|
I read this thing and I'm furious. It irks me even more that it's getting so little play here in the US.
I don't know if it helps to post the whole thing here, but fuck it, it makes me feel better. And that's what this place is about.
So for those of you who haven't read the thing, or for those who still naively cling to the vacant valiantry of George W., let the record show the man was, is and remains a lying ass:
SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY
DAVID MANNING
From: Matthew Rycroft
Date: 23 July 2002
S 195 /02
cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell
IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY
Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.
This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.
John Scarlett summarised the intelligence and latest JIC assessment. Saddam's regime was tough and based on extreme fear. The only way to overthrow it was likely to be by massive military action. Saddam was worried and expected an attack, probably by air and land, but he was not convinced that it would be immediate or overwhelming. His regime expected their neighbours to line up with the US. Saddam knew that regular army morale was poor. Real support for Saddam among the public was probably narrowly based.
C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
CDS said that military planners would brief CENTCOM on 1-2 August, Rumsfeld on 3 August and Bush on 4 August.
The two broad US options were:
(a) Generated Start. A slow build-up of 250,000 US troops, a short (72 hour) air campaign, then a move up to Baghdad from the south. Lead time of 90 days (30 days preparation plus 60 days deployment to Kuwait).
(b) Running Start. Use forces already in theatre (3 x 6,000), continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli. Total lead time of 60 days with the air campaign beginning even earlier. A hazardous option.
The US saw the UK (and Kuwait) as essential, with basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus critical for either option. Turkey and other Gulf states were also important, but less vital. The three main options for UK involvement were:
(i) Basing in Diego Garcia and Cyprus, plus three SF squadrons.
(ii) As above, with maritime and air assets in addition.
(iii) As above, plus a land contribution of up to 40,000, perhaps with a discrete role in Northern Iraq entering from Turkey, tying down two Iraqi divisions.
The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.
The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.
The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change.
The Prime Minister said that it would make a big difference politically and legally if Saddam refused to allow in the UN inspectors. Regime change and WMD were linked in the sense that it was the regime that was producing the WMD. There were different strategies for dealing with Libya and Iran. If the political context were right, people would support regime change. The two key issues were whether the military plan worked and whether we had the political strategy to give the military plan the space to work.
On the first, CDS said that we did not know yet if the US battleplan was workable. The military were continuing to ask lots of questions.
For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary.
The Foreign Secretary thought the US would not go ahead with a military plan unless convinced that it was a winning strategy. On this, US and UK interests converged. But on the political strategy, there could be US/UK differences. Despite US resistance, we should explore discreetly the ultimatum. Saddam would continue to play hard-ball with the UN.
John Scarlett assessed that Saddam would allow the inspectors back in only when he thought the threat of military action was real.
The Defence Secretary said that if the Prime Minister wanted UK military involvement, he would need to decide this early. He cautioned that many in the US did not think it worth going down the ultimatum route. It would be important for the Prime Minister to set out the political context to Bush.
Conclusions:
(a) We should work on the assumption that the UK would take part in any military action. But we needed a fuller picture of US planning before we could take any firm decisions. CDS should tell the US military that we were considering a range of options.
(b) The Prime Minister would revert on the question of whether funds could be spent in preparation for this operation.
(c) CDS would send the Prime Minister full details of the proposed military campaign and possible UK contributions by the end of the week.
(d) The Foreign Secretary would send the Prime Minister the background on the UN inspectors, and discreetly work up the ultimatum to Saddam.
He would also send the Prime Minister advice on the positions of countries in the region especially Turkey, and of the key EU member states.
(e) John Scarlett would send the Prime Minister a full intelligence update.
(f) We must not ignore the legal issues: the Attorney-General would consider legal advice with FCO/MOD legal advisers.
(I have written separately to commission this follow-up work.)
MATTHEW RYCROFT
Posted by Jody at 03:22 PM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
Are you folks familiar with the whole Rubinstein affair? Rubinstein is the history professor who recently traded on his Ph.D that he was unconvinced that evolution ever really happened.
