U.S. Weapons Being Smuggled to Mexican Cartels?

There's been some back-and-forth going on over the last few weeks over whether the majority of weapons used by Mexican drug cartels came from American dealers or came from South America or the Mexican army itself. Neither side had any meaningful numbers to back up their claims. Until now:

You've heard this shocking "fact" before -- on TV and radio, in newspapers, on the Internet and from the highest politicians in the land: 90 percent of the weapons used to commit crimes in Mexico come from the United States.

{snip}

There's just one problem with the 90 percent "statistic" and it's a big one:

It's just not true.

In fact, it's not even close. The fact is, only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S.

What's true, an ATF spokeswoman told FOXNews.com, in a clarification of the statistic used by her own agency's assistant director, "is that over 90 percent of the traced firearms originate from the U.S."

But a large percentage of the guns recovered in Mexico do not get sent back to the U.S. for tracing, because it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S.

"Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable, and the U.S. effort to trace weapons really only extends to weapons that have been in the U.S. market," Matt Allen, special agent of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), told FOX News.

Video:Click here to watch more.

A Look at the Numbers

In 2007-2008, according to ATF Special Agent William Newell, Mexico submitted 11,000 guns to the ATF for tracing. Close to 6,000 were successfully traced -- and of those, 90 percent -- 5,114 to be exact, according to testimony in Congress by William Hoover -- were found to have come from the U.S.

But in those same two years, according to the Mexican government, 29,000 guns were recovered at crime scenes.

In other words, 68 percent of the guns that were recovered were never submitted for tracing. And when you weed out the roughly 6,000 guns that could not be traced from the remaining 32 percent, it means 83 percent of the guns found at crime scenes in Mexico could not be traced to the U.S.

Full article here.

Unbelievable!

I've been watching FNC's coverage of the Maersk Alabama incident, and they've got LTG Tom McInerney (ret.) on making recommendations on how to deal with this incident.

His suggestion? Use the F-22.

What would it do against pirates? They'd be on patrol, and since they can fly at Mach 2, they could respond quickly. Respond and do what, you ask? Answer: strafing runs. And the good General doesn't even think the F-22 could hit the pirate skiffs, just put fire in their vicinity.

Unbelievable. How many US commanders would risk a $178 million fighter (and that's not counting "sunk costs") on a strafing run against a pirate skiff that may have SA-14s on board? Are we really so desperate to plug the F-22 in the wake of the Gates recommendation that we're making these claims?

The F-16 has the same gatling gun the F-22 has for strafing runs, and can shoot it just as accurately. You can get 10 $18 million F-16s for the price of 1 F-22. Having 10x more aircraft on patrol will improve response time a hell of a lot better than the extra .2 Mach or so of speed. And if we get unlucky and lose an F-16 to a shoulder-fired SAM, it will be a major loss, but not the fraking disaster losing an F-22 would be.

Apparently, the case for the F-22 is so weak that we need to pretend we need it as an anti-piracy weapon.

M/V John McClane?

This morning, I awoke to learn that a US-flagged cargo ship with a US crew was hijacked.

Now, we're being informed that the crew took back control of the ship. At least one pirate is in custody.

That's.... amazing. Thought that shit only happened in Die Hard movies.


Photo: A rigid hull inflatable boat leaves USS Bainbridge (DDG 96) on its way to FGS Hessen (F 221) during the Neptune Warrior training course. Neptune Warrior is a course designed to increase interoperability in NATO coalition forces. U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Coleman Thompson

Strategy Makes A Comeback

Secretary Gates presented his recommendations for the restructuring of our armed forces to the president today. Overall, it's a sound, bold new plan. The best thing about the plan is that it comes from a strategic view, not politics, ambition, or...whatever the hell it is we base our procurement on these days.

The Big Winner in all of this is the small-wars crowd, while the Cold Warriors take quite a thumping. Gates summarized the strategy that the force will be built on as: "we must rebalance this department's programs in order to institutionalize and enhance our capabilities to fight the wars we are in today and the scenarios we are most likely to face in the years ahead, while at the same time providing a hedge against other risks and contingencies." Short and sweet, that means small-wars, crisis repsonse, counterinsurgency and the like is the new "meat and potatoes" of our armed forces. The Cold Warriors who wanted to maintain a high-end force that could hand China's ass to it with 0 casualties are not going to get what they want. Which is as it should be, since major wars are rare and becoming rarer, while our military in constantly invovled in crisis response and small wars.

