Did North Korea Really Conduct An H-Bomb Test? Doubtful!

Designs of primitive H-bombs (ca. 1952-55) from U.S. (top) and Soviet Union.

 As the U.S. press approaches panic over North Korea's most recent nuclear test, wiser and more sober heads have questioned whether it even makes the cut of a hydrogen bomb at all. Best estimates from the U.S Geological Survey, analysts at Rand Corporation and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists - based on a 6..3 Richter scale quake in the vicinity - are that the yield was 100 kilotons.  This is nowhere near the expected yield (500 kt - 1 megaton) of a minimal hydrogen fusion bomb.

According to Paul Richards, a researcher at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, who studies the seismic signals of nuclear weapons test explosions:

"It does not seem large enough to be the mark of a true hydrogen bomb detonation."

Adding:

"The limited number of (hydrogen bomb tests) that have been done underground in the few megaton range have magnitudes on in the high six or seven range. That would be a hundred times larger than this."

This is reinforced by Won-Young Kim, also a research scientist at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory who collaborates with Richards.   He observes that for a test of a supposedly more powerful device, the seismic signal bears a similarity to those of previous nuclear tests involving smaller devices.

Kim added in a CNBC interview:

 "The consensus is that a hydrogen bomb or thermonuclear device would be huge — the yield would be much bigger than that of a small nuclear bomb."

How is this? Let's go back to yield and mass delivery specs for earlier H-bombs, for which I show two designs above.   The U.S. original H-bomb (Teller-Ulam ) design shown in the top graphic, consists of a fission bomb - massive in itself  -  at one end of a heavy radiation case. At the other end is the thermonuclear charge, basically a cylinder with a neutron shield at one end (liquid deuterium inside it) and a thin 'spark plug' of plutonium mixed with tritium. At detonation, the radiation from the fission bomb reflects off the radiation casing and compresses the thermonuclear charge to many times its original density.

The compression then sparks a fission reaction in the mixed Pu- ³ H spark plug that compresses the fusion fuel simultaneously from the other side. The fusion material is now primed for fusion reactions which yield megaton scale release.

Given a similar design for the N. Korean weapon, the best explanation of what transpired is that the full implosion of  the thermonuclear charge failed to occur.  This means the high density needed for actual nuclear fusion - needed to overcome Coulomb repulsion, i.e. between like charged protons- did not occur. The result of 100 kt was merely an advanced atomic explosion, or "boosted" detonation,  but not a hydrogen fusion detonation.

By comparison, the U.S.  early 50s' 'Mike' design, once refined, came in at 1,360 kg  for total mass and the yield to mass ratio translating into just over a 1 megaton explosion (1.08 Mt).  This conforms to what Bruce Bennett, a senior analyst for Rand Corporation, a non-partisan think tank - said: "That type of explosion doesn't cause kilotons [of explosive yield], it causes megatons."

The message then, despite all the hype and the usual huff and puff from Trump, is not to panic. In the end most rational observers - like Adm. James Whitfield (Ret.) this morning, advise it's time to take a deep breath. According to Adm. Whitfield, Kim Jong Un is simply buying insurance against a U.S. invasion or attack such as we beheld with the regime change in Iraq in 2003.  Whitfield in a CBS interview this morning, emphasized that  Kim would never attack the U.S. first because he'd know it would mean his own annihilation and that of his country. That's the last thing he wants. He wants to stay in power.

Alarming at another level is the South Korean Defense Minister's request for a review of tactical nuclear weapons for his country.  Any such transfer would pose enormous risks, not only to the South Koreans, but increasing the chances of an accidental nuclear war that could see Russia and China enter as well. According to nuclear non-proliferation expert Catherine Dill, such a move would radically "increase the chance of miscalculation or unintended escalation.". It is simply not on.:

As the WSJ's Gerald Seib (p. A4, today) put it: "most experts simply don't believe a preemptive strike on North Korea is feasible because it would trigger a conflict that could leave millions of South Koreans dead."   Thereby rendering even more reprehensible Trump's tweet about South Korea's President Moon "appeasing" the North.   Delivered like a true coward who himself has zero 'skin in the game except for his big mouth.

This is why, as former CIA Acting Director Mike Morrell put it, all parties - certainly here in the U.S. - including the bombastic "fire and fury" Trump and Nikki Haley ("Kim is begging for a war"), need to tone down the rhetoric.  It is such misguided brinksmanship that often sets off wars such as World War I.   Sadly, we have a nincompoop who tweets like a five -year old in charge and not the mature person we really need, say a JFK- who got us through the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Intelligent citizens also ought to ignore the trade threats of Trump, the man-baby,  who responded to the latest North Korean missile test by warning about halting trade with China ("any country doing business with North Korea").  As analysts noted, in today's WSJ (p. A6, 'Trump's Threats Put China Trade At Risk') such a precipitous move "would be nearly impossible to implement without wreaking havoc on the U.S. economy".

