Trump Treads Dangerously By Dissing National Security State

Trump's explosive personality disorder - in many ways similar to Adolf Hitler's -  has now antagonized the entire intelligence community to our nation's detriment.

Yet another alarm bell has sounded for those state electors still debating whether to allow the Trump extravaganza and circus to continue on to inauguration on January 20th. The latest alarm bell has been a comprehensive report signed by 17 intelligence agencies - basically the national security state if you will - indicting Russian operatives as interfering in the 2016 general election. As The Washington Post reported on Friday, the CIA (among other agencies) had determined these operatives interfered not just to make mischief but to toss the election to Trump.

The core as well as ancillary documentation is still to be released in special report authorized by President Obama before January 20th  The investigation itself will be led by Director of National Intelligence, James R. Clapper, and the objective will be to arrive at a definitive judgment about the Russian role in the election including its extent. But all 17 networked intel agencies have already signed on to the initial findings and pledged their further cooperation.

Whether the actual released report (Obama aides pledge as much as possible will be released) turns out to be a 'slam dunk'  is now not so much the issue as Trump's reaction to the intelligence agencies behind the report. That is, he has essentially mocked it as untrue, eliciting a gasp even from former NSA Director Michael Hayden who marveled how this ignorant twit could put his own unsupported assumptions above what 17 agencies have validated to their satisfaction.

Trying to turn the issue around to make the CIA the scapegoat, Trump's transition team actually put the new report in the same league as the claim Saddam had WMD.    However, we now know then CIA Director George Tenet was played by an Iraqi expatriate and defector  who went by the name "curve ball". He invented the whole WMD baloney in order to trigger regime change. You can read more about this imp (Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi)  here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/curveball-man-who-lied-about-wmds-comes-clean/2012/04/03/gIQAUdditS_blog.html?utm_term=.98430badaeb5


Trump, going on the record actually discredited himself as any commander-in-chief when he said in an interview that CIA had discredited itself over the Iraqi WMD over a decade ago.  Meanwhile, his current attack on the agency's credibility is unique in our history, as the WSJ has noted:

"Mr. Trump’s attack on the CIA’s credibility appears to be a unique historical event, according to scholars. Some presidents have come into office suspicious of the intelligence community and even hostile to it. Richard Nixon knew that the intelligence agencies had collected information about his campaign’s contacts with the government of South Vietnam, declassified documents later showed."


To say the agency-  particularly the men and women who work tirelessly in it -  are upset, would be to put it mildly. To say the national security state is treating this episode casually is not to understand that state and how its power now ought to make any would -be president tremble. For if anyone can find out anything - dig anything up - from Trump's checkered background, the CIA, NSA and DIA  can.  Hell, they can now dig so much up they don't even have to resort to an executive action, say if it they desired to remove an especially obstreperous and dangerous figurehead leader regarded as a foremost national security threat.

According to a WaPo account published Saturday:

"U.S. intelligence officials described mounting concern and confusion about how to proceed in an administration so openly hostile to their function and role."

Paul Pillar, former deputy director of the CIA's Counterterrorism Center, quoted in the piece, said:

"Given his proclivity for revenge combined with his notorious thin skin, this threatens to result in a lasting relationship of distrust and ill will between the president and the intelligence community.

He added:

"Everything Trump has indicated with regard to his character and tendencies for vindictiveness might be worse than that displayed by Richard Nixon."

An even more head scratching and appalling ongoing farce is Trump's unwillingness to read and process the PDBs or President's Daily Briefs, now being delivered to him as a courtesy. In addition, as the WaPo piece notes, "Trump has attended only a limited number of intelligence briefings - and he appointed as his national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn"

That was the clown  - who with his goofy son, Michael G. - invented all the idiotic fake news stories to do with "Pizzagate". Is this a clown who can even be trusted with delivering pizza?

More to the point, if Trump is prepared to display such a cavalier attitude to national security issues, how the hell can he even be trusted to defend and protect the nation in case of a possible terror attack? He refuses to read the PDBs and he is clashing nonstop with the whole intelligence community to the extent he doesn't even trust them.

To jog memories, recall that good old George W. Bush was also cavalier with the PDBs. The most sensational Daily Brief of all was that dated August 6, 2001 and headed: Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US . Bush received this while at his Crawford, TX retreat. (He took more vacations than any other president in his first year alone.) How did Bush respond to this? He gave a quick glance then went to clear some ....bush. But what ought to have made his eyeballs pop out was the short paragraph reading (9/11 Commission Report,  ‘The System was Blinking Red’, p. 255-56):

"An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told an [—] service at the same time that Bin Ladin was planning to exploit the operative’s access to the US to mount a terrorist strike."


Of course, hindsight is always 20-20 as they say, but one is left to wonder how less devastating those 9/11 attacks might have been had Bushie boy paid more attention to the PDBs.

Now, however, we have a clown who is of such intellectual ineptitude and emotional regression he can't even be bothered to read them.  Trump's transition team - according to the Post - insists his "unwillingness to make time for intelligence briefings is a consequence of his busy schedule"  Yeah, right! Going on 'victory tours' to brag to his voter dopes: "I don't even need your votes any more!"

See e,g.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHYaN_Jq3w0

 Or appointing former female wrestlers and other dunderheads to agency positions, meanwhile conducting "Apprentice" style hours long dinners with Mitt Romney and the like - to discern more appointment picks.  All this reckoned as more critical than intelligence briefings that could hold clues to a future attack.

What will it be like if he actually becomes commander-in-chief? Some naïve folks might  may well say: "Well, once he gets into office he will read them!"  But I'm not sure. If past is prologue why on earth should we expect anything different in his behavior than we behold now?

After all, a man with Trump's severe character deficits, e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2016/10/narcissism-pre-moral-mind-and-donald-j.html

doesn't suddenly acquire stable temperament or moral character he never possessed in the first place. It simply doesn't happen.  To believe so is to reject all the fundamental tenets of modern neuroscience and psychology.

That means there is no basis to expect a President Trump will do anything different from the President Elect version.  In addition, we can expect - from all that's been revealed thus far-  the contretemps with the intelligence agencies will continue and metastasize like a cancer, reaching a point that our collective security is in peril. (And if an attack should occur in Trump's 1st term,  he is not below placing the blame on Muslims, or liberals, analogous to Hitler blaming the Jews for the Reichstag fire.)

The very fact this character is at odds with the national security state charged to protect the country tells me in no uncertain terms he has no business holding the highest office in the land.

This is yet one more reason for the Electoral College electors to send this unhinged dolt packing on December 19th. Let him have free, unencumbered reign to run his business empire without having to divest it, since this is what he truly wants. But at least he won't be running our nation....into the ground.

See also:

http://www.salon.com/2016/12/12/did-russia-hack-the-election-trump-doesnt-care-and-the-peril-grows/

And:
http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/harvey-wasserman/70225/electoral-college-must-not-vote-until-russian-hacks-of-our-election-are-fully-investigated

Is Netanyahu A Paranoid Warmonger? Yes, Which Is Why He Needs To Be Ignored

Let us accept as a proposition that in the world we inhabit the laws and exercise of principles may never match ideals. Look no further than the ACA or "Obamacare" which ideally would have been in the form of a single payer system. But the version finally on offer is the best that could be attained given the political climate.   In a similar vein "waging peace" often requires nuanced steps and trade-offs, especially with a nation like Iran - which let us admit is not a palsied military pretender like Iraq (when we invaded in 2003).  Thus, the step-by- step current negotiations are more likely to have success than a precipitous response.

But the  latter is what we got from Benjamin Netanyahu two days ago in the Israeili warmonger's hysterical performance on Capitol Hill. Again, with fire-breathing rhetoric, "Bibi" blasted any deal apart from total Iranian nuclear disarmament and - effectively -  demanded the only alternative had to be war. Which is total insanity, and ought to be sufficient to see this moron taking a one way hike out of the leadership of his Likud party- hopefully in the wake of the Israeli election.

The Financial Times, in an article by Philip Stephens yesterday  ('The Answer for Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu Is War Against Iran')  highlighted the total awkward impropriety of it all, in the form of traducing Obama with the Republicans. Of course, the Repugs would lap it up as they're always looking for wars as a means to ramp up deficits to decrease social spending. Call it their trademark. So we expected Boehner and his merry band of bellicose Teepees to certainly grovel and slaver as Netanyahu tried to give his best imitation of Winston Churchill. But most ''Murican historical numbnuts today forget Churchill gave his address at a time when the world faced a real threat in the Nazi Third Reich. As Stephens noted, it was bellicose hyperbole "indulged in by John Boehner" but on the good side (ibid.):

"At least he left out the crude diagram of the Iranian bomb he waved aloft at the UN in 2012."

What is most puzzling is how this unhinged Irsraeli jackass - who more and more resembles the 'boy who cried 'Wolf!' -  has any creds left  when the EU and most European states "shut him out" (according to Stephens) long ago. His rants became so predictable and the over the top rhetoric so absurd that they basically tuned him out. But not the warmongering Neocons in the U.S.