Last week, in his statement to the HASC, Thomas Barnett aptly described this choice:

It is my professional opinion that the United States defense community currently accepts too much risk AND casualties AND instability on the low end of the combat spectrum while continuing to spend far too much money on building up our combat capabilities for high-end scenarios. In effect, we over-feed our Leviathan force while starving our SysAdmin force, accepting far too many avoidable casualties in the latter while hedging excessively against theoretical future casualties in the former. Personally, I find this risk-management strategy to be both strategically unsound and morally reprehensible.

Gates shares the same sentiment:

But, it is important to remember that every defense dollar spent to over-insure against a remote or diminishing risk – or, in effect, to "run up the score" in a capability where the United States is already dominant – is a dollar not available to take care of our people, reset the force, win the wars we are in, and improve capabilities in areas where we are underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I will not take.

Here are the highlights of the recommendations:
*Army and USMC come out ahead in personnel.
*Moar Choppars for the army, lots more ISR, including UAVs and some turboprops that I'll need to look into. I'm guessing relatively cheap aircraft with modern IR sensors.
*Improved air/sea lift capabilities
*Reaffirmed committment to LCS
*F-35 comes out as a winner
*F-22 to end at 187.
*Land and Sea Based theatre missile defenses reaffirmed (winners: SM-3, THAAD. Losers: Alaska, ABL, Multiple Kill Vehicle)
*Reaffirmed KC-X
*Replacement for Ohio SSBNs
*NO NEW (nuclear?) BOMBERS
*10-carrier Navy
*CG-X delayed
*DDG-1000 ended at 3, DDG-51 class restarted
*Reduced procurement of the surface fleet
*Amphib programs delayed (this surpises me)
*VH-71 Cancelled
*CSAR-X Cancelled
*FCS to be replaced with a new program

ACQUISITION REFORM
*Wants mature technology requirements, realism in anticipating threats, end requirements-creep
*more acquisition staff, greater oversight, stricter contact terms

For the most part, this looks like a very sensible plan. My only major concern is that we over-emphasize air supremacy over what we do when we have that supremacy. Between the F-22 and F-35, it makes some sense that the F-35 comes out the winner, but what we really need are dedicated CAS aircraft (although, to be fair, the plan does call for an increase in Army helicopters) and high-endurance bombers. The report does say no new bombers, but I'm not clear if they mean no bombers at all or no new bombers as part of our nuclear forces. I don't think we need nuclear bombers; SSBNs and ordinary strike aircraft can take care of that. What I don't want, however, are high-end aircraft like the F-22 and F-35 loitering over countries like Afghanistan or Iraq waiting for a call to go drop a JDAM on some insurgents, burning millions of dollars of jet fuel while they wait. I want a cheap aircraft like a dedicated CAS plane or a high-endurance plane like a bomber (more loiter time=less sorties=less operating costs and less wasted fuel) or even a high-endurance armed UAV to do that. The good news on this front: increased ISR, including UAVs and high-endurance turboprops. The bottom line is that once you have air supremacy, you don't need to be flying every mission with superfighters that can handle MiGs, SAMs, jamming at the same time while supporting the troops on the ground. You can fly the support missions with cheap planes designed for the specific missions they're going to be performing. Something like an A-10 or AC-130, even a B-52. Just have a few superfighters flying CAP on the borders to keep the airspace safe for the support aircraft and you're golden.

I'm also having some difficulty reconciling how Gates says his missile defense focus "on the rogue state AND theater missile threats" while funding only the theatre-defense programs but not those designed to protect against long range missiles from, e.g., Iran or the DPRK. I would be OK with focusing the technology on the theatre threat, while leaving the long range threat from the rogues to deterrence/preemption/anti-proliferation, but that's not what Gates said.

Those gripes aside, this is a very welcome change.