How much havoc? Enough to also "hurt American factories and workers" - the ones Trump promised to help out with jobs, and most of whom likely voted for the imp.

This is because after Mexico and Canada, China is the U.S. 3rd largest trade partner at $479 b in goods and services, according to Capital Economics analyst Andrew Kenningham.. Cutting that out in response to China not dealing with the North the way Trump wants, would be the mark of a moron. But then, look who we have leading the country.

A veritable toad who doesn't know any better than to issue tweets concerning a potential nuclear conflict - for which cooler heads and serious negotiations are in order. Not deranged outbursts from a narcissist authoritarian's Id.


See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/david-swanson/74955/stop-allowing-your-emperor-to-threaten-nuclear-apocalypse

Can Trump DO Anything To Stop North Korea After ICBM Test? No, But He Can Make Another Phony Wrestling Video

The Fourth Of July dawned with the alarming news that North Korea had succeeded in a test launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) they call the Hwasong -14.   At the outset the brain trusts at the Pentagon and CIA had the test pegged more as an IRBM or intermediate range ballistic missile test, but later analysis - specifically including the duration of powered flight (37 mins.) put the kibosh on that. The maximum altitude of 1700 miles, combined with the 580 mile horizontal range, put the test firmly in the ICBM class with the capability of reaching Alaska.

More unsettling, it showed the missile cone could have survived re-entry through the atmosphere. which is crucial for any ICBM.  As I noted in an earlier post, if  the North Koreans can master the technological re-entry problems, then according to Lt. Gen. Vince Stewart,  it will be "on a pathway where this capability is inevitable."  Of course, it remains to be seen whether the North has miniaturized a nuclear warhead to fit in the nose cone of their Hwasong -14 missile. Let's bear in mind the crucial factor here is the mass.

Assuming their nuclear capability is only at the most primitive stage (roughly like the U.S. in mid -1945) that means they'd need their ICBM to deliver a warhead with a yield of roughly 0.08 kt/ kilogram. That is yield per actual bomb mass.  This means they’d need to be able to launch or carry (via plane) at least 100 kg of bomb mass to get an 8 kiloton A -blast, or 200 kg to get a 16 kt yield..

The key aspect for a stable ICBM, of course, is to ensure the center of gravity (or center of mass) of the missile is ahead of its center of pressure. The CG is just the point where the rocket mass is evenly balanced.   (Imagine placing the missile on a knife edge and being balanced). Thus, there is no net moment on one side or the other. Given the nose cone mass is rendered much larger by incorporation of 100 kg or 200 kg mass then it is advantageous for stability to have that extra mass in there. The center of pressure (CP) then is located more toward the tail and is generally considered as the focus of all aerodynamic forces acting, which entails computation of the total area of the missile, e.g. fins, cylindrical surface etc.

The farther behind the center of gravity the center of pressure is placed, the stronger and more precise the restoring forces , so the missile displays greater stability in flight, less wobble.  Of course, the competition for a stable ICBM will be seen between the nose mass (where the warhead is located) and the tail region where the engines reside. One certainly needs engines of powerful thrust - up to  360,000 foot-pounds, or 1, 600 kilo newtons -  but this also implies greater engine mass. The greater that engine mass the more the CG will move backward toward the tail. Obviously then, if the engine mass is too great the danger is that the CG may fall behind the CP leading to instability.

It is doubtful to me that the N. Korean ICBM test included an actual miniaturized warhead. The question they must answer is how the inclusion of a 100-200 kg mass in the nose of the missile will affect its trajectory and especially stability  - in concert with the engine required to hurl it to another continent..  That is basically the sixty four dollar question.  Only at that point , i.e. of an actual  warhead test, should the world really be going into panic mode.

Nonetheless, the successful "bare bones" (e.g. minus warhead)  test marks a direct challenge to Trump, whose tough talk has yet to yield any change in Pyongyang’s behavior as the regime continues its efforts to build a nuclear tipped ICBM that can reach the U.S. mainland.

Trump, the man-baby,  responded to the North Korean missile test by applying rhetorical pressure on China, North Korea’s ally and economic lifeline, and by mocking dictator Kim Jong Un on Twitter. Of course, given Kim Jong Un is the Korean version of Trump (but cubed),  it probably only made more provocations inevitable.

Funniest of all was Trump's trademark childish tweet:

"North Korea has just launched another missile. Does this guy have anything better to do with his life?”

