I am certain it is mere coincidence that every time peaceful protesters plan a major action, police announce a vile conspiracy to blow things up. And it is even more of a coincidence that the conspirators claim to have been baited into such plans by undercover agents, who have even been known to supply material with which they can blow things up.

Because if it was not a coincidence, we'd have to admit that our own government is working against our ability to seek redress for grievances, and that couldn't possibly be true. The good guys always win, right?

Lawyers for three protesters arrested on terrorist-related charges ahead of the Nato summit have accused police of entrapping them and encouraging an alleged bomb-making effort.

The three were arrested on Wednesday night when members of the Chicago police department battered their way into an apartment in the Bridgeport area of the city.

According to court documents released on Saturday, the three men considered targeting Barack Obama's re-election headquarters and the home of Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel.

The Chicago police department said the men, described as self-proclaimed anarchists and members of the "Black Bloc" movement that has disrupted international gatherings in the past, were arrested on Wednesday and charged on Friday with conspiracy to commit terrorism, providing material support for terrorism and possession of an explosive incendiary device.

The three men charged were listed as Brian Church, 22, of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Jared Chase, 27, of Keene, New Hampshire, and Brent Betterly, 24, from Massachusetts.

At a hearing on Saturday bail was set at $1.5m for each of the three. Their next court appearance is on Tuesday.

Supporters of the three men disputed the charges, saying the men had come to protest at the Nato summit peacefully and that the police had confused beer-making equipment with explosives.

A lawyer for the three, Michael Deutsch, said undercover police officers had entrapped them by infiltrating the group and encouraging the bomb-making effort. The Chicago police department declined to comment on the tactics employed in the case.

The Cook County state attorney's office said the three men had other weapons including a mortar, knives and a hunting bow. It said they considered attacking police stations and cars in Chicago to disrupt police operations for the two-day Nato summit that begins on Sunday.

A mortar? A kitchen mortar? Knives and a hunting bow? Yeah, they sound like hardened terrorists to me! Imagine. You can carry a loaded handgun to a presidential appearance, but apparently you can't have knives or a hunting bow without being charged with a terrorist conspiracy.

Continue reading »

Libyans have written their own story, and it is a good one. After nonviolent protesters were massacred across the country in February, a widespread uprising finally coalesced into victory yesterday. Benghazi became the geographic center of rebellion on February 20th; using social media, Libyans there immediately cried out for international intervention. That assistance arrived in the nick of time, with NATO establishing immediate air and sea supremacy. The next six months saw freedom fighters and their international allies organize an AirLandSea campaign of combined arms, maneuver, and insurgency.

CAUSES

The Chomskyan narrative frame of empire and power has little real application to the outbreak of conflict in Libya. I have written before about the causes, but the most important single thing to understand is that about seventy percent of the North African diet is bread. Climate-change driven drought in Russia last Summer raised global wheat prices across the region over the Winter. In a region with sluggish GDP growth, that has created social alarm.

Food insecurity is a common cause of conflict (.PDF) and the most common cause of conflict in the region (see: Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, Sudan, Chad). Wars rarely solve food insecurity, however, and the conditions that brought conflict to the North African maghreb have only intensified since February. We live in interesting times.

The tribal structure of Libyan society also plays a role. Moammar Ghadafi has been playing the tribes against one another for four decades, and it has finally caught up with him. On this map, you can see one of the disaffected Berber tribes to the southwest of Tripoli, along the Nafusa Mountain escarpment. They are among the most persecuted minorities in the country:

Continue reading »

DOWNLOADS: (311)

PLAYS: (742)

Embed

UPDATE: Al Jazeera reports that there's a lot of scepticism about this report.

So this is what "protecting civilians" looks like. Not so pretty, is it? Can you say "mission creep"?

BENGHAZI, Libya — The government of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi said he survived an airstrike in Tripoli late Saturday night that killed one of his sons and three grandchildren, in the sharpest intensification yet of the NATO air campaign intended to pressure the Libyan leader from power.

The son, Seif al-Arab Muammar el-Qaddafi, 29, and the grandchildren, all said to be younger than 12, were possibly the first confirmed casualties in the airstrikes on the Libyan capital. And while the deaths could not be independently verified, the campaign against Libya’s most densely populated areas raised new questions about how broadly NATO is interpreting its United Nations mandate to protect civilians.

It is the second airstrike in seven days to hit a location intimately close to the Libyan leader, following a midnight attack last week that destroyed an office building in his compound where he and his aides sometimes work.

In a news conference early Sunday morning in Tripoli, a Qaddafi government spokesman called the strike an illegal attack. “This was a direct operation to assassinate the leader of this country,” said the spokesman, Musa Ibrahim. “This is not permitted by international law. It is not permitted by any moral code or principle.” He said that the colonel and his wife, who were staying at the house along with “friends and family,” were not hurt.