AIG: A Joke of a Scandal

This whole thing is stupid.

The Federal government knows how to, and is quite good at, placing conditions on receiving federal funds. Don't tell me that they couldn't have expressly required that the cash they gave to AIG did not go to bonuses, or anything else deemed wasteful. Of course they could have.

They chose not to. It was deliberate.

And now that the funds are being used for that, everyone's pissed at AIG, and it's Congress rousing the rabble.

Does anyone else find that at least a little disconcerting?

RKB Nunchaku?

Didn't see this coming. I expected that, after incorporation, the Heller line would go after other gun bans. Perhaps targeting state-level handgun or "assault-weapon" bans. Or, instead of focusing on the scope, they'd focus on getting an explicit ruling requiring Strict Scrutiny, and proceed to go after laws placing an undue burden on the right.

But now it appears that the next case is going to be about your right to keep and bear Nunchucks. And the case is being appealed to SCOTUS by none other than "BigLaw" Kirkland & Ellis, LLP.

Technically, it's an incorporation case, because that was the ground it was decided on under appeal. So, if it gets to the issue of scope, it will probably be after remand and coming back up again. But it is interesting nevertheless.

Heller contains some problematic and self-defeating language. The scope of the 2A, according to Heller, is weapons "in common use." The problem is that the government can regulate/ban weapons to make them NOT in common use, and having done that, those weapons are removed from the protection of the 2A. I call this the circularity problem. And it's something that needs to be addressed before the Heller line implodes on itself before it can effect meaningful change in the law. What we need is a holding that expressly defines common use around prior laws; i.e. common use includes weapons that were in common use prior to government intervention or would be in common use but for government regulation. Without this, the government gets to define the limits of its own power, which is a constitutional absurdity.

What does this have to do with nunchucks? Everything. As I mentioned earlier, the most likely route to the Heller line seemed to be to go after something like an AWB. There is a problem with that strategy, both politically (such a ruling would be controversial and contentious) and legally (Justice Thomas inserted some language which might have been an endorsement of bans on M-16s). Enter the nunchaku. These are not "especially dangerous" military weapons, nor do they provoke controversy the way so called "assault-weapons" do. That makes them fertile ground for a relatively safe "common use" argument.

Are they in common use? Probably not. But, the facts on the appellate record suggest otherwise. The challenged law prohibiting nunchucks was actually enacted because they had become prevalent, both among gang members and martial arts enthusiasts. The do-gooders got nervous and enacted the ban. So there's that. But, in all likelihood, "common use" will be a national, not local standard ("...being necessary to the security of a free state..." speaks to national security, not local security). Nevertheless, we don't know how "common" is "common." Martial arts enthusiasts around the country could well be common enough. As a generally nonlethal weapon, nunchucks aren't "particularly dangerous" in the meaning of Heller.

Bottom line: arguing about common use for martial arts weapons is a safe, conservative approach to expanding upon the Heller precedent. If the case loses, it would not be likely to reinforce the circularity problem, but to lose on a "safe" ground (not common enough, not related to militia service---yes, Miller is still alive, and this area was referenced in Heller and was the basis for the common use scope---etc. etc.).

No word on whether Chuck Norris plans to file an amicus brief.

New Star part II

China Summons Russian Ambassador

BEIJING - China summoned Russia's ambassador Friday to express shock over the sinking of a Chinese cargo ship by a Russian warship and urge a thorough investigation, the foreign ministry said.

Eight of the 16 crew members on board were killed when shots from a Russian naval vessel sank the Chinese-owned cargo ship the New Star off Russia's east coast on Sunday.

Russia has blamed the cargo ship's captain for the incident.

"The Chinese side expresses shock and deep concern over this incident," china's Vice Foreign Minister Li Hui told Russia's Ambassador to China, according to a foreign ministry statement.

"The Chinese side... strongly urges the Russian side to... quickly and thoroughly investigate this incident.

"We call on the Russian side to begin with a humanitarian spirit... and continue to make all efforts to find the missing personnel."

Russian diplomatic spokesman Andrey Nesterenko expressed regret over the incident, but said the Chinese ship had failed to heed warning shots.