Well, from the looks of it he's certainly got more done than watching cable TV 12 hours a day like the Donald, or making fake wrestling videos body slamming a CNN suit. In a race to tell who's done more, I'd have to say the North Korean wins, especially as he's got Trump totally boxed in with nothing he can really do but tweet like a fool. "Modern day version" of a president? Nope, modern day version of a goofball who has no more business in the Oval Office than a drunken baboon.

Despite Trump's puppet McMaster's veiled threats, there really is no possibility at all for any direct military strikes. Any such retarded and precipitate folly would lead to South Korea being utterly turned into ashes within minutes - and likely via nuclear fireballs.

Interviewed in April,  and asked if Trump would actually attack North Korea, former CIA North Korean analyst Sue Mi Terry responded:

 “I can’t see him following through on this and that is the problem with the brinksmanship policy. Because you’re putting yourself in a bind. You will either have to back down and lose credibility or you are stuck on a ledge with a military option which is very, very risky.

 North Korea is not Syria. It’s not Afghanistan. It’s going to have very devastating consequences.  North Korea will retaliate to any kind of military option. They will retaliate against South Korea given seventy percent of its ground forces are deployed within 100 kilometers (60 miles) of the DMZ.  And there’s twenty thousand U.S. military in South Korea and twenty million people in Seoul”

Let's be clear none of the North's existing weapons could reach the U.S. presently – though they could wreak havoc on Seoul, South Korea – with the potential to obliterate over 20 million people as well as all U.S. troops stationed in S. Korea.

Clearly, this is a cost and risk no sane leader would visit on a vulnerable ally. An 11-page report just compiled by Global Zero's Nuclear Crisis Group also warns that the risk of a nuclear war is now "unacceptably high".  Despite that, some military know nothings exist - just as they did in the Kennedy era with the Cuban Missile crisis (e.g. Gen. Curtis LeMay) who really believe a "pre-emptive strike" can be managed with no further risk of conflagration. 

As Exhibit A for the "Curtis LeMay clone of the year award", I give you  former NATO supreme Allied commander -  Admiral James Stavrids (Ret.). This inveterate dickhead  blithely talked this morning (on 'Morning Joe') of taking out the North like you'd lance a boil. No shit. 

According to Stavrids:

"It will be on President Trump's watch to make this decision and it becomes a pre-emptive strike that is legitimate under international law. So you build an Asian coalition, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Singapre....as many as you can get on board, And you're going to  have to use a combination of cyber warfare, special forces, and long range air from Guam as well as bring three to four carrier battle groups around the peninsula.

We're gonna lose hundreds of thousands of people in that scenario. Many of them will be Americans, there are 200,000 American citizens there. It's a very dark scenario but if you've gotta lance the boil militarily can you do it? Yes.  Do you have the legitimacy when the nuke and the intercontinental missile stream cross?  Yes, and that's probably eighteen months away."

He acknowledged "hundreds of thousands" dead and doesn't blink an eye. Nor does he see there is no assurance a "preemptive" strike confined to the peninsula means the ensuing war is confined there.

If you go back to read through the transcripts of the tapes made during the Cuban Missile crisis (The Kennedy Tapes: Inside the White House During the Cuban Missile Crisis’, by Ernest R. May and Philip K. Zelikow (1997, President and Fellows of Harvard College) you will see the Joint Chiefs then also firmly believed the U.S. had the "legitimate right" to make a full invasion of Cuba and bomb Castro back to the Stone Age. Of course, Robert McNamara thirty years later on meeting Castro then learned all 90-odd IRBMs would have been launched at the U.S. - doubtless ushering in a full scale nuclear war.

So yeah, it's neat to bang the drum of "legitimacy" by whatever rationalization and ideational confection you  can muster, but the question to be answered is : Do you really want to reduce the planet to ashes that badly? 

Meanwhile, Gen. Vincent Brooks, commander of U.S. forces in S. Korea (after a joint missile drill with the South Koreans) insisted as per a Financial Times quote that "the allied troops were prepared for war". Seemingly oblivious to the fact the North's response will not be conventional but likely via a single A-bomb of 8 - 20 kt scale dropped from a plane or hurled via solid fuel missile.

Fortunately,  there are still some sane voices to be heard like former CIA deputy director Mike Morrell .  Two days ago when asked on CBS Early Show what the U.S. response should be, Morrell minced no words: "There can be no military response or attack. The only two options are more sanctions and perfecting the missile defense system".   And the latter needs perfecting given it's now exclusively "designed for success" with a GPS locater beacon in the target's nose cones.

If JFK were President as opposed to an overgrown toddler with malignant ego issues, whose only communications are via a cartoon medium, we might have a chance.  Kennedy as per his Cuban Missile solution would have figured the only way out is to make some concessions (say more food supplies) after getting Kim Jong Un to the table.  Then, perhaps trade food and medical supplies for a reduction in missiles.  