And as far as trying to upstage Obama, all that really happened is that it backfired in the minds of most sensible citizens. Because no matter the excuse, no one one- ups the President in terms of attending a speech that he never sanctioned, but which a troll Reepo congress did - just to get back at him for his executive orders on immigration.

Stephens also observed that Israel's own security and political establishment - including former generals and other officials- has been critical of the speech and believes its only effect is "a clear and present danger to Israel".  A take with which I agree.

While most rational people in the world of realpolitik understand that the only chance to curb Iran is the one now being followed by Obama, the irrational warmongers in Israel and the U.S. demand all out attacks a la Netanyahu. It seems two major conflicts in the last 14 years  aren't enough - they want the whole enchilada. Worse, they're prepared to even invoke the holocaust and in newspaper and mail ads - such as the one I got from AIPAC three days ago. But the hysterical rhetoric used is not designed to encourage thinking people of good will to side with them and so I tore up the AIPAC flyers and hurled them into the dustbin.

I've been a vocal and frequent critic of holocaust deniers and the Nazis (and neo-Nazis) but that doesn't mean I'm going to jump on a pro-war with Iran bandwagon when diplomacy is the only way we'll get a decent resolution.

Perhaps the most insightful and rational take on Iran was offered three years ago by U.S. intelligence specialist, Paul Pillar, in an essay in The Washington Monthly:

"More than three decades of history show that the Islamic Republic's rulers, like most rulers elsewhere, are overwhelmingly concerned with preserving their regime and their power....in this life and not some future one."

Israel, before it mounts its bombs to attack Iran might want to process that. They also might wish to look again at Principle VI under the Nuremberg laws, passed after the Nazis were brought to heel. Principle VI clearly states:

"The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law: (a) Crimes against peace: (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). "

The U.S. itself would commit total folly getting involved in another mid-East hornet's nest, given how it's already fucked up Iraq to a far-thee-well, destabilizing its secular government to the point the crazies like ISIS could enter and wreak havoc.  Leading to State Dept. spokesperson Marie Harf's observation (for which she's been pilloried by the Right):

"We cannot kill our way out of this war" 

Referring to the current conflict with ISIS.  Well, we certainly cannot if that means once more committing tens of thousands of ground troops - especially after we beheld how that worked out before. I mean, look,  as Einstein put it: "insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result."  So if we do follow Bibi's prescription for war, we have to be insane.

And yes, this is contrary to pseudo-Indy columnist Kathleen Parker's recent jibes: "It sounded silly" and  "it needed 12 pages of context to sound rational". In truth, it only needed a memory of recent history of how we totally fouled up Iraq by removing Saddam and ended up with over 4400 dead and  $4 trillion in debt - when all the medical costs are toted up. 

Do we want to go through all that shit again? 

As for making war on Iran, any nut or warmonger that entertains that fantasy needs to see the movie 'Threads' which concerns a U.S. and NATO strike force  invasion of Iran in response to a perceived Russian threat. Though the initial trigger may differ it is possible the rest may well materialize.

From the initial strikes on a nuke reactor at Isfahan, to the accidental sinking of the Russian ship Kirov in the Straits of Hormuz, to the deliberate exchange of two tactical nuclear weapons (with radiation blowing over Pakistan) and the escalation to a full scale nuclear war - with 3,000 megatons exchange (210 megatons on the UK alone) this movie will keep you on the edge of your seat and your ears tuned to the Siren sounds of would-be warmongers..

It should also give you nightmares and motivate you to scream down all the jingoist twits in this country with a boner to pick a fight. One might also include the Israelis in this as well, since any attacks by them could easily escalate and generate unintended consequences.

The last segment of the film - following the timeline after the missile exchange and when nuclear winter occurs, discloses there are some prices that are simply too much to pay. Most graphic are the scenes of the sorry victims of radiation sickness in Sheffield, UK and the final scene when a young woman that manages to survive gives birth to an infant with a frog-like face, scales and small scaled horns. As she screams in horror at her mutant, grunting offspring, the film pans to black and the credits roll.

DO we really want this future? Then by all means let's take Netanyahu's solution to the Iran nuclear problem! If not, we'd best ignore him and relegate him to the ranks of other crackpots in the past - like Barry Goldwater, and Gen. Curtis Lemay - the guy who demanded we nuclear bomb Russia after WWII, after they helped us to prevail.

Warmongering, paranoid crackpots will always be around. But that doesn't mean we have to pay them any serious attention.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/marjorie-cohn/61233/netanyahu-censored-voices-and-the-false-narrative-of-self-defense

And:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-parry/61228/congress-cheers-netanyahus-hatred-of-iran

And:

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/05/americas_war_fever_is_rising_how_fear_bloodlust_are_bringing_americans_together/

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/06/lets_all_pity_netanyahu_and_the_gop_israel_iran_irrational_thinking_and_thomas_friedmans_usual_muddled_nonsense/

It's Still Stupid to Launch an Attack on Iran

As undercurrents of discontent for Iran's nuclear program continue to bubble to the surface and we behold the Israelis already preparing for Iranian counter-attacks (to a near future bombing raid on Iranian facilities), the fact remains there is no defensible logic which could justify such an attack.

Even leave out for the moment the report in a recent issue of The Economist ('Smart Concrete', March 3rd, p. 89) that recently developed U.S. "bunker buster", 30,000 lb. bombs may not be able to penetrate Iranian underground facilities, fortified as they are now with "ultra-high performance concrete" (UHPC) - this is a nanoscale variation, often incorporating oxides of titanium or zirconium. Other variants have used polypropylene fibers and quartz flour (known as 'fume') to attain the same effect, according to the piece.

In other words, attacking Iranian facilities using these Massive Ordinance Penetrators ("MOPS' ), which can break through 60 m of ordinary concrete, will not necessarily be a walk in the park. And if not for the U.S., it won't be for Israel either, unless they do something reckless like using tactical nukes - the basis for the horrific nuclear war flick, 'Threads', e.g.
http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/03/anxious-to-start-war-with-iran-see-this.html

But there are other reasons to refuse to be cajoled into a costly, maybe super-costly, war. One of them is Iran does not have a nuclear weapon. All it has are highly enriched fuels which could be used for reactors. The U.S. Intelligence community has already twice concluded there is no evidence that Iran has committed to any decision to make a nuclear weapon. So, are we now again, to be pushed into a 3rd conflict - like the specious one in Iraq based on ridiculous claims of them getting "yellowcake" - abetted by a 'dog and pony' show before the UN?

Meanwhile, London's International Institute for Strategic Studies concurred.

There is also a major fault in the logic that if Iran goes nuclear it'll set off a nuclear arms race in the region. We have examples that counter such reasoning. When North Korea went nuclear, neither Korea or Japan followed suit. And when Israel went nuclear, neither Egypt or Saudi Arabia followed suit.

Also, comparing attainment of nukes to India and Pakistan doesn't wash, since we've seen both those countries go to war three times in 30 years yet nukes weren't used. In fact, one could argue that since going nuclear they've been more restrained, somewhat analogous to the basis for "mutually assured destuction" (MAD) that existed between the U.S. and Soviet Union during the Cold war.

Neither does the argument that any nukes "might fall into the hands" of terrorists make sense. After all Iran has endured, including massive sanctions (the latest being cut off from the international electronic banking SWIFT system) how or why would they be so cavalier in allowing their hard won attainments to be usurped by loonies? It is all scare tactics.

Finally, the (mainly) Israeli argument that Iranians are prepared to commit mass suicide if it means the extermination of Israel is hyperbolic babble. (This was the claim of the Israeli Ambassador on a recent Bill Maher show). A truer take was offered by Gen. Martin Dempsey on Fareed Zakaria's CNN program some time back, when he referred to Iran as a "rational actor" - that means ultimately invested in survival not self-extermination for a manic, irrational cause (as the Christian fundies are in the U.S. of A., who can't wait for Armageddon to occur and the world's cities vaporized to pave the way for Jaysus' 2nd coming. Oh, and that means all the Jews except 100,000 "chosen ones" vaporized too, though until then these fundie U.S. Xtians are happy to use Israel as the base for their prophecies to unfold!)

As observed by U.S. intelligence specialist, Paul Pillar, in an essay in The Washngton Monthly:

"More than three decades of history show that the Islamic Republic's rulers, like most rulers elsewhere, are overwhelmingly concerned with preserving their regime and their power....in this life and not some future one."

Israel, before it mounts its bombs to attack Iran might want to process that. They also might wish to look again at Principle VI under the Nuremberg laws, passed after the Nazis were brought to heel. Principle VI clearly states:

"The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law: (a) Crimes against peace: (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). "

As for Obama and his administration, he'd be stupid to cooperate in such a violation, leading as it would to even higher spiking oil prices, and very likely an end to his aspirations to get a 2nd term - which I for one believe he deserves.