"We regret the tragic consequences of this incident," he told the Ria-Novosti news agency.

"But at the same time, we put all the responsibility on the captain of the New Star, who acted in a totally irresponsible manner.

"We took exhaustive measures to stop the boat: the border guards fired warning shots, but the New Star continued on its way without reacting to the orders," he added.

Russian prosecutors said 10 Chinese and six Indonesian sailors were on board the vessel, Interfax reported.

Russian news reports said eight people had been killed in the incident, although these figures have yet to be confirmed by authorities.

The Sierra Leone-flagged, Chinese-owned vessel New Star had earlier fled the Russian port of Nakhodka where it had been impounded for alleged smuggling, media reports said.

In a video posted online that purportedly captured the incident, a man, apparently a Russian naval officer, is heard repeatedly urging the New Star to halt.

The Russian navy fired over 500 rounds to try to force the cargo ship back to port, China's state-controlled Global Times newspaper said.

Russian news agencies said the eight surviving crew members were rescued and taken to hospital.

Chinese Cargo Ship New Star Sinks off Vladivostok

Early reports are often wrong, so take the following with a grain of salt. But to paraphrase this article, the Russians detained a vessel suspected of smuggling, it left port without permission, and was prosecuted by a cruiser. Tried to limp back to port, but didn't make it. And neither did all the crew.

Bravo Zulu!

H/T: USNI Blog

Curtailing Extreme Searches at the Jail

I'm sure many will disagree, but I see this as a positive development:

NEWARK, N.J. (WPIX) -- A federal judge has ruled thousands of strip searches carried out at jails in Burlington and Essex counties in New Jersey were illegal. U.S. District Court Judge Joseph H. Rodriguez says the searches violate the Fourth Amendment and are unconstitutional.

The suspects who were searched were arrested for minor offenses, such as traffic tickets. The searches have been taking place at the Burlington County Jail and Essex County Correctional Facility since 2003.

Susan Chana Lask, who represents the plaintiffs, says approximately 10,000 people were strip searched. She says she plans to file a motion for a jury trial to determine damages. Lask says a jury could award as much as $10,000 to anyone who has been strip-searched while in custody for a minor offense. The plaintiffs may be entitled to millions of dollars.

At least eight similar suits are pending against jails in Union, Middlesex and Bergen counties.

Can there be people being "checked in" who may be hiding weapons? Sure. But strip and cavity searches for routine arrests are a bit excessive (I know cavity isn't mentioned in this article, but I know it happens in IL). You can find a weapon with a pat-down. The real purpose of these searches isn't safety, but degradation. They want to make the process of being arrested as difficult as possible, which allows them to harass innocent people. Take the case of Roderick Pritchett, for example:

The evening of Roderick Pritchett's descent into hell on earth started with an ordinary shopping trip to Safeway for his mom last November 21st. The 25 year-old African/Jamaican-American frequently ran errands for her; he was the sole car owner in his family.

On the way out of his south side Chicago apartment, he went back inside and grabbed his Taurus 9 mm pistol -- which was unloaded and in its case as Chicago law requires -- and tossed it in the passenger seat. Roderick liked to stop by the shooting range to practice his marksmanship once a week to stay sharp and keep his groupings tight.

In his wallet behind his driver's license was his FOID (Firearms Owner Identification Card) which he obtained before purchasing the gun in 2000. In accordance with the strict gun control laws enacted by Mayor Daley and the city legislature, Roderick kept the gun in his apartment and never carried it on his person. This seemed strange to him; the law essentially said that defending his property was more important than defending his life from the numerous predatory south side hoods. Pritchett however always followed the law, even the ones that defy common sense.

As he drove down South Ada St. toward the range, he noticed a police car tailing him. It was early evening and Roderick was a young black man with dreadlocks driving alone. In Chicago, that's lights-and-siren time. Sure enough, Police Officer Edward Kos and Officer Rodolfo Camarillo pulled him over at 87th and Ada for a burned out taillight.

The officers approached and asked if he would mind if they searched his car. Pritchett didn't object. He knew beyond a doubt that his 9 mm was 100 percent legal. He even had a copy of the Illinois gun laws in his case. When he handed over his driver's license, he also gave them his FOID and volunteered that he had a legal firearm in the vehicle. He knew he had nothing to fear.