What we can hope for is that China's President Xi  Jinping and Vladimir Putin (Trump's "hero") talk some sense into president Man-Boy as regards feasible responses when he attends the G20 summit. The question is whether Drumpf listens to them or the hotheads calling for a pre-emptive strike.

McMaster Shows Himself Another Puppet By Denying, Spinning Trump's Latest Intel Transgression

Trump divulged highly classified intel to Lavrov (L) and Kislyak last week.

"We can't have someone in the Oval Office who doesn't understand the words 'confidential' or 'classified'." - Donald Trump in campaign speech last year, in regard to Hillary Clinton's handling of classified information on a private server.

The banner headline for The Washington Post story released last night read:

'Trump Revealed Highly Classified Information To Russian Diplomats'

Ought to send chills down the spines of all true American patriots, not the paper type who wave their little flags, chant "USA! USA!" but can't even recite three of the Bill of Rights, or name the branches of government - but the real patriots. That is, those who know their leaders are not laws unto themselves and must be held to account.

The lead story in the Post reported on Monday that Trump shared details of intelligence gathered about an Isis threat that had been closely guarded within the United States government and among close US allies. The report stated that while Trump did not describe the specific sources or methods used to gather the intelligence, he provided highly classified details, apparently connected to an Isis plot related to the use of laptops on board passenger aircraft.

Naturally the lying, spinning Trump did not take kindly to these revelations and so dispatched his pressured toadies to try to spin them all the way (at the same time it was reported that Sean Spicer, Sara Huckabee Sanders and Steve Bannon went on a screaming binge in one room as the TVs  played the snafu over and over.)

Then there was none other than the new head of the NSC, H.R. McMaster, who we all expected to be the "adult in the room" keeping the POTUS steady on his daily political 'potty' training.  But once again, that fell through, the evidence being H.R. had to go out in front of the press and channel Sara "Huckster" Sanders, morphing into yet another coverup spinner of misinformation. In his blustering denial McMaster blathered:

"The story that came out tonight as reported is false.... At no time were any intelligence sources or methods discussed and no military operations were disclosed that were not already known publicly,..”

But this was not the point and McMaster damned well knows it. The point was in Trump failing to adhere to specific talking points (always prepared before contact with foreign diplomats) and going off script, blabbering, bragging about the intel he gets then divulging classified information. This did not concern sources and methods, which the WaPo article clearly pointed out.  But that doesn't matter, the information embodied critical intelligence.  The Russians are smart enough to be able to 'reverse engineer' what was given them to ascertain the location of the source and likely the identity of the "code word source".


McMaster obfuscating and spinning last night.  He's no longer the "adult" in the room but another sycophant and stooge.

McMaster then, by his willing duplicity, made Arlen Specter of  'Magic Bullet' Warren Commission fame look the very picture of decorum and probity by comparison.  While Specter tried to feed us the bunkum that one bullet made 7 wounds  and escaped virtually unscathed, McMaster tried to feed us the 'Magic Intel' bunkum.  That is,  POTUS-leaked intel information prepared by an ally (and not to be disclosed without said ally's consent) was not a real misfire at all, and will cause no lasting damage.

Why such a big deal? Because Trump, in a spasm of boastful egomania,  blabbed what was classified beyond even Top Secret, e.g. (SCI  or 'secret compartmentalized information')  via an information-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government. This according to  current and former U.S. intelligence officials, specifically that what Trump did was violate a sharing agreement with a key ally.  As Ned Price, former CIA analyst pointed out in an interview last night:

"There is a core assumption that undergirds our intelligence the world over.  This includes our sharing relationships with friends, allies and even at times with adversaries. And that is, we will share with you if you will share with us, with a reciprocal understanding that we will safeguard each other's information. And there is not to be onward passage of that information without explicit consent of the country that gave us that information. So, if the details reported are true, President Trump betrayed that core premise under which all our intelligence are forged.....This will infuriate the ally that gave us the information but a much greater threat is that countries around the world will think more than once about sharing information with us."

Former CIA deputy director Mike Morrell also pointed out this morning (CBS) that Trump's disclosure puts the source at risk if the Russians are able to figure out who it is.  Morrell also pointed out it was McMaster's job to get Trump to pay attention to the nature of critical intelligence (in his prep briefing book) and what may be disclosed in contacts with foreign agents or personae and what cannot.  Morrell was even more direct in terms of Trump's first words of boasting on the intel: "Once the President started going down this road it was H.R. McMaster's responsibility to redirect the conversation."

All of which portrays an eye-popping Trumpian transgression even for mealy mouthed sycophants like McMaster or Rex Tillerson to try and spin -  who may insist Trump (as President) had the "right" to do it.  But no executive order delivers such right, since as I noted previously, executive orders aren't provided for under the constitution.  Oh, and no President is himself above the law, meaning above the oath by which he swore to defend the Constitution.

What makes it even more scandalous, is that this latest Trump fuck up -the only appropriate word to use- is about the fourth in a week. This includes firing James Comey and threatening him with release of "tapes" - means intelligence gathering allies will be even less likely now to share highly critical information with us. Why would they when we have such a jackass, blabbering resident, and also howling dog puppets to try to cover his tracks - none of whom can evidently be trusted.  As the WaPo report noted:

"The partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said Trump’s decision to do so endangers cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State."

I mean imagine the implications here! This dumbass fool who promised to get rid of Isis during his campaign actually divulges classified content that could have assisted in ultimately (with allies' cooperation) bringing them down.   The same bombastic birdbrain yelped constantly during the '16 campaign that "no one should be in the Oval Office who doesn't understand the words 'confidential' or 'classified'."

Imagine then what would have happened to Hillary had she been President and blabbed such confidential material to foreign actors and especially those deemed to be high level adversaries. Hell, the hearings that would have ensued would have made Benghazi look like a  Disney cartoon, plus the articles of impeachment would already be getting drafted.

Of course, none of this may matter in the long run because right now Trump regards himself as "the law" and so do his puppets. Just two days ago, UN ambassador Nikki Haley opining on the Comey firing asserted without a blush: "He  is the CEO of the country. He can fire anyone he wishes!"  Yeah, well Nikki, first let me inform you that we have no "CEOs" running the nation. We have Presidents who preside at the behest and will of the PEOPLE not the other way around. Also, our nation is not a goddamned corporation based on a corporate charter, but a federal union of states operating under a Constitution. And just because Trump thinks he can "fire anyone he wants" doesn't mean it's necessarily "constitutional" if done for nefarious motives, say to snuff an investigation.

For almost anyone in government, discussing such matters with an adversary would be illegal, and as one commentator put it last night - if Trump were an ordinary citizen he'd be tried for treason.  But as our "President" Trump automatically was granted a (temporary)  'get out of jail free' card his sycophants think they can twist facts any which way they want. . Thus, the latter insist that by occupying said office Trump has broad authority to declassify government secrets, making it unlikely that his disclosures broke the law.  

Let me rephrase that for better perspective: Trump can impulsively blab away specialized classified content  (SCI) to foreign adversaries, realize later what he did was unlawful or treason - then, invoking his office, retroactively "declassify" the SCI already divulged. Neat trick,  eh?

Cutting through all the discharged crap and spin, here's the central point that bears emphasis as numerous talking heads attempt to dilute or diminish Trump's latest transgression:  According to U.S. Intelligence sources, Trump actually revealed the city in Islamic state held territory where the U.S. intelligence partner detected the threat.  As Morrell said this morning, this level of specificity is "what the Russians will go to school on" i.e. to find out more. That source then is now imperiled as well its ongoing intel, because a blabbermouth blowhard without the slightest sense of propriety saw fit to divulge intelligence to a foreign adversary. At the very least, this reckless moron needs to be impeached, and as soon as possible. He is a liability to the nation, to its intelligence services and to all our global partners invested in securing a better world.

See also this link which suggests he may have to be removed for his own good under the 25th amendment:

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/kali-holloway/72836/the-video-that-suggests-trump-is-suffering-from-alzheimers

Excerpt:

“I'm not saying that Donald Trump has dementia,” Joe Scarborough said during a recent segment on Trump’s mental state, “but my mother has dementia. She lives in the moment. She forgets what she said a day ago, a week ago. We can't have presidents that do that."

Acting AG Sally Yates Merits Kudos For Defying BLOTUS

Two years ago it was Sen. Jeff Sessions who grilled Sally Yates on her ability to be impartial, asking:

"If the views the President wishes to execute are unlawful, should the attorney general or deputy attorney general say 'no'"?

Yates didn't hesitate in answering:  "Senator, I believe the attorney general or the deputy attorney general has an obligation to follow the law and the constitution and give their independent legal advice to the President".

This is, in fact, exactly  what Sally Yates did, but it was ignored - after Trump's unlawful "EO" created vast chaos and irreparable harm, leading her to take the action she did.

Millions of us who lived through Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre" - when he fired two attorneys general (who refused to fire Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox) - were shocked and horrified when BLOTUS Trump fired Sally Yates last night. What did Ms. Yates do to deserve such ignominious treatment?    According to the Trumpistas, she told justice department lawyers not to defend his executive order banning entry for people from seven Muslim-majority countries.