He was subsequently skewered across Blogdom over his view, most excellently by Orac and my current blog idol, PZ Meyers. In response, Rubinstein, replied to his critics that he wasn't a creationist and that he would gladly donate $100 dollars if, in the next 10 years, anyone could show him evidence of speciation occurring in any place other than a lab.
Now, folks, you all know what a kind hearted, expansive and loving soul I have. I figured that Rubinstein must not understand that speciation is well documented, with sources easily available on the web, and that were I to simply direct him to Talk Origins, he could read the list for himself and come away the better for it.
(Okay, you got me. I don't believe in souls, I used to snatch children in the night from their parents, and I'm fairly crumedgenly, bitter and vindictive. But if IDers can believe the fiction that the universe is intelligently created, I can at least believe the fiction that I'm perfect and innocent. Just go with me on this, alright?)
I proceeded with my plan and sent along the following email (his stuff is in red, mine's in green.)
Secondly, I would be happy to donate say one hundred dollars or fifty pounds to charity if, by the end of ten years from now (May 2015) anyone can produce an example of evolution in the animal world which has occurred during that time span - that is, the appearance of a new species of animal, which does not exist today, but which is descended from an existing species....
Professor, there is no need to wait to make your donation. Current speciation has been documented extensively. Here's a small list of source material. More can be found at http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html.
Pretty nice, simple and too the point.
I tried not to be bitchy.
It was very hard.
I zipped the the little electronic correspondence off and drummed my fingers on the desk, eagerly awaiting his response.
Well, that's technically not true either. I did write a screenplay, finished a paper on independent film marketing for school, went shopping, got gas for the Mustang, did laundry, ordered Thai, read "How we Believe" by Michael Shermer, outlined a novel, played "Republic Commando," delivered meals to the needy, catalogued my library, went to a birthday party, avoided anacondas on a hunt for the blood orchid, rebuilt the engine on my car, did a HAHO jump and got a little further in my search for a cure to the common cold. Oh, and I watched some porn.
By the time I was done with all of that -- I think it took about two hours -- low and behold, Rubinstein reponded! Glory days! My grand exercise in eye-opening, mind-expanding, horizon-broadening, was about to pay off! Accolades! Joy! I opened what was sure to be a touching note from Dr. Rubinstein, expecting to read that through my own careful and reasoned argumentation -- oh, yeah, and that stuff at Talk Origins -- a thank-me for pointing out the errors in his thought, helping him to move through his ignorance, and join we happy folk in the 21st Century. With baited breath, I clicked on the message and read :
Many thanks. I was aware of some of the reports you cite, and, of course, according to evolutionary theory there have been millions of instances of speciation during the past two billion years. My offer, however, relates specifically to the period I stated, when I can examine the evidence as it is reported. Best wishes, Bill Rubinstein
Astonishment.
My heart sputtered.
My mind tumbled in confusion: He'd already read those sources??
It churned still further, like a chicken in the gears of a well oiled clock: Rubinstein was familiar with the work of countless scientists across the planet, who for decades have gathered data point after data point in support of a theory first popularized by Darwin over a hundred years ago? He knew the research, the results, the discoveries, all utilized daily, consistently, productively, to make life better for him, for me and for the billions of people on the planet? He knew all of that and, like a petulant teen, stuck his fingers in his ears and crowed "I"M NOT LISTENING!! I'm NOT LISTENING" by demanding it all be made real to him in a ten year period of his choosing?
Betrayal.
A crushing blow to my ideals.
The world is not full of kind, loving, and intelligent people, who honestly wish to discourse, discover and understand the environment they live in. No, people are, as Dr. Shermer pointed out, emotionaly commited to their own points of view and support them with a selective reading of data. Sulk. Shuffle off to a far corner and bemoan the horrendous iniquities of Life. How, how pray tell, could I deal with such a weighty discovery, with the existential pall, the sudden and complete rending of my here-to-fore comforting cloak of Pollyanish Idealism?
After I got done watching more porn, I figured that I should also send along a snappy rejoinder. I couldn't let the good doctor continue on in his willful ignorance. I, steeped in my personal greatness, as a proud purveyor of truth, justice and light, knew that I had to make someone who didn't want to see it, who clung gleefully to their ignorance, see things my way. It just wasn't right to allow this man to continue on unchallenged. I had the responsibility, the duty, nay the right to make this man see the truth! Focusing all my special powers, my deep insight into human nature, and on my truly alien grasp of words, I typed my short, piercing and definitive reply and sent it off:
Oh, brother.
Posted by Jody at 11:25 PM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
So I'm doing a little bit of spring cleaning -- instead of writing a treatment for my latest epic -- and I chance upon an old file from when I was a kid. It's full of medical records, report cards, school reports...and an early story. It's a hoot and I just had to share it here.
And it gives me another week to write a "feature" article for the webpage.
So here it is, spelling errors, punctuation and paragraph formating exactly as a 12 year old knew it was supposed to be:
"(The Murder) Sub!" with Agent Steve Johnson (713)
by Jody Wheeler, age 12.
Swish! Swish! Pew Pew! (If you think this is "The Spy Who Loved me" your wrong!) Went the shots of a gun. Blam! Ahhh! Click. "That was agent 12 he was murdered last week with the information on the "sub." Pew! Ahh! That was the last Steve ever herd of "Chief." "Chief." Pew "Were' atomatic ah!" Pew "Stop that let me shoot you now!!! I don't know why I said that because now that dip that was shooting at me is standing over me with a bull knife. "Bye!" As I rolled over the man dug his knife into my shoulder. "You dip!" I said. "Shut up!" said the man as he pulled out a gun. By now I was up and about to kick him as a shot rung by. "Not this time" as I hit him! POW "You broke my gun boo ho ho" as he ran out. I follwed him in my fire hawk x-12. Powp. "Dern! Flat!"
Part II
As I entered the building I saw Mr. B A janator. "What are you doing?" I asked. "Mr. Trey told me to clean up."" As he drew his German Lugger. "Not this time." Pap as I hit him in the head with my foot as two men came around the corner. "Freeze." The first one said. "Sorry bub." Pop went my red pen as gas hit the room (Secret Agent Deluxe pen.)
They left. But this time my fire hawk parked out side the door triped them. I forgot about Mr. B. As I ran back I found a glove that said Acme Imperson nations. "Hm." "Ah." I saw Mr. B run to the roof. He had too be three people Trey Brower, Jeff Marciono, or Mr. B himself. I flowed him to the roof he shot at me with a rifle. I shot back. Then a cry of death was Mr. B fling to his death. As I came down stairs I saw Mr. B on the ground. I took off the ocuplises masks to my sirprise I saw Mr B and Jeff Maicion under there masks. There was only one person left. Trey Brower. The ring Leader of the "Sub" kid nap!
The End.
As you can see, it's ready for production tomorrow. Now all I need are attachments and a director and I'm set.
Posted by Jody at 01:13 PM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
One of the common duty assignments when I was doing Child Protection was what we called "Dirty Duty." It was essentially a chore that rotated from day to day, unit to unit, person to person. Everyday someone would wind up detaining kids - they'd bring them back to office, plant them in the play-room and move off to find a placement of some sort for them. Since kids couldn't be alone, another CSW had to sit with them while their worker was doing the paperwork. As the rest of us were equally busy with all the resulting work from our detentions the previous days, no one really wanted drop what they were doing to sit with kids - no matter how cute they were - for anywhere from two to twelve hours (and I don't exaggerate) while phone calls and paperwork were completed. Yet we did, and kids being kids, it was always interesting, informative and often quite fun...
(If you are wondering where the whole "Dirty Duty" name stemmed from, it was best explained to me on my first duty day when a female co-worker pointed from the crying baby in the crib to the wall full of Pampers to the special trash can lined with the red bag marked "Bio-Hazard." Did I mention she smiled before she left me alone in the room?)
Provided the kids hadn't come from a horribly abusive situation, generally our charges were pretty regular: teenagers were sullen, tweeners were cautious but inquisitive and the kindergarteners moved from tears to trust with a little bit a work. I found one of the niftiest ways of getting the interest of a five or seven year old was pulling out a tall narrow glass of water and a short, wide, flat bottomed cup. I'd announce that I could do magic and make all the water in the big glass fit in the smaller one. To a "T" the little ones would give me some variant of the "You are crazy" look and declare quite loudly that it couldn't be done. With the evil grin I did do so very well, I'd pour the liquid from the tall glass into the short one in and watch the reaction on the child's face as nothing overflowed.
As I poured the liquid back, the incredulity on their faces would shift and you'd think they were in the presence of Harry Potter himself. (I could almost have pulled that off when I first started in the business - 12 years, forty pounds and a receding hairline ago.) Two 8oz. cups of differing shapes provides a good deal of questions from the we'uns. You pick up in grad school that kids of about age 5 existing in what Piaget called the Pre-operational stage of reasoning. They understand some simple logic about the world but aren't as clear yet with the transitive properties of things - the continuum items and ideas exist in and how the eyes and their perceptions don't quite track with reality. They grow out of it as they get older, but that sense of curiosity, wonder and even anger are very present and instructive. One kid was adamant that I was making things up, that I had somehow made the water disappear and reappear as I moved the liquid back and forth. He just didn't get "it" yet, and as what I was doing moved quickly from instructive to torturing, we moved on to a deep and meaningful philosophical discussion of Yu-Gi-Oh.
I'm reminded of all of this as I track the "debate" raging between Whizbang [Paul] and the rest of Blogosphere over his recent comments about his disbelief in evolution. Apparently he read this article and concluded - quite wrongly-"that we don't know jack about the origin of the species". Comments like that are understandable in the case of a child, though truth be told, kids seem to grasp evolution far easier than adults do. Less of an ego stake, I think.
When My Most Excellent BlogFriend I've Never Met in Person Andy" pointed out that Wiz was sadly mistaken the usual harsh ego-stoked harsh language ensued. When The Most Excellent Biology Professor Par Excellence PZ Meyers took Wiz apart point by point,the usual response oozed out. Now, faced with tons of folks pointing out the history and evidencies for evolution, Wiz has just decended into pouting and foot stomping, just like the kids I used to work with did.
Kids you give a time-out to; adults, well, hopelessly deluded ones, the best you can do, after pointing out the errors they've made and possible sources for their own edification, is give them a slap-down. Like most oozing pustles, the problem with vain stupidity is that when it pops it infects honest discourse and produces weeping wounds of ignorance, victimhood and darkness.
You get a mess that takes countless turns of Dirty Duty to even begin to solve.
Posted by Jody at 03:09 PM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
Going back to school, you get challenged in the most unlikely of places by the most unlikely of teachers. One class I'm taking now is taught by a rather legendary former head of The William Morris Agency. His rep is a rather vile asshole, but while confrontative, I've found him to be anything but that. One of his assignments to me was to write about a current issue I was grappling with, something I was trying to get over and move through. It came out rather well, so as usual, I'm posting it here:
________________
Mind the Gap
By Jody Wheeler
The Gap begins with the childhood rustling of the doorknob and ends with adult shopping for milk at Ralph's.
As a kid of ten or eleven -- imaginative, magical, comic book reading, Star Wars action figure playing -- I remember sitting on the sofa, enthralled with TV, dinner eaten, homework done, entrancement bathing from the phosphorescent light. My mom always is cleaning something up in the kitchen, or sorting the mail, or still helping my sister complete her homework. The mood is invariably light, there's a smile on my mom's face and a look of intense seriousness on my sisters. And always then, from the distance, racing through like sudden downpour of a southern summer storm, the sound of the jiggling doorknob floods through it all.
The sound of that doorknob told me what mood he'd be in: tired, it would twist slowly one way, angry it would quickly round another, and royally pissed a repeated, delaying motion still. It was puzzling as kid to watch my mother's mood shift so profoundly - not in a stereotypical, movie of the week, victim stoked supplication or kowtowing avoidance, but rather to a dainty, placating, cautious response -- a dance along a cliff edge; a precarious routine of tight-rope walking. On my dad's arrival, conversation became indirect, around the corner, underhanded and feinting. A space created between whatever intent was meant and what exactly was being said. It was a cautious play - with success meaning a continuance of mere heightened tension and failure an explosion of harsh words and cutting comments...