Unfortunately, his confidence was short-lived. The police ordered him to take a seat in the back of their black-and-white. "The officers began questioning me from the front seat of their squad car before they even let me know I was under arrest," says Pritchett. "They giggled a couple of times before sarcastically asking me why I didn't run. I was shocked speechless at their rude treatment of me."

Pritchett couldn't understand why they were hassling him. With all the crime in the city, why should they bother someone with a legal gun? He pleaded that he was only going to the range and that his gun was legal, but to no avail. Pritchett was arrested for violating 720 ILCS 5/24-1.6 Aggravated Unlawful Use of Weapons.

One of the officers left the squad car and got behind the wheel of Pritchett's station wagon to drive it to the station. Apparently, Officers Kos and Camarillo were either ignorant of the laws regarding the legal transportation of firearms, or chose to ignore them. In any case, Roderick Pritchett was on his way to 72 hours of misery that he would never forget.

Pritchett had his legal gun confiscated and was transported to the Cook County lockup and charged with a Class 4 Felony. Next, he endured the standard treatment of any run-of-the-mill accused felon within Chicago city limits -- a quite thorough strip search that left no body orifice sacred, incarceration, long days and sleepless nights in a cramped, urine-stinking cell chockablock with accused rapists and thieves, and meals of stale bread and cold soup in the company of accused child molesters and slightly more palatable muggers.

When his mother finally scraped together the $500 bond to secure his release three days later, Pritchett had one more treat awaiting him, courtesy of the Chicago PD -- a $700 fee to spring his station wagon from the impound lot. He begged the police before they impounded his car to let his girlfriend pick it up. The cops refused.

Maybe I'm a little jaded from growing up in Cook County, IL. I've been fortunate that in all my dealings with (suburban) police, they've always been professional and courteous. But I'm also white and middle class, and I haven't done anything to get myself on, say, Dick Devine's shit list (at least I don't think so). So for the most part, I do trust the police, but strip/cavity searches at arrest pushes that trust beyond its limit. I see what you're doing there, and it's not OK.

Assigned Reading

Here is a very thoughtful analysis of the Palin candidacy, what it meant politically, the reality vs. the perception, and how it went down like it did. It gives a very thorough trashing of all the assumptions made on both sides. Very, very highly recommended. (Hat tip: Conservative Wahoo)

One thing I really liked about the theory behind the article is that it offers a sensible explanation for why Palin was mocked for inexperience but Obama got a free pass, in a way that goes beyond the O'Reilly "in the tank" line.

I'm still trying to figure out the "worldview" part. True, McCain did fail to be more than an "attitude poltician with an appealing biography," and would have benefited from articulating a vision of what "his" America would look like. But if McCain was an "attitude" candidate, Obama was an "emotion" candidate, also without a clear vision articulated. All people really knew about Obama's future America was that it would have Hope and would not have Bush. Well, maybe that's just it, when you're able to run against an unpopular administration, maybe emotion is enough, and the substance of the outgoing Pres is all the substance you need.

But, I think he's absolutely right about the need to tie substance with cultural populism. Cultural populsim was demonstrated to be stronger than people have given it credit for, and it's something that would do us some good if it found a voice in power. Maybe that detached-ness, the senselessness that DC has become could be corrected with a dose of some good old common sense and the wisdom the comes from life experience. So maybe the next candidate needs to be able to tap into that, like Palin did. But, whoever that is also needs to have some intellectual depth to his/her candidacy, if for no other reason than to prevent the "blank slate" effect where everyone just throws their own projections at the candidate.

Well, at least somebody stopped it...

It turns out that not only did we not scuttle the Iranian arms shipment (yes, I know that's a pipe dream), but we let it go, lacking legal authority to detain it.

Fortunately, the Cypriots were not lacking as well:

JERUSALEM, Jan 30 (Reuters) - Cypriot authorities have detained an Iranian ship en route to Syria with a cargo of weapons, Israel's Haaretz newspaper reported on Friday.