American and NATO officials have said they are not seeking to kill Colonel Qaddafi, and some have suggested it might not be very easy. But frustrated by the evasion and resilience of Colonel Qaddafi’s military, NATO has pledged to step up its strikes on the broader instruments of his power, including state television facilities and command centers in the capital.

I do get a little tired of the fact that war seems to be our major export these days. Now we're all upset because Great Britain is making defense spending cuts? I don't get it:

The US has made an eleventh hour intervention in the highly charged defence review as Britain's top military brass launched a last ditch attempt to persuade David Cameron to water down the cuts.

Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, and Robert Gates, the defence secretary, both voiced concerns about the planned cuts as the heads of Britain's three armed services marched into No 10 in uniform to express unease about plans to cut the Ministry of Defence budget by 10%.

As the prime minister welcomed General David Petraeus to Downing Street, Washington highlighted concerns that Britain will scale back military spending to the level of weaker NATO members.

In an interview with BBC Parliament's The Record Europe in Brussels, Clinton was asked whether she was worried about the planned cuts in Britain. "It does, and the reason it does is because I think we do have to have an alliance where there is a commitment to the common defence. NATO has been the most successful alliance for defensive purposes in the history of the world I guess, but it has to be maintained. Now, each country has to be able to make its appropriate contributions."

The Reid Report: Rand Paul, the Joe the Plumber of eye doctors

Eunomia: U.S. hawks suddenly discover the futility of NATO

Ta-Nehisi Coates: Because there are no racists...

Check out the Stand-Up Economist (h/t Batocchio)

Manifesto Joe's Texas Blues: Colorado Springs is what happens when rich twits refuse to pay taxes

onegoodmove: Freedom vs. Suckas

As U.S. and coalition forces mass outside of Khandahar, Afghanistan, for another major combat operation, a spokesman for NATO forces decides to try some Newspeak on Reuters' journalists.

"We would like to call it a process that is encompassing military and non-military instruments," Brigadier General Josef Blotz, the spokesman for NATO forces, told reporters this week.

Ominously, there has been a surge in attacks and political assassinations in Kandahar city recently. Residents fear more bloodshed as some 10,000 troops move into their neighbourhoods.

Most of the troops will stay in rural areas trying to cut off access routes into the city while a 3,500-strong U.S. army brigade will aim to push into Kandahar city, accompanied by almost 7,000 Afghan police.

And for those who would like to consider the former Helmund province offensive process a success, there is this note in the Reuter's article.

A report by policy think tank the International Council on Security and Development (ICOS) this week found that 61 percent of 400 men interviewed in and around Marjah felt more negative about NATO forces than before the operation.

"In other words, the objective of winning 'hearts and minds' -- one of the fundamental tenets of the new counter-insurgency strategy -- was not met," ICOS said in the report.

Meanwhile, CNAS analyst Andrew Exum insists that the failure to progress in Afghanistan is due to political, not military, strategy shortfalls. Really. I'm not sure if he's referring to President Obama's decision to continue the Bush legacy or the continuing lack of a cooperative government in Kabul with which to work. But hey, let's keep rolling those military campaigns until the political leadership figures out what it wants to do in Afghanistan. Maybe we can surpass the Vietnam war record of 12 years of continuous engagement with insurgent forces using "the process."

Bush's puppet. Afghanistan leader Karzai says he may consider joining the Taliban. No, really.

– Afghan President Hamid Karzai threatened over the weekend to quit the political process and join the Taliban if he continued to come under outside pressure to reform, several members of parliament said Monday.

Karzai made the unusual statement at a closed-door meeting Saturday with selected lawmakers — just days after kicking up a diplomatic controversy with remarks alleging foreigners were behind fraud in last year's disputed elections.

Lawmakers dismissed the latest comment as hyperbole, but it will add to the impression the president — who relies on tens of thousands of U.S. and NATO forces to fight the insurgency and prop up his government — is growing increasingly erratic and unable to exert authority without attacking his foreign backers.

"He said that 'if I come under foreign pressure, I might join the Taliban'," said Farooq Marenai, who represents the eastern province of Nangarhar.

"He said rebelling would change to resistance," Marenai said — apparently suggesting that the militant movement would then be redefined as one of resistance against a foreign occupation rather than a rebellion against an elected government.

Marenai said Karzai appeared nervous and repeatedly demanded to know why parliament last week had rejected legal reforms that would have strengthened the president's authority over the country's electoral institutions.

Two other lawmakers said Karzai twice raised the threat to join the insurgency.

The White House is not very happy at his remarks. I mean we're spilling a lot of blood and treasure at the expense of this war and the American public already hates it so what does he think he's accomplishing by saying this?

The lawmakers, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of political repercussions, said Karzai also dismissed concerns over possible damage his comments had caused to relations with the United States. He told them he had already explained himself in a telephone conversation Saturday with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that came after the White House described his comments last week as troubling.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said reports Karzai threatened to abandon the political process and join the Taliban insurgency if he continued to receive pressure from Western backers to reform his government are troubling.