I didn't initially understand any of it at first, and walked into far too many ego-bruising battles as a result. In time, learned on that giggle to tense, move, and change the volume of the TV or, later, my personal location, all in an effort to prevent the inevitable.I learned less how to dance my mother's feinting dance but instead to form a gap - a buffer space, a dislocation allowing for a proper understanding of things before engaging. Like a general on the battlefield, finding it best not to commit too much to any particular battle, I saw the necessity to hold back, to watch, and wait. My core wasn't exposed. I was safe.
As necessities learned well became skills, as skills pushed habits, as habits formed routine and routine fostered certainty against the chaos of life, that Gap, that slight disengagement but paradoxical awareness, became something not all that terribly bad. As a counselor, and later a therapist, I found I could watch a hugely convoluted situation, with a thousand emotions and bits of detail flying at once, and hear through the cacophony what was of tell-tale importance, value and need for further exploration. As a public speaker, I could trade away the din of fears and concerns echoing in the background of my mind, and move quickly into a room of three or three hundred and convey pretty clearly what I wished to say. As a writer, seeing the connections between people, their internal dislocations and paradoxes, the thrust of their dramas and the depths of their plots, allowed the creation of the stories I wished to tell to be far, far easier. As a person though, as an integrated being, a gestalt of thoughts and emotions, a system of wants and desires, an exchange of music and dance, having that Gap is rather limiting in result. Distance is distance - be it between me and my friends, me and my loved ones, or more importantly, me and myself.
The greatest movements in my life came in leaping that Gap, in moving into whatever it was that I held out at a distance. As a young man, acknowledging I was Gay returned all that I was feeling to the normal place it was supposed to be. What I had held in abeyance, left lonely on the shelf, became the rich and vibrant paints applied lovingly to a previously monochrome and bland emotional canvass. Seeing the fear that was holding me in place at my job, recognizing that my figurative martyrdom was fast becoming a literal one, gave me the certainty to step away and off into a fear of not knowing was to happen next - as no school and no job prospects were in hand. Now, the paucity of deep, fundamentally loving relationships stands visibly clear as a current expression of that Gap. Snaking alongside is the space there between choosing to be a writer and living fully as one. Both are aspects of not living fully, richly, deeply, proudly, the life I've chosen. Disengaged routine forms a familiar certainty, after all.
Peering across this part of Gap, I spy the oddest of things. Along the isles of the supermarket, between the Charmin displays and the Coke C2 specials, near the sushi bar and past the bakery, are the couples, gay and straight, pulling, dropping, comparing, cupon-ing all the sundry pieces of a shared and sharing life. It's a simple expression that fanciful or not, upon the stage of my Mind's Eye, playing out in the beats of price pointing, the movements of produce searching, the acts of salsa dip finding and dénouements of trunk stuffing, is a profound simplicity, a searing closeness, that I currently lack. It's finding my away onto this stage, enacting the same drama, that exemplified the next part of my journey.
Posted by Jody at 11:53 AM
| Comments (1)
| TrackBack
Zing
March 09, 2005
Comments are working again and Trackbacks are being de-spammed thanks to miracle plug-ins from across the web. I still haven't been able to restore the missing six months of entries from their html sources -- and I won't for a few more weeks. I seem to have found a few moments to update the Shorts section, being a welcome momentary break from cranking out pages. Will things ever return to normal around here?
Tune in next week to find out....
Posted by Jody at 11:08 PM
| Comments (0)
| TrackBack
Classes are sucking out a lot of time, with a script to get out in a week as well as three term papers. Restoring the missing entries is going to take a while.
Posted by Jody at 09:23 PM
| Comments (0)
It's still a little crazy around here. Reinstalled the old back-ups and haven't lost too much. The font size seems to be off though, making those directories on the left appearing like belt-lines at Christmas time.
Things will be back shortly.
Posted by Jody at 02:04 PM
| Comments (0)
Keyrap
February 26, 2005
The upgrade trashed my database and I've had to spend the last few days rebuilding things.
It'll be a while until things are better.
The upgrade trashed my database and I've had to spend the last few days rebuilding things.
It'll be a while until things are better.
Posted by Jody at 02:59 PM
| Comments (0)
|