As I wrote in two previous posts, this was quite correct as none of these so-called "executive orders" has any force of law behind them, having not been properly vetted. Worse, the content clearly is in violation of the Constitution, including equal protection under the law and the establishment of religion clause. Ms Yates saw these violations clearly and acted upon them, as a principled person charged with impartial justice would.

But Trump's gaggle of Nazis, especially Steve Bannon,  didn't see it that way. They  said Sally Yates had “betrayed” the department by refusing to enforce a legal order that was “designed to protect the citizens of the United States”.  Of course this is balderdash, because Trump's scrap sheet decree framed as an "executive order" was unlawful,  carrying no weight, none.  Bannon and the other assholes who drafted it and fired it off didn't even bother to do a modicum of cross- department vetting to ensure it was doable and consistent with existing practices.  Because of this they had to walk back the green card aspect, i.e. initially denying entry to legal green card holders.  Even Iraqis who had helped U.S. troops were included in the insane ban, as well as an Iraqi general fighting ISIS.  As some military experts have put it, this is sheer "insanity" when we need Iraqis to help root out ISIS. 

Nor did Bannon and his fellow reprobates have the sense to alert the affected agencies (e.g. Homeland Security) before releasing it so they could at least get their operations in synch. No, they just dropped the hammer, forcing agencies to cope with the thousands of suddenly affected travelers - including Harvard professors, students, doctors - one from Cleveland Clinic - on the fly. Again, sheer insanity.

Thus, this act of Bannon-Trump's discloses they do not believe in judicial independence and insist the DOJ become their political pet to interject and impose wanton, lawless policy. The very nature of the language used, e.g. "betrayed", indicates this - when Ms, Yates was following the historical and principled position of DOJ independence from political influence.

This is evocative of the Reich Courts which replaced the normal Weimar judiciary during Hitler's reign. Hitler  - like Trump now - insisted and demanded "loyalty" from his judiciary to thereby enact his Reich laws (e.g. which enabled seizing Jewish property)  so well described in many books, such as Konrad Heiden's, 'The Fuhrer'.   My point is that when an independent judiciary is quashed it should be the first sign of impending tyranny to vigilant citizens.

Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Tribe, on MSNBC last night, offered this view, when asked 'how big a deal it was to fire the acting attorney general over this issue'':

"I think it's historic. It certainly reminded me immediately of the Saturday night massacre. One of the main differences is how quickly this has happened with the Trump presidency. It's like history is being collapsed into a black hole and everything is happening faster than the speed of light. It seems to me that because the Sessions nomination is already controversial, because the executive order really challenges who we are as Americans and violates important parts of the Constitution - including the clause forbidding an establishment of religion  - including the many protests against this president, I think this is an important turning point in our history.

I think tonight is part of that extraordinary moment we are living through. "

When next asked if it was right for Trump to relieve Ms. Yates of her job, and replace her, Prof. Tribe responded:

"The President had a choice. He could have arranged for the appointment of a special counsel to defend his position even when the Justice Department wouldn't. There are certain limited cases in our own recent history where the Department of Justice was unwilling to defend a particular law and congress appointed someone to defend it. In this case, it wasn't a law that was an issue but an executive order, the president might have arranged through the White House counsel's office to have his order defended. But for him to turn the Justice Department - because of this discharge- into part of his fiefdom and compromise its independence suggests that he has no commitment to the institutional integrity of the department we rely on to represent the rule of law. And not simply the rule or whim of the president of the United States,"

Note carefully first Prof. Tribe's distinction of a law (e.g. settled law) from executive order. Note also that as opposed to his reckless and tyrannical act of firing Ms. Yates, he had other options. Namely getting his own counsel to defend his order, and even better, make the full case that it comports with the constitution. But this he did not do! Authoritarian narcissist that he is, he insisted conformity of the DOJ with his personal, unlawful decrees and hence making the DOJ "part of his fiefdom"  to quote Professor Tribe.

If we as a nation can't see anything seriously wrong with this, we are beyond hope. However, I am convinced the spreading protests show that enough citizens are aware and are  not prepared to initiate or allow another version of Hitler's Reich Court.

For perspective here, as the country’s top law enforcement official, Ms. Yates  had control over the justice department’s immigration litigation office, which has handled the federal complaints filed against Trump’s order since his bombshell policy was announced on Friday. As she made clear in a letter to justice department lawyers :

“I am responsible for ensuring that the positions we take in court remain consistent with this institution’s solemn obligation to always seek justice and stand for what is right. At present I am not convinced that the defense of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful.”

The acting AG's action earned praise from immigration activists and Democrats but within three hours Ms Yates was gone. A propaganda statement from press secretary Sean Spicer's  office
said:

“Ms Yates is an Obama administration appointee who is weak on borders and very weak on illegal immigration.It is time to get serious about protecting our country. Calling for tougher vetting for individuals travelling from seven dangerous places is not extreme. It is reasonable and necessary to protect our country.”

Of course, this is nonsense only meant to distract from the political basis for the firing. As I noted in the last post, Mike Morrell - former CIA deputy director- noted the ban is purely for show and didn't  get at the core problem. In his words:

"I think the order is going to make the threat worse. It is going to make us less safe. First of all, the biggest problem we face is home-grown terrorism.  Of the roughly hundred people who've been indicted for Isis -related crimes over the last three years, eighty five percent were American citizens. This doesn't get at that at all.... It doesn't make the danger any less and it's playing right into the Isis narrative that it's a war against Islam. So this is going to be a recruitment boon for Isis."

Morrell also exposed the blatant Trump lie that these nations were on Obama's hit list. In fact not. They were really part of a program to enhance the security of a visa-waiver program for people traveling from European countries. So the Trump bunch effectively enhanced and 'weaponized' a nominal visa waiver program.

After firing Ms. Yates. Bannon-Trump drafted Dana Boente to take her place. What we know is that he is the US attorney for the eastern district of Virginia, and also an Obama appointee.

A White House statement quoted Boente as saying: “I am honored to serve President Trump in this role until Senator Sessions is confirmed. I will defend and enforce the laws of our country to ensure that our people and our nation are protected.”

This may well be a more or less accurate statement. The not so sanguine news this  a.m. (CBS) is that Mr. Boente has ordered the DOJ to comply with Bannon-Trump's "order".   Well, there may be limits to adhering to principles and demonstrating courage in these difficult times. Look how the asshole Sean Spicer even threatened over 100 State Dept. employees even after they used the Dissent Channel - which by law makes them immune to political  threats.

In the meantime, after this new insult, the Democrats must go full ballistic on Trump's nominees including Jeff Sessions. Any Dems voting for these nominees, OR who go against a filibuster for Trump's Supreme Court pick, will be listed by name as Vichy Democrats (collaborators) on this blog. Everyone, from every sphere or occupation, must now grasp the seriousness of the national situation. We are approaching a constitutional crisis because of the extremists now running the country and there will be no peace, no relaxation no cessation of dissent until they are neutralized or removed.

See also:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/opinion/president-bannon.html?_r=0

And:

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/henry-giroux/70955/democracy-in-exile-and-the-curse-of-totalitarianism

Malaysian Flight 17: Who's To Blame? How Should They Be Punished?

As recriminations fly back and forth, investigators are ready to sift through the pieces of shattered airliner, Malaysian Airlines Flight 17. The flight, from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur with 298 on board, had entered airspace over eastern Ukraine traveling at 598 mph and at an altitude of 33,000'.  A question that immediately occurs is why the hell this aircraft was even flying over a de facto war zone - in which it was already known that several military cargo and transport planes had been shot down. Moreover, the MH 17 flight was actually even further north on its track than other planes also traveling to the same destination - from Amsterdam. Why? The more northerly path put it more directly into harm's way as several commentators noted last night.

Some new research also reported on smirkingchimp.com disclosed that the Ukrainian military transport, i.e. IL76, or Candid, "has the same echo as a 777 on a radar screen”. This would mean it had been even more critical NOT to fly into that airspace no matter what anyone was told about it being "safe" or how many other airlines foolishly did it to save fuel.

One Malaysian talking head this a.m. actually said:  "No one gave any instructions to change the route" - observing MH 17 flights had made 14 trips over the war zone the past two weeks. Yet an intelligent company wouldn't need "instructions", only common sense, and the U.S. had already warned about making flights over the area. It looks like, sad to say, the Malaysians screwed up again like they did with Flight 370 months ago. (Another Malaysian official stated that the Ukrainians hadn't closed the air space and 55 other international flights had transited the area the same day. This also is no excuse, and merely discloses ALL the aircraft had similarly played Russian Roulette with their passengers lives! It's still a freakin' war zone whether or not the air space was closed,  for god's sake!)

All the evidence so far, including the wide scatter area (nearly 10 miles) and debris pattern, clearly indicates a missile strike. The most probable culprit was one surface to air BUK battery missile - roughly 18 ft long, capable of a 1/2 mile per second velocity and with a range of 46,000 ft.  It is also known that such batteries have been supplied to the separatists by the Russians. It is also known they've been used to shoot down Ukrainian military transport planes. (Note: These BUK missile batteries are also possessed by the Ukrainian military so it is possible that the separatists liberated one or more from Ukrainian bases.)

Former Deputy CIA Director Mike Morrell's take this morning on CBS seems to be the accurate one:

"I think what happened here is that the separatists, who shot down a couple of aircraft this week, believed that they were targeting a Ukrainian military transport and they just made a mistake. That's what I think happened here.."