Quoting a European Union diplomatic source, it said Cyprus had acted after Israel and the United States requested that the Cypriot-flagged vessel be stopped.

Authorities contacted the ship and demanded that it dock in Limassol for inspection. Customs officials had unloaded part of the cargo and a large amount of weaponry, including artillery rounds and rockets, the paper said.

Cypriot authorities declined comment.

Israel believes the weapons were destined for the Lebanese Islamist guerrilla group Hezbollah or for Islamist Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip, Haaretz quoted Israeli sources as saying.

On Wednesday, U.S. military officials said personnel from the U.S. Navy vessel San Antonio last week boarded the Cypriot-flagged "Monchegorsk", a cargo vessel travelling from Iran to Syria, and found a weapons shipment but for legal reasons did not confiscate the cargo.

The officials declined to say what kind of weapons were found or how many. They also would not be specific about where or when the incident occurred.

It was unclear whether this was the same ship which Haaretz reported had been apprehended by the Cypriot authorities.

Officials in Washington said the search was conducted as part of the U.S. Navy's normal maritime security role in regional waters that stretch from the Arabian Sea to the Mediterranean.

The U.S. officials said the arms could not be shown to violate U.N. weapons sanctions against Iran and the vessel was allowed to continue on to Syria.

The incident came to light amid media reports that the U.S. navy has been ordered to intercept suspected Iranian shipments to rearm Hamas following Israel's 22-day Gaza offensive against the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas. (Additional reporting by Michele Kambas in Nicosia, writing by Ori Lewis; Editing by Samia Nakhoul)

Speaking of Intermeddlers...

I really wish we would scuttle ships caught red handed like this. When there are no consequences, we come out looking like fools, even when we do pull off a minor tactical victory like this.

U.S. Navy stopped Iran ship carrying weapons and headed to Gaza

TEL AVIV — U.S. defense sources said the U.S. Navy tracked and intercepted an Iranian ship in the Red Sea that was headed for the Gaza Strip.

The sources said U.S. marines found ammunition, including artillery shells, concealed in crates aboard the cargo ship.

"There was a huge amount of crates on board and we called for help," a defense source said.

The U.S. television network CBS News reported that the ship was intercepted by the U.S. Navy near Egypt's Suez Canal. CBS said the U.S. Navy vessel requested that Egyptian authorities direct the Iranian ship to port for a thorough search.

The Antithesis of Hope

What a depressing week.

As if the stuff from yesterday wasn't bad enough, today I found this bad omen. Pres. Obama decided to become the first President to skip the Salute to Heroes (see below), preferring to rub shoulders with celebrities instead of with veterans and Medal of Honor recipients. It's appalling, and frankly, shocking as well. I was prepared for President Obama to be a bit of an elite snob, but not to this extent. And as much as I want to be part of the "loyal opposition" and stay away from toxic language, I can't help but describe this choice to prioritize celebrities over genuine American heroes as unpatriotic. Yeah, I went there, and I'm sorry, but I can't think of a less-toxic word that describes it.

But the part that really shocks me the most is the blatantness of it all. Now that he's President, he doesn't care to keep up appearances anymore. I expected the performance to continue, but instead, he's decided to stand up in front of the Nation and tell us all that he intends to use the office of the President to enjoy the high life, and that he'll get around to more important matters when he gets around to it. He has so much contempt for us that he insults our intelligence, confident that 50% +1 of us in an electoral majority of states will still be stupid enough to vote for him in four years.

Obama Snubs Nation's Heroes, Becomes the First President to Skip Ball Honoring Medal of Honor Recipients in Over 50 Years

Barack Obama may have stumbled over his words briefly during his inauguration, but he made an even bigger blunder later Tuesday evening. The newly sworn-in President opted not to appear at what should have been one of the most important Balls on his agenda that evening - The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball was begun in 1953 for President Dwight Eisenhower's inauguration. The event recognized recipients of the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest military award. There were 48 Medal of Honor recipients in attendance, who were undoubtedly disappointed by the Commander-in-Chief's failure to show. Over the past 56 years and 14 inaugurations, no President has skipped this event - until now.

The Salute to Heroes Inaugural Ball is sponsored by the American Legion, and co-sponsored by 13 other veteran's service organizations, including those such as the Paralyzed Veterans of America and the Military Order of the Purple Heart.

Instead of attending this ball honoring our nation's heroes, Obama was busy making stops at 10 other official balls. Obama and his wife's first stop was at the Neighborhood Ball. From there they went to the Home State Ball for Illinois and Hawaii, the Commander-in-Chief Ball, the Youth Inaugural Ball, and the Home State Ball for Delaware and Pennsylvania. They finished off the night with brief appearances at the Mid-Atlantic, Western, Midwest, Eastern, and Southern regional Balls.

Celebrities were a plenty at the balls, with Stevie Wonder, Shakira, Mary. J. Blige, Faith Hill, Jay-Z, Alicia Keys, Adam Levine, will.i.am, Sting, Mariah Carey, and Leonardo DiCaprio in attendance at the Neighborhood Ball. In addition, the other nine balls also featured a star-studded lineup including Kanye West and Kid Rock at the Youth Ball, Marc Anthony at the Western Ball, and Cheryl Crow at the Western Ball.

It was the party without all of the celebrities that Obama skipped. The very people who he sought to have support him during his candidacy and campaign, who have fought to protect this country, were snubbed in favor of publicity and the opportunity to rub shoulders - yet again - with the out-of-touch Hollywood elite.

Off To a Great Start, Aren't We?

Wow. What a great first week.

First, we got a glimpse of the new politics of civility.


Then, the new President decides to close the Gitmo detention facility. Without having any idea what else to do with them. Great plan! You know someone isn't serious about putting good governance before ideology when they take the ideological action and save the difficult questions for later. Strange.... that reminds me about a certain heavily criticized ex-President who invaded a country without any plan for handling the occupation and insurgency to follow. But, this is what passes for "CHANGE" these days.

Oh, news flash to the new administration: released detainees are popping up again fighting against US troops. Just recently, one was identified as a new AQ leader in Yemen. So you might want to figure this one out, you know, before people start getting killed for your cause.

The pledge for transparency in government lasted all of two days. I can give the snubbing of press reporters/photographers a pass for now--that was likely just a n00b gaffe that will sort itself out (although, between the retaliatory curtailing of access to some networks during the election, the pay-to-play angle to that story has additional credence). But, the new SECSTATE concealing donors is unforgivable. The only way she received any serious consideration was by promising transparency. But no, the Clintons had to renege on their promise and a cloud of corruption already hangs over the executive branch.

Not even a week in.

An Overdue and Indirect Response to "Maurer" School of Law

I found this over at The Stupid Will Be Punished and it just reminded me of the renaming thing. It was originally published last April 1 (obviously, before DDG-1001 had been named the Michael A. Monsoor).

New U.S. Ship Naming Guidelines Announced

In a move long expected, the Secretary of the Navy today announced that the process for determining the names of Navy ships will "finally enter the 21st century":

"In these days of tighter budgets, all government agencies must find creative ways to raise money for operating funds. As a result, I have today directed that naming rights for future naval vessels will be auctioned off to the highest bidder.

"This does not mean we won't continue to honor our heritage. Traditionally, names of all ships within a class have been related. Therefore, naming rights for follow-on Ford-class carriers will be limited to automobile manufacturers. I expect to announce the official naming of USS General Motors (CVN 79) within the next week.

"Bidders for naming rights to major surface ships will be limited to companies listed on the Fortune 500. The second Zumwalt-class destroyer will be christened USS Microsoft (DDG 1001). Amphibious ships will be named for foreign countries; each winning bid comes with a guarantee that the ship will not be used to invade its namesake.

"In another return to tradition, submarines following USS Mississippi (SSN 782) will be named after fish... restaurants. The keel for USS Long John Silver (SNN 783) will be laid early next year."

Welcome Back, Sully!

Hope you play well tonight. (But not too well)

I wonder if there's any way we can get him back.... he'd fit right in with this new team.

Linked: Voter Intimidation by Black Panthers Leads to Charges

Recall these videos from election day:





From America's Right:

PHILADELPHