9/11 and More

The New York Times reports on the release of the 9/11 Commission's report. Due to a lengthy reading list, this might be one case where I'll be more like Dubya than I'd like to admit, i.e., I'll probably skip the entire report--for now. Unlike the dauphin, I'll download a copy (looks like he got a hardcopy of the book--maybe they even signed it), and try to get to it in the next six months or so.

The article in the Times surprised me just a bit: I'd heard a few minutes of discussion on NPR, and I'd figured they glossed over the damning reports which indicated that field agents were well aware of suspicious folks taking flight lessons and reported this to higher ups, who ignored the evidence--to their credit, some of this appears to be in the report. Of course, I'm not surprised that another bone was thrown to the "blame Clinton" crowd, as the news items indicate a willingness to tar the ex-Prez as much as circumstances will allow. Gee--maybe when they finally convene an independent commission on Iraq (sometime in the 22nd century, I'd guess), they'll find another way to blame the man from Hope/Hot Springs.

And, while the media spends it's time focusing on whether or not this country needs to introduce punitive measures to limit access to driver's licenses and passports, this will likely slide below the radar:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. military has found 94 cases of confirmed or alleged abuse of prisoners by U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan since the fall of 2001, the Army's inspector general said Thursday in a long-awaited report made public at a hastily called Senate hearing.

The number is significantly higher than all other previous estimates given by the Pentagon, which had refused until now to give a total number of abuse allegations.

In fact, I'm guessing that 94 is pretty much an arbitrary figure, given what we're beginning to see in terms of the systematic abuses at Abu Ghraib (not to mention the infamous death trucks in Afghanistan). It looks as if the idea here is to fess up to "more than a few bad apples" for purposes of covering the army's collective ass, while at the same time trying to keep the larger picture under wraps.

Speaking of under wraps, this story also fortuitously shows up while the press is focused elsewhere:

US military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are running $US12.3 billion ($17 billion) over budget this year. Pentagon officials are trying to make up for the shortfall by transferring money from other accounts and delaying refurbishment of worn-out equipment in Iraq, the Government Accountability Office said.

The office, a nonpartisan congressional agency, estimated that the army was about $US9.4 billion over budget. But delaying spending until next year would result in it increasing even more, the agency said.

"Spare $17 billion for illegal war, please?"

And, just to prove that he really is an evil, lying son of a bitch, Donald Rumsfeld insists that he won't require National Guard personnel to serve in combat longer than the statutory 2 year limit--even as he parses "24 months" by rhetorically asking if that meant "cumulative" or "consecutive." What a creep. Yet, even as he says he won't be changing the policy (it's also a federal law, dipshit), he notes that one should 'never say never,' and Reuters is reporting that the Pentagon is asking for "voluntary" extensions beyond the limit. That must mean the war is going "extra well."

Back in a bit...