend "Franklin Ford" was an AID
official who did get out to the Delta and told me many stories which I
subsequently made public on BIX and GENIE. I certainly heard none of the
systematic brutality and atrocity stories Kerry told in those days.
On sources: I have nothing beyond what
you see here. A letter was sent to Colonel Haynes, who sent it on to many
people including me. I have no idea of the reliability of
Jim Mendrala who was
the original sender. I don't follow topical news. However a Google Search on
John O'Neill, spokesman, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth produced this:
Swift Boat Veterans Condemn Kerry as Unfit to Command
Dave
Eberhart, NewsMax.com
Tuesday, May
4, 2004
WASHINGTON – It was the news conference John Kerry did not
want to see happen.
In a standing-room-only suite at the National Press Club,
former “Swiftee” John O’Neill, spokesman for Swift Boat
Veterans for Truth, told reporters that the junior U.S.
senator from Massachusetts spent 45 minutes on the phone
with group founder Rear Adm. Roy Hoffman, USN (Ret.), trying
to “discourage” the band of brothers from going public with
their united sentiment that Kerry is unfit to be the
nation’s commander in chief.
The effort failed, and in a 90-minute session one veteran
after another described with brutal honesty why he fixed his
signature to a public letter to the Democrat candidate
condemning Kerry’s allegations of war crimes and demanding
that the former decorated Swift Boat skipper authorize the
Department of Defense to release all his military records.
<snip>
(
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/5/4/132751.shtml
) |
|
So I would guess that there is some
provenance to this.
====
I don't suppose it would do any harm
to reveal the true name of "Franklin Ford" but I have not heard from him in
some time, and although I am sure he is long retired I won't do it here. So
for now
=================
It's Pournelle's Fault
=================
On the Swift Boats people,
see below.
Just after Colonel Haynes' message I
got this. I have no idea if the quotes are verifiable.
John F. Kerry speaks:
"The vast majority of our imports come from outside
the country." - John F. Kerry
"If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure." -
John F. Kerry
"One word sums up probably the responsibility of any
Governor, and that one word is 'to be prepared'." - John F. Kerry
"I have made good judgments in the past. I have made
good judgments in the future." - John F. Kerry
"The future will be better tomorrow." - John F. Kerry
"We're going to have the best educated American people
in the world." - John F. Kerry
"I stand by all the misstatements that I've made." -
John F. Kerry
"We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a part of
NATO. We have a firm commitment to Europe. We are a part of Europe." - John
F. Kerry
"Public speaking is very easy." - John F. Kerry
"A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people
going to the polls." - John F. Kerry
"We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may
not occur." - John F. Kerry
"For NASA, space is still a high priority." - John F.
Kerry
"Quite frankly, teachers are the only profession that
teach our children." - John F. Kerry
"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment.
It's the impurities in our air and water that are doing it." - John F. Kerry
"Its time for the human race to enter the solar
system." - John F. Kerry
John Dinkel
=But:
Well that didn't take long:
Subject: RE: "john F. Kerry Speaks
According to this site
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/q/quaylisms.htm
These quotes get attributed to various "flavor of the
moment" political candidates.
Jp
==========
Subject: "John Kerry" Quotes
Title: "John Kerry" Quotes
When Bush was elected many of those same quotes were
passed around via email attributed to him. THAT email was cribbed from an
email that was passed around long before that, filled with quotes attributed
to Dan Quayle...
Regards,
Christopher B. Wright (wrightc@ubersoft.net)
==
Dear Dr. P --
You wrote:
>Just after Colonel Haynes' message I got this. I have
no idea if the >quotes are verifiable.
The quotes certainly are verifiable.
However, thirty seconds of search engine use reveals
that virtually all of these alleged Kerry quotations were in fact originally
voiced by the former Vice President, J. Danforth Quayle.
The only one which I cannot definitely attribute to DQ
is the line about imports coming from overseas, which appears to be obscure,
probably a misrendering of George W. Bush in Oregon in 2000, in which Dubya
said, "more and more of our imports come from overseas".
I recall spending much of the first Bush-clan
Presidency in an avid search for the latest and funniest Quayle
malapropisms, and I logged many of them in near-real-time from wire service
copy.
There are messages of mine in ancient DAT-tape
archived mail spools which incorporate the "if we do not succeed, we run the
risk of failure" quote as a .sig file. I've also got some Quayleisms from
that era which didn't make the above alleged-Kerry list, including this
beauty:
"Mars is essentially in the same orbit... Mars is
somewhat the same distance from the Sun, which is very important. We have
seen pictures where there are canals, we believe, and water. If there is
water, that means there is oxygen. If oxygen, that means we can breathe."
Mr. Dinkel, the original submitter, needs to be rapped
across the knuckles and sent back to school for some basic lessons in
informational hygiene.
It's certainly reasonable and proper to critique Sen.
Kerry on any number of different grounds, and I'm happy to do so at length
and late into the night, especially over a pitcher of good beer. But let's
be sure that the criticism is actually substantive, shall we?
Cheers,
RT
Again, I haven't time to look. Quayle
certainly said some odd things in public, but he was a very competent head
of the National Space Council, and was directly responsible for getting the
DC/X built despite the opposition of NASA and much of the Air Force. SSTO
technology was considered dead as the result of a very authoritative paper
by RAND done by Charles Lindley. Lindley was on my Council which recommended
SSTo investigations: he had repented his earlier views, largely due to
Council discussions with Max Hunter. Quayle took the trouble to get RAND to
do a new feasibility study, and this time the indications were that we could
do it.
Quayle asked us "Why now and not
before? Is it new engines?" to which Max Hunter and Chuck Lindley said in
effect "No, we're just smarter now." Max was blunter. "We were stupid
20 years ago."
Anyway DC/X was built and flew because
Quayle listened to all sides of a very highly technical debate. He was a
lawyer by training, and had been known as "the distinguished junior Senator"
and "an authority on defense policy" until the day after he was named as
candidate for Vice President...
So it is certainly possible to make
some odd statements in public. I've done a few myself, but fortunately the
cameras weren't running and there were not a lot of newsmen watching.
Incidentally, Quayle on life on Mars:
the Astronomer Royal wrote a book in the 60's (that late!) in which he
speculated on the subject, and if one did not spend a good bit of time
following the results of the probes, one might be forgiven for holding that
view after Pioneer and other Mars probes showed a very different Mars from
Percival Lowell's. Alas, because I liked Lowell's (and Heinlein's) Mars a
lot...
Anyway, that sh0uld be enough on that
one.
The Swift Boat
people's remarks are a different story.
========================
Subject: Be careful what you write.
http://www.local6.com/news/3605533/detail.html
- Roland Dobbins
Feeling safer already
========================
And now for
those worried about codes in products:
Subject: RFID Crack
Jerry:
Now you can crack the RFID tags used in retailing. I
suppose it had to happen sooner or later, and "Sooner" is nearly always a
safe bet in the Crackerverse:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1628713,00.asp
Charles Krug
" LAS VEGAS—A German consultant has released a
tool that its creator says will allow modifications of the code stored
within RFID tags, theoretically allowing consumers to wreak havoc in future
retail deployments.
The RFDump <http://www.rf-dump.org/> software
allows a user equipped with an RFID reader, a laptop or PDA, and a power
supply to rewrite the data stored in ISO 15693 tags, the most common tags
used to host the EPC (Electronic Product Code) information traditionally
stored in bar codes. "
This probably goes in my new novel.
(But see below,
alas)
===================
The REST of the Story
Everyone has heard the line
What if they gave a war and nobody came?
I've recently learned that this is the first line of a
poem attributed to Bertolt Brecht (1898 - 1956), the German poet and
playwrite. The full text of the poem follows:
What if they gave a war and nobody came?
Why then the war will come to you!
He who stays home when the fight begins
And lets another fight for his cause
Should take care:
He who does not take part
In the battle will share in the defeat.
Even avoiding battle will not avoid Battle,
since not to fight for your own cause really means
Fighting in behalf of your enemy's cause.
Courtesy Baen's Bar
Jim Woosely
Brecht has some great lines. He wasn't
a very admirable person, and went back to be Minister of Culture for
People's Germany. But he did have some courage, and after the East German
uprising:
The Solution
After the uprising of the 17th June
The Secretary of the Writers Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?
Which is perhaps his redemption.
==========
Subject: Arabs Caught Crossing Illegally Over U.S. -
Mexican Border
Hello Dr. Pournelle,
This is frightening. I wonder if there is anything to
it. If so, who is sitting on the story and why? There seem to be a lot of
people involved.
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/
newswire/news2004/0704/newswire073004-terrorists.htm
Cheers, Clyde Wisham
**** "He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the
vices I admire."-- Winston Churchill ****
==============
Subj: Iraq: Optimism or Hope?
You have accused me, Sir, of Optimism.
I plead guilty only to Hope.
I am not *confident* that All Things *are* going well,
or *will* go well. I merely am *not* confident that Things are going so
horribly, irretrievably badly that the whole business is Doomed. I see
indications both ways, and I see that the conventional Media -- and at least
one of your other contributors -- report only indications in one direction.
I can't do a lot about the conventional Media at large, but I can try to
give you the opportunity to make a more balanced view available to _your_
readers. Maybe that's why I seem Optimistic to you?
You want Optimism? *Here's* an Optimist:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005430
Rod Montgomery==monty@sprintmail.com
I presume your remarks are actually
address to Cochran.
I find you an "optimist" as I find
Cochran a "pessimist", but neither term is useful as an absolute. As to
presenting the readers with a variety of opinions, I thought I had been
doing that. Some people have sent me long documents they want me to open and
read, but I don't do that; otherwise I put up a pretty good sample of
everything I receive.
One chap recently thought my views
about Iraq "wishful thinking" which is puzzling and confuses analysis with
wishes: much of that leads to shooting the messenger.
His point was that the Kurds are
willing to accept the semi-federal structure now proposed for Iraq, and thus
to point out that fundamental differences remain that have strongly
centripetal effects is "wishful thinking". My "wishful thinking" is for a
time machine that lets us not get in there in the first place; I certainly
don't wish for a Civil War with my friends and relatives caught up in it.
But I have not seen anything to indicate to me that the Shia majority is
willing to accept anything less than an absolute majority rules centralized
Iraq, and I haven't seen any of the fatwa's that govern Iraq to any other
effect.
I have always said that if we could
get local governments going and leave the top layer to something less than a
democracy, the results would be good; once in a while things happen to make
me think that's possible; but the bombs do continue and I can't think that
is good news.
We had lots of good news coming out of
the Delta in Viet Nam, too. My "Franklin Ford" reports were full of them. We
were winning that war, in fact we had won it, when we abandoned it for
domestic political reasons. Perhaps it will be different this time.
=================
I am going to
post this:
Subject: Kerry:
Dear Jerry:
This is not something you and I should even try to
convince each other about. Total waste of time. That said, I'm a bit
suspicious of those Swift Boat veterans. As our mutual
friend who would actually know will tell you , Kerry was known to be a bit
of a "hot dog". At that time and in that war, that was how a young officer
was supposed to make his way, by being stupidly aggressive. I note that none
of the 18 actually served with Kerry on his boat and that those guys are
going around the country with him , supporting his candidacy. I wrote the
article on Disinformation that appears in the Enclyopaedia Britannica. There
is probably some truth in much of what they said, but that is why I
described it as "an elegant form of lying". Partial truth is part of the art
of it.
This seems to be a continuing tactic of Republicans
who did not serve against Democrats who did. Deny or denigrate their
service. It worked with Max Cleland in his Senate re-election campaign. I
heard so much bull about Cleland at the club that I presented one of our
foremost conspiracy theorists with a copy of his book, where he describes
exactly what did happen when he lost two legs and an arm to grenade.. This
same individual said that he had "heard" that Cleland was drunk at the time,
which is just an outright lie.
I don't think these guys who served over there are
deliberately lying. I think they have been persuaded to remember it, based
not on their own observations, but what they heard. Then or later. Having
been an Awards and Decorations clerk (among five other jobs) while I was in
Vietnam, let me once more state what the regulations are on the Purple
Heart. It is not an award per se, but an entitlement, and if you look at the
regulations you will see that that the key document for the award can only
be issued by and has to be signed by a Medical Officer. No one else can
institute an action for awarding this particular medal. Not your commander,
your sergeant, no one. Neither can they prevent nor disapprove it. Nor do
you need to be wounded by the enemy to get one. Incidents of "friendly fire"
and even those where no direct combat is encountered , such as a vehicle
accident ( as happened with Jessica Lynch) qualifies. Sometimes even
psychological wounds qualify. It is all up to the doctor on the spot.
I actually processed one of these. It was for one of
our MPs who was on convoy duty, and for his actions that day should have
probably been awarded the Bronze Star as well, except that no thought to put
him up for it. We were an MI outfit and liked to keep a low profile. This
kid comes in with the medical officer's form, telling me that he has been
ordered to present it post haste. I've never seen one, so I have to look it
up. I tell him, "Bill, this means you get the Purple Heart". He protests.
The wound in question was covered with a band aid. It was a "scratch". I
asked if he had the item that caused the wound and he shows me a piece of
shrapnel about two inches long with jagged edges, in a little glass bottle.
I advise him that he should take the award, (not that he had a choice)
because if the "scratch had been four inches deeper it would have gone right
through his heart and killed him. He turned white at that point. It had
never occurred to him that he might actually get killed until that moment.
That little episode is why I tend to disregard claims
that a Purple Heart wound was not sufficient. It is not a matter for post
action, after the fact, judgment. The doctor says you get the Purple Heart,
you get the Purple Heart, and at that time in Vietnam, as the Republican
Green Beret veteran that Kerry saved from drowning in the Mekong pointed
out, you got three and you were automatically sent home. I have no Purple
Heart myself, so I did a year there. I don't resent anyone who was rotated
out early, for wounds or any other reason. I do resent those who do resent
that. I find usually they didn't serve at all, much less in Vietnam.
Bottom line, the Purple Hearts are not as significant
as the testimony from Kerry's own crew mates. And while I believe that what
these Swift Boat veterans say seems true to them, I view it with great
suspicion as yet another product of the infamous attack machine that
questioned Max Cleland's patriotism for political gain.
Bob Kerrey, the former Senator who won the Medal of
Honor heard that the Republicans were going to try and dispute Kerry's
Silver Star and Bronze Star. "Let them try it," he growled, "Let them try
it. I can't wait."
Neither can I. Enough is enough.
Sincerely, Francis Hamit
You cause me to go back and read that
long article about the Swift Boat people because I had not recalled anyone
questioning his medals. It's in there, but it's not the major thrust of what
they are saying.
What they are mostly talking about is
not his service record, but what was said and done after the war; atrocities
he accused them of participating in, or of being aware of without
intervening.
His own crew, or some of them, seem
satisfied with him:
http://www.navytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-282468.php which is much
to his credit, and they don't seem upset that he talked about atrocities
committed by the Swift Boat people; but then he didn't report them as being
involved in such things.
In any event, I agree, questioning
people's service records is silly. I know a chap whose wrist was broken by a
typewriter at headquarters, I believe in the act of using it as a blunt
instrument for opening a locked field desk. He got his Purple Heart and I
don't recall anyone resenting it although there was some laughter. Everyone
who has seen the elephant knows that medals are distributed in a semi-random
fashion, and depend in large part on having a literate and eloquent person
witness the action and feeling impelled to write it up. I know no one who
has any medals at all who doesn't know of people who deserved them but
didn't get them.
But I would think it legitimate to
resent being accused of participating in atrocities, which is, as I
understand it, the main thrust of those people's remarks.
=======================
Subject: RFID Hack
— a bit of "FUD"
Dr. Pournelle:
Regarding hacking RFID chips. IMHO, a non-issue...."FUD"
(Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) via the press.
- reprogramming RFID chips only work on
*reprogrammable* RFID chips. Non-reprogrammable ones are much cheaper, and
more likely to be used in scanning situations (using RFID instead of bar
code). - RFID will be mostly used for inventory/restocking purposes. Sales
tracking is more likely to be done via bar codes. I suspect that bar codes
are here to stay for a while. - and even bar codes can be 'hacked' — just
print your own bar code label. (But that doesn't happen much) - many
self-checkout systems (at least the ones I've used at Home Depot and
Wal-Mart) use bar codes and weight checking. Both have to match, or there
are problems. You have to scan the item, then place it in the bag (which is
on a scale) before you can go onto the next item. - RFID tags don't contain
pricing info...(again, it's just a 'bar code') - RFID standards include
encryption of the ID code on the chip. You have to have the right 'writer
password' on your RFID writer in order to program the chip. Much harder to
break. - Wouldn't you be noticed if you were carrying around a RFID writer?
So, hacking RFID tags is a non-issue. They are just
fancy bar codes. Their main advantage to the retailer will on the
inventory/reorder side. I think it will be a very small part of 'shrinkage'
that all stores deal with.
Regards, Rick Hellewell, information security at
digital choke dot com
Ah well, it would have made for such a
good story, too...
==========================
From the Afghan
front
Well, we had another chance to employ in combat. My
third employment was also the most frightening. It started with us
supporting U.S. forces near the Pakistani border.
Suddenly, we get a call from a patrol a mile up
this valley that they are in heavy contact and have wounded. The controller
was worked up and it took 15 minutes to get an effective talk on. A 1500
foot ceiling had rolled in so my lead held above using the targeting pod
through breaks in the clouds while I dropped down low altitude. I flew low
through the valleys and rolled into the wrong one.
I broke off the pass, spun and rolled onto the
right target. Right as it settled in my sights, an Apache helicopter flew in
front of me. He wasn't talking to anyone so I aborted the attack. The
Apaches got up on freq and started working the area. I stayed at about 1500'
using binoculars to watch the area. I found 8 camels saddled up on a ridge
above the friendlies. No one was around the camels, so we figured this was
terrorist transportation. The Apache's had Chinooks in tow, so we
deconflicted from them while they held outside of the firefight. Savage, a
flight of HMLA-773 Cobras arrived and we coordinated to help them escort
Dustoff into the ambush site.
After Dustoff cleared the area, we bingoed out
for home. Higher headquarters wanted our flight back into the fight so we
got the KC-135 to chase us down. We rejoined, and the KC-135 dragged us back
south to the fight. When we got back on station, we started taking moderate
small arms/automatic weapons fire from a mountain top. The FAC cleared us in
to the target.
My flight lead's gun malfunctioned, so we coordinated
a Joint Air Attack Team attack with another flight of USMC Cobras. I rolled
in with two AH-1 Cobra gunships following me down the chute. It was very
dark because a massive thunderstorm had blown up right over the target area.
The first pass was rainy and I came off dry due to late clearance. I spun
around, picked up the Cobras and rolled back in. I flew through heavy rain
and shot a 3 second burst of high explosive incendiary 30mm bullets into the
enemy position near the crest of the mountain. Even with bleed air rain
remove and anti-ice, the water all over the windscreen made the explosions
from 170 bullets look a lot closer than they were. It was a Low Angle Strafe
pass so I was close to eye level with the target. The Cobras rained HE and
flechette rockets into the same area as I pulled off target. We received no
more fire from that location.
It was the most challenging attack I have ever done.
Shortly after, the ground forward air controller reported hail, lightning,
rain and high winds. As the dry river beds filled up with flood water, the
Hogs and Cobras backed out. While my lead and I were waiting out the storm,
I had a near collision with a HUGE prehistoric looking bird. As it went down
the left side of the jet, I got a master caution light. It turned out that
it missed, and the light was a Low Oil Pressure from bunting over too hard.
It caught my attention! When we finally left for home, we climbed to FL 230
and saw a massive thunderstorm sitting right on the border. It looked about
20 miles wide and up to 40K at least. We had no idea that such a huge storm
had blown up so fast.
- M
=============
On the Transit
Ordnung! Story:
Eat Candy, go to jail...
Jerry,
Sue here.
For the moment, eating on the Metro is outlawed in an
effort to keep things tidy. Will society get to the point that over-eaters
will become like smokers? Will they be relegated to eating their meals out
in front of buildings so that they don't offend other eaters?
I am exaggerating, of course. However, as I read the
follow-up story to the Candy Bar-gate, I had this vision of smokers and
obese people gathered in front of doors on cold, snowy days indulging in
their addictions.
I think I need to go to bed. It's late on the East
coast.
Sue
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28601-2004Jul30.html
Snacker's Arrest Irks Metro Board Balance
Sought On Enforcement
By Lyndsey Layton Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, July 31, 2004; Page B01
Several Metro board members said they want to
review the transit system's enforcement of its rule against eating and
drinking after a woman was handcuffed, arrested and charged with chewing a
candy bar in the Metro Center Station.
"It's a question of striking the right
balance," said D.C. Council member Jim Graham, who represents the District
on the Metro board. "I'm not advocating to lift the rule or relax the rule;
I'm looking for ways to avoid people ending up in handcuffs for chewing a
candy bar."
Charles Deegan, who represents Prince George's
County on the board, said he thought the Transit Police officer who made the
arrest overreacted. "She probably needs -- what do you call it? An attitude
adjustment," said Deegan, who joined Graham and board member Gladys W. Mack
of the District in calling for a review of the policy.
But Metro Police Chief Polly Hanson said that
Officer Cherrail Curry-Hagler tried to issue a citation to Stephanie Willett
and was forced to arrest her because she refused to stop and produce
identification.
"The reason she got locked up is because she
wouldn't stop to let us give her a ticket," said Hanson, who added that she
is investigating the arrest but that it appears her officer acted in
accordance with department procedures.
News of the arrest lit up phones at talk radio
stations and brought Willett national attention.
About 6:30 p.m. July 16, Willett was eating a
PayDay candy bar while riding the escalator from 11th Street NW into the
station. Curry-Hagler, who was riding up on another escalator, warned
Willett to finish the candy before entering the station.
Willett nodded but kept chewing the
peanut-and-caramel bar as she walked through the fare gates. Curry-Hagler,
who had turned around and followed Willett, warned her again as she stuffed
the last bit into her mouth before throwing the wrapper into the trash can
near the station manager's kiosk, according to both Willett and the officer.
Curry-Hagler told Willett to stop and produce
identification because she intended to write a citation, Hanson said.
Willett said she refused to stop and told the officer, "Why don't you go and
take care of some real crime?" while still chewing the PayDay bar as she
rode a second escalator to catch her Orange Line train.
At that point, Willett said, Curry-Hagler
grabbed her and patted her down, running her hands around Willett's bust,
under her bra and around her waist. She put Willett in a police cruiser and
took her to the D.C. police 1st District headquarters, where she was locked
in a cell. At 9:30 p.m., after she paid a $10 fee, Willett was released to
her husband. She is scheduled to appear in court in October for a hearing.
Willett, a 45-year-old scientist for the
Environmental Protection Agency who lives in Bowie, said she was arrested
because she talked back to a police officer.
Hanson said that wasn't true. "It's an
indication of her state of mind," Hanson said. "The ridership of the Metro
is highly educated and maybe getting stopped and having your behavior
corrected in front of people isn't something you think you should have to
put up with. Her actions led to her arrest. The verbiage is just an
indication of how uncooperative she was."
Willett's arrest for eating was the second this
year. Since Jan. 1, transit police have fined 58 other snackers on the Metro
and given 308 written warnings.
Hanson said her police take the no-eating and
no-drinking rule seriously because of complaints by the public about greasy
wrappers, empty bottles and sticky spills on the trains and buses and in
stations. "Some people who've been riding this system for years feel it's
pretty dirty right now," she said.
T. Dana Kauffman, who represents Fairfax County
on the Metro board, said he supports the candy bar arrest. "Fundamentally,
people don't want to be sitting in food, looking at food or listening to
food," he said.
Policies vary elsewhere. In Chicago and San
Francisco, eating and drinking is prohibited on subways and buses. But in
New York and Boston, food is sold inside stations and no one bats an eye at
snackers.
"You can have your Doritos and soda on the
train," said Lydia Rivera, a spokeswoman for the Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority. "Just take your garbage with you."
C 2004 The Washington Post Company
Note that the wrapper was thrown into
the trash, not on the floor. Note that the candy bar was entirely in the
mouth, so it's apparently enough to be chewing on something to get you
rubbed down and handscuffed.
Ordnung.
=============================
Subject: "Kerry Phishing"
Dr. Pournelle:
Phishing has moved into the political arena: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5581739/
"In a world awash in fake e-mails designed to steal
personal information, it was probably inevitable. This weekend, researchers
discovered a near perfect imitation of a recent solicitation sent by the
Kerry-Edwards campaign. The notice was a hoax, sending users off to a Web
site controlled by a computer hacker. ....
"The Web site designed to collect the stolen
information was disabled on Sunday. And a clever tactic employed by the
Kerry campaign's Webmaster also foiled the e-mail -- effectively hacking the
hacker.
"The original version of the fake e-mail referenced a
genuine image of Cam Kerry that was hosted on the legitimate campaign Web
site. Over the weekend, that image was replaced by a statement from the
Kerry campaign indicating the e-mail was a fraud. Because the fake e-mail
used the Kerry campaign site as the source for its image, when users called
up the e-mail, instead of Cam Kerry's face, they saw a notice saying "Do not
donate using any link in this e-mail."
Regards....Rick Hellewell information security at
digital choke dot com
I suppose it had to happen. Sheesh.
==================
Subject: Purple Heart
As a former/retired Intell weanie, I hate to disagree
with a fellow former MI soldier, but Mr. Hamit is wrong in regard to the
Purple Heart.
Prior to 1985, a purple Heart was only awarded to
service members wounded/killed as a direct result of enemy fire, the Purple
Heart was not awarded for wounds recieved as a result of "Friendly Fire."
This was changed by Public law 99-145, which expanded
converage to those wounded or killed by "Friendly Fire" while engaged in
combat with enemy forces. Jessica Lynch, and every one in the HMMWV with
her, was awarded a Purple Heart as a result of a vehicle accident caused by
evasive maneuvers made while under enemy fire. A soldier wounded/killed in a
normal, non-combat, traffic accident in a war zone would not qualify for a
Purple Heart. And, at least for Army personnel, the award is not automatic.
In certain situations the award can be denied if the commander decides the
wound resulted from personal negligence, such as walking through a clearly
marked off-limits/mined area, or searching for/retrieving war souvenirs.
This exact issue came up on a forum I follow, and was
forced to research this before inserting foot to mouth. The Internet is
great, when you can a trustworthy source.
US Army PERSCOM:
https://www.perscom.army.mil/tagd/tioh/Awards/PH1.html
and
AR 600-8-22 Military Awards
http://www.usapa.army.mil/pdffiles/r600_8_22.pdf
Michael Goldsberry
P.S. Love your books.
I thought I recalled it that way. The
chap who broke his wrist with the typewriter and got a Purple Heart did so
during some kind of enemy raid or artillery fire, which was the cause of his
trying to open a locked cabinet using the typewriter. How much of his story
was real and how much embellishment I cannot say, since it seems to have
changed between the first and last time I heard it told.
==============
TOP
CURRENT
VIEW Monday |
CLICK HERE for
a Special Request. 
Dr.
Pournelle: 