And I agree with this take, as it's the most logical conclusion given the information - including U.S. intelligence - available so far.  When asked by Charlie Rose 'What would it take to prove that?'  - Morrell responded:

"We have our own intelligence capabilities - radar tracking, satellite tracking and we marry that with any information the Ukrainians have, then when you get to the crash site you can put all those pieces together."

So okay,  the separatists are to blame, but the take is that it was not a deliberate targeting or shoot down as the paranoid Ukrainian puppet PM advanced. It was a very plausible error of the type which can be made in the inevitable 'fog of war'. (Another reason no aircraft should have been flying that route over eastern Ukraine - so the Malaysian Airlines also bears partial responsibility for wittingly or unwittingly putting its passengers in harm's way.)

Then there is the U.S. itself, which is not squeaky clean in this by any stroke. As I noted previously, this 'war zone' would never have evolved had U.S. neocons not interfered to push Ukraine into instability by ousting its democratically elected leader, Viktor Yanukyovich - replacing him with the Neocon-NATO puppet "Yats" (Arseniy Yatsenuk ).

The American -NATO aggression that initially spurred Russia to action to defend its own sphere of influence was described on the basis of game theory, e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2014/03/a-game-theory-perspective-on-ukraine.html


Even Col. Lawrence Wilkerson (Ret.) at least understood enough Russian history to know that Putin would not tolerate a NATO client state set up on his very border via a coup. Indeed, Wilkerson even said flat out (on Chris Hayes’ All In program in March)  that if he were Putin, he’d have done the same thing! This after Gorbachev and Russia were PROMISED by Bush Sr. that NATO “would not move one more inch to the east”.

And then to foment a coup on Russia’s doorstep?  All of the chaos and conflict now could have been seen well in advance and the U.S. spy -military state knows it. Contrary to U.S. media mouthpieces, Putin’s vision is not of a “Russian-dominated former Soviet space” but of protecting his nation’s security at its border.

Lest some of us suffer from  historical memory deficits, let us also recall - since I see all kinds of talking heads like John McCain getting hysterical ("We have to do something about Russia!") that the U.S. also shot down a commercial airliner, back on July 3, 1988. Iran Air Flight 655 was an Iran Air civilian passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai that was shot down by the United States Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes. The attack took place in Iranian airspace, over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, and on the flight's usual flight path. The aircraft, an Airbus A300 B2-203, was destroyed by SM-2MR surface-to-air missiles fired from the Vincennes.All 290 on board, including 66 children and 16 crew, died. (As noted on Kornacki today also, the U.S. didn't offer ANY apology but instead advanced the question: "Why were they flying in a shooting zone?" In other words, if you're flying over a war zone you have no comebacks!)

As noted by Rachel Maddow last night, the U.S. ended up paying reparations of $62 million, an average of $213,103.45 per passenger, in compensation to the families of the Iranian victims.

In analogous fashion, and allowing that both the 1988 incident and the current one were not deliberate shoot downs  but mistakes(in 1988  the U.S. insisted the naval crew incorrectly identified the Iranian Airbus A300 as an attacking F-14 Tomcat fighter operated by the Islamic Republic of Iran) the solution is self-evident: Russia- which gave the BUK missile batteries to the separatists, needs to pay up reparations for each victim.

The amount of the reparations, I suggest, ought to be roughly what the U.S. paid to the Iranians back in 1988, but in 1988 dollars

That should be the end of it and the paranoia, including suggestions of more "sanctions" and more saber rattling.

The bottom line is that NO one's hands are clean here, no one is blameless. The Malaysian Airlines and Dutch KLM (which operated shared flights) for flying over a proven deadly war zone, the U.S. and Ukraine for installing a puppet government to begin with and destabilizing the country - leading to Russian entry and separatists, and the Russians themselves for delivering a powerful SAM- battery to the separatists who weren't savvy enough to use it properly and indeed ought not have been using it at all.

Everyone needs to settle down, think clearly and proceed with caution, especially the Amerikkan war hawks and neocons - never at a loss for more sanctimonious bullshit, and war mongering.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-parry/57044/airline-horror-spurs-new-rush-to-judgment

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-parry/57004/the-human-price-of-neocon-havoc

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/russ-wellen/57040/suddenly-putin-blaming-ukraine-for-flight-17-makes-a-shred-of-sense

and:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/walter-c-uhler/57020/whos-responsible-for-shooting-down-malaysia-airlines-flight-mh17

http://www.salon.com/2014/07/18/the_new_age_of_global_paranoia_russia_ukraine_and_the_plane_crash_heard_round_the_world/