"On behalf of the American people, we're frustrated with the remarks," Gibbs told reporters.

The lawmakers said they felt Karzai was pandering to hard-line or pro-Taliban members of parliament and had no real intention of joining the insurgency.

Peter Galbraith, the former US Ambassador to Afghanistan hinted that Karzai was partaking in Afghanistan's vast drug business.

Former U.N. envoy to Afghanistan Peter Galbraith on MSNBC's Daily Rundown this morning charged that Afghan President Hamid Karzai's "continued tirade raises questions about his mental stability." He then added, "In fact, some of the palace insiders say that he has a certain fondness for some of Afghanistan's most profitable exports." Afghanistan produces more than 90 percent of the world's opium from poppy -- used for heroin production.

He certainly is acting erratically. If you know anything about Afghanistan and their immense drug trade then you have to figure that a good portion of the people there are probably stoned out on drugs.

Spencer Ackerman, in tweet, says that Galbraith is not being serious:

Dear Entire Media Landscape: Peter Galbraith is not being serious re Karzai being on drugs. Read this int & calm down http://bit.ly/aziYoW

As I'm reading about the Marine-led NATO offensive in Afghanistan, I'm wondering if this represents the "new" counterinsurgency warfare, or is this just the basic combined arms "search and destroy" conventional approach that we saw in Iraq? From the NY Times:

The first large skirmish began at 9:30 a.m., as Second Platoon, the company headquarters and most of the Afghan platoon stopped at the edge of a small village and prepared to clear it. The Taliban opened up with automatic rifle fire from a few hundred yards away, shooting from concealed positions protected by open ground.

Marines and Afghan soldiers rushed to mud walls and returned fire. The Taliban’s fighters could be seen at times running between fighting positions and irrigation ditches. A few were struck by the Marines’ fire, and fell. Others kept up their fire. Bullets buzzed past the Marines.

------

Often, small groups of Taliban opened up from a different direction after the Marines had faced several minutes of fire. It was clear that the Taliban had ringed the company, and was probing and picking at the Marines as much of Company K moved toward a road and bridge that Captain Biggers intended to seize.

As the company spread out, the fighting moved with it. At times, two or three gun battles raged at once, including at the outposts where the Marines had left their equipment. The Taliban harassed and attacked these positions several times during the day.

-------

More than a half-hour later, after the fighting had subsided again, the Himars rocket barrage struck a nearby house, but not the one from which highly accurate fire had been holding the Marines against the wall.

Several Marines cursed. The wrong building had been hit. The company commander saw the children stream outside, ordered a cease-fire, and sent a patrol to go help.

Certainly there's the time and place to use conventional warfighting tactics to take on a large concentration of insurgents. Pretty sure that's in the COIN manual. But I feel like we're still fighting at the tactical/operational level, looking for short-term gains with no feasible long-term strategy to win and get out. It is encouraging that there are more Afghans involved in this joint operation than ever before, and word is that "development aid" is set up to follow into the province. But the "proof is in the tasting of the pudding," so they say. We'll watch and see what happens next.

No getting around it: This really is Obama's war. I read yesterday that U.S. spokesmen were giving contradictory versions of this operation to different reporters, so as with any war, I'd take everything you read with a grain of salt. (By the way, I notice this outpost is named Belleau Wood, after one of the bloodiest battles of World War I. Is that supposed to be good for morale?)

The largest military offensive of the eight-year war in Afghanistan, launched this weekend in southwestern Helmand province, is a crucial test for President Obama's strategy of more troops, more civilians and more money.

In an acknowledgment of past mistakes, administration officials have emphasized that for the first time, U.S. and NATO forces are outnumbered by thousands of Afghan soldiers fighting alongside them. Unlike previous offensives, in which territory won from insurgents was later abandoned, the troops plan to clear the Taliban stronghold of Marja and hold it for as long as it takes to install a functioning local security system and government.

Large numbers of Afghan and international civilians have been marshaled to move into the district once the fighting is over, and development projects are funded and ready for implementation.

"What's important about this operation is that it is the first major operation in which we will demonstrate, I think successfully, that the new elements of the strategy -- which combine not only security operations but economic reform and good governance at the local and regional level with a much more visible presence of Afghan forces -- will take place," Obama's national security adviser, retired Marine Gen. James L. Jones, said on "Fox News Sunday."

Rest In Peace, Deborah Yesner, a pioneering blogger and researcher for the movie "OutFoxed."

reed writes: Canada joins the US in staring into the eyes of defeat in Afghanistan

43 Ideas Per Minute: Music of the Decade

You Are Dumb: The End of The Innocence

Dependable Renegade: For the love of God and all things holy, someone, somewhere, please delete Meghan McCain's twitter account.

Mike is away this week; Round up by Blue Gal.