So this is what had the Wikileaks founder so jumpy. No wonder the government wanted to keep this under wraps:

A huge cache of secret US military files today provides a devastating portrait of the failing war in Afghanistan, revealing how coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents, Taliban attacks have soared and Nato commanders fear neighbouring Pakistan and Iran are fuelling the insurgency.

The disclosures come from more than 90,000 records of incidents and intelligence reports about the conflict obtained by the whistleblowers' website Wikileaks in one of the biggest leaks in US military history. The files, which were made available to the Guardian, the New York Timesand the German weekly Der Spiegel, give a blow-by-blow account of the fighting over the last six years, which has so far cost the lives of more than 320 British and over 1,000 US troops.

Their publication comes amid mounting concern that Barack Obama's "surge" strategy is failing and as coalition troops hunt for two US navy sailors captured by the Taliban south of Kabul on Friday.

From Steve Hynd over at Newshoggers:

The newspapers admit they kept some secrets too sensitive for publication buried and the details in the document dump seem to be of the kind well known already to wonks who have followed Afghanistan reporting over the years, but the manner and volume of the War Log's release will doubtless crystallize the opinions of many who were only casual readers of news from the West's occupation there. With public opinion against that occupation running at some 60% in the U.S. and over 70% in the UK and Germany, these leaks will put further pressure on Western governments to find an exit sooner rather than later.

Among the stories on which new light has been shed:

-- Pakistan and to a far lesser extent Iran have been offering funding and other direct aid to Taliban groups for years. Pakistan's ISI is reported to have been behind many Taliban targeting decisions, including on U.S. and coalition troops, despite it being an ostensible ally.

-- The U.S. has been using an undisclosed "black" unit of special forces, Task Force 373, to hunt down targets for death or detention without trial. This team has been responsible for the deaths of Afghan policemen and civilians, including children but authorities seem to have been more concerned with keeping its operations secret than curtailing its zeal.

-- There have been over 50 incidents of "Green on Green" fire - where Afghan police or soldiers opened fire on their fellow uniformed countrymen, many begun by drug use, corruption or indiscipline.

-- There are reports of hundreds of border clashes between Pakistani troops and their Afghan or American opposite numbers - far more than previously reported.

-- The 140 reports of incidents involving the shooting and blowing up of civilians by Coalition troops reveal a casual disregard for human life, including "nearly 100 occasions by jumpy troops at checkpoints, near bases or on convoys...'warning shots' often seem to cause death or injury, generally ascribed to ricochets."

The reason why governments don't want us to see war too closely is that they see how little point there is to the whole bloody mess. Why are we still there? Why are we destroying all these lives?

Bush Anxious to Learn More of Deep Throat

Greatscat cued me to this article in the Washington Post.

President Bush said on Wednesday the disclosure that the former No. 2 official at the FBI was Watergate's "Deep Throat" source caught him by surprise and he's anxious to learn more details about his relationship with the news media.

"It's hard for me to judge" whether former deputy FBI Director Mark Felt provided a valuable public service or acted improperly, Bush told reporters.

----------------------------

Since Bush has done everything in his power to make sure there are no "Deep Throats" in his administration, I doubt this took him by surprise at all. Porter Goss's shake-up over at the CIA is certainly an indication that the President wants to plug up any leaks that might come down the pike from there. He'll probably review the Watergate story more thoroughly to make sure he hasn't left himself with any more loose ends to tie up.

The Daily Show on Robert Novak

Jon Stewart:"Robert Novak, Douchbag of Liberty award"

Video

Stewart goes to "Crossfire" and exposes him as a hypocrite.

From Americablog

Of all people to be talking about leaks at the CIA, ROBERT NOVAK? The man who leaked Valerie Plume's name? From Creators Syndicate:

Moreover, McCain told me this week, "with CIA leaks intended to harm the re-election campaign of the president of the United States, it is not only dysfunctional but a rogue organization." (Rob's Note: As opposed to leaking the name of the wife of one of YOUR political opponents.)

Well, this isn't good news:

Interference from gas hydrates, a natural phenomenon found on ocean floors, has stopped BP's first attempt to significantly stem the flow of crude oil from a blown-out underwater oil in the Gulf of Mexico.

BP lowered a 98-ton containment chamber to the site of the oil leak on Friday; the chamber is intended to contain one of two leaks gushing at least 5,000 barrels per day (bpd) (210,000 gallons/795,000 liters) of crude oil into the northern Gulf.

The leaks, first detected on April 25 after a drilling rig off the Louisiana coast caught fire on April 20, threaten the economy and environment along the U.S. Gulf Coast from Louisiana to Florida.

The hydrates have formed what is described as a slush blocking a pipe meant to carry the oil gushing from the well to a ship on the ocean surface about 5,000 feet above the well site.

While I didn't know the specifics, I had a suspicion that the containment dome was a little too good to be true. BP hasn't given up hope that the containment dome will work, however, I'm less than reassured by NBC's careful mentioning that local fishermen don't seem to be concerned yet. Make no mistake, this is a major ecological tragedy, one, unfortunately, that the Obama administration has not taken to heart:

The Obama administration waived environmental reviews for 26 new offshore drilling projects even as the BP oil disaster spewed hundreds of thousands of gallons of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico, environmental activists said today.[..]

The Centre for Biological Diversity said that even after the disaster, the Obama administration did not tighten its oversight of offshore drilling. An investigation by the respected environmental group revealed that since 20 April, when an explosion the Deepwater Horizon rig killed 11 workers, 27 new offshore drilling projects have been approved by the Mineral Management Service (MMS) the regulatory agency responsible for overseeing extraction of oil, gas and other minerals.

All but one project was granted similar exemptions from environmental review as BP. Two were submitted by the UK firm, and made the same claims about oil-rig safety and the implausibility of a spill damaging the environment, the centre said.

"This oil spill has had absolutely no effect on MMS behaviour at all," said Kieran Suckling, the director of the centre. "It's still business as usual which means rubber stamping oil drilling permits with no environmental review."

Great. Ironically, Meet the Press used the event to look back at the discussion behind the Exxon Valdez leak in 1989:

SIX months later, Exxon insisted their clean up was done. Ha! TWENTY YEARS later, the area has still not recovered.

And yet there's no stopping with the rubber stamping of more drilling contracts?

I'm absolutely thrilled that the good people of Vermont who organized the opposition to this plant were so successful, since the plant was leaking radioactive tritium into the water.

However, Vermont still has to figure out how it's going to replace that energy:

The Vermont Senate blocked efforts by Entergy Corp. to win a 20-year license renewal for its Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, an action that could encourage opponents of nuclear energy in other states.

The Senate vote, which was 26 to four, marks the first time a license renewal has been thwarted, and it sets the stage for the plant's closure by 2012, when the license expires.

The vote was striking because the state relies on the plant for a third of its electricity. In the past, license renewals have been routine, allowing energy companies to squeeze more life out of aging plants. To date, the NRC has renewed 59 reactor licenses, and 19 are pending.

The vote, which reflected fears about safety after leaks of radioactive tritium were discovered at the plant last year, is a blow to Entergy, which had planned to spin off six reactors, including Vermont Yankee, into the nation's first stand-alone nuclear power company, to be called Enexus Energy Corp.

In a move that's akin to acknowledging the roof has massive leaks, but you won't consider any solutions that involve anything more costly than putting pots and pans under the leaks, President Obama announces he wants to do something about unemployment - but he doesn't want it to cost anything:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama assured Americans on Monday that boosting jobs was a top priority, but gave no specifics about how to meet this goal that some economists say warrants more government spending.

The White House said separately that all "sensible and reasonable measures" would be considered to encourage employment, but also stressed that it must be balanced with the need for the United States to tackle record budget deficits.

"Our economy is growing again for the first time in more than a year," Obama told reporters after a meeting with his Cabinet. "We cannot be sit back and be satisfied given the extraordinarily high unemployment levels that we have seen."

[...] Obama has also said he is interested in solutions that would not cost much public money, warning that adding to the U.S. debt could trigger a double-dip recession.

Reacting in the NY Times, Krugman is, well, appalled:

What? Huh? Most economists I talk to believe that the big risk to recovery comes from the inadequacy of government efforts: the stimulus was too small, and it will fade out next year, while high unemployment is undermining both consumer and business confidence.

Now, it’s politically difficult for the Obama administration to enact a full-scale second stimulus. Still, he should be trying to push through as much aid to the economy as possible. And remember, Mr. Obama has the bully pulpit; it’s his job to persuade America to do what needs to be done.

Instead, however, Mr. Obama is lending his voice to those who say that we can’t create more jobs. And a report on Politico.com suggests that deficit reduction, not job creation, will be the centerpiece of his first State of the Union address. What happened?

It took me a while to puzzle this out. But the concerns Mr. Obama expressed become comprehensible if you suppose that he’s getting his views, directly or indirectly, from Wall Street.

I suspect a lot of this goes back to what Howard Dean said when I interviewed him: That the young people who came out in record numbers to vote for Obama are concerned about the deficit. Well, isn't it time you put on your teaching hat and explained why that can't be the priority right now, Mr. President?

Steve Benen:

I checked the byline a couple of times this morning, to make sure the column that was ostensibly written by David Broder wasn't, in fact, written by Charles Krauthammer. Regrettably, the so-called Dean of the D.C. Media Establishment actually wrote this.

The more President Obama examines our options in Afghanistan, the less he likes the choices he sees. But, as the old saying goes, to govern is to choose -- and he has stretched the internal debate to the breaking point.

It is evident from the length of this deliberative process and from the flood of leaks that have emerged from Kabul and Washington that the perfect course of action does not exist. Given that reality, the urgent necessity is to make a decision -- whether or not it is right.

"Whether or not it is right." The Commander in Chief, in other words, should put expediency over merit. Speed is preferable to accuracy. It's only the longest military conflict in American history, with the future of U.S. foreign policy on the line -- the president should worry less about due diligence and thoughtful analysis, and worry more about picking a course, even if it's wrong. Other than the loss of American servicemen and women, untold billions of dollars, and undermining U.S. interests in a critical region, what's the worst that can happen?

This says so much to me. The "dean" of Beltway journalism and conventional thinking perfectly encapsulates the Republican zeitgeist:

1. Criticize anything that Obama does. If he acts decisively, complain that he's reckless. If he acts thoughtfully, complain that he's "dithering". If he points out that he's inherited a big fat clusterf&ck, complain that he's pointing fingers. If he tries to move forward in even a slightly progressive way, complain that he's not bipartisan enough and that he should listen to Republicans. In short, make sure that no matter what, Obama is wrong.
2. There are no consequences to telling Obama he's wrong. So what if 45,000 people die because they don't have healthcare? So what if sending more troops is basically sending them to their deaths? So what if there is no stable government in Afghanistan? So what if we're spending millions of dollars every month and deficit spending is the cause du jour for those suddenly fiscally responsible Republicans?

If Obama acts quickly, and it's the wrong choice, will the decision to act fall back on Broder and the Republicans for the pressure they've placed on Obama? 'Course not. But you can bet your sweet bippy they'll only be too glad to pounce on him if there are more American deaths.

Tell you what, Broder, if you're so eager to see some action in Afghanistan, let's see you do one of your patented "folksy" reports from a coffee shop in Kandahar or Kabul. Otherwise, STFU and let the people in charge actually make a reasoned and thoughtful decision, since it affects so much in American blood and treasure.

We've had eight years of quick rather than right decisions. It's time for the grownups to be in charge now.

Slate: Why did we get it wrong? Five years on, "liberal hawks" consider their support for the Iraq war.

The Reaction: McCain, public financing, and the law.

The Debatable Land: DMX on BHO and GWB

Scholars and Rogues: Blackwater fades into the men in the Greystone suits

The Satirical Political Report: New leaks on the 'passport' scandals

HOLY CRAP: Blog Against Theocracy this weekend. Some in the Senate want to make it Ten Commandments Weekend...Problem Pastor...Which "men of God" represent political machines?...Divine Wright...Hillary's religious affiliation...It's time to kick Jesus out of politics...Using God as a frontman or doing what Jesus would do?...EXPELLED! A Faith-Based Crossfire...Prescription for disaster...Some evangelical voters beginning to see the light

Shuster asked the right question of Rep. Blackburn and predictably the attacks followed. (Newsbusters) Whenever someone leaks info to right wing blogs---red flags should go up. Via Blue Texan:

Shuster's apology [re: Marsha Blackburn] may have been premature. The tiny hamlet of Bon Aqua, Tenn., is where Bohannon lived in the months immediately prior to entering the Army. The Census Bureau places his home in Blackburn's 7th Congressional District.

Media Bistro asks a good question:

Why did MSNBC rush Shuster to apologize? And, more importantly, who made him do so? Or did Shuster and MSNBC just not have the info (or didn't do the research) that Scripps dug up?

We know that Scooter Libby isn't around anymore to call NBC and complain to the Russert's of the world---so who is the new contact from the WH that's putting the heat on?

UPDATE: Oye:

FishbowlDC hears that MSNBC General Manager Dan Abrams asked David Shuster to apologize for Wednesday's Rep. Marsha Blackburn incident and even wrote the bulk of Shuster's on-air apology...read on

NewsHog: The Mumbai bombs and Pakistan...recently, Cernig called the Indian sub-continent the Most Dangerous Place In The World and a month ago predicted that America's next big foreign policy disaster was brewing there.

Senate Majority Project: After being implicated in two election crimes, and serving time in prison, Alan Raymond's phone-jamming company is back in business...under a different name.

War and Piece: Michigan Republican Rep. Peter Hoekstra has suggested some unauthorized leaks could have been deliberate attempts to help al-Qaeda. That kind of reckless talk sounds familiar...

Attytood: A plea to America's news directors and editors: Cancel Bush's "Fear Factor"

The Brad Blog: California election official facing 43 criminal charges...

Media in Trouble: NPR's Steve Inskeep parroted GOP talking points, Senator Leahy slapped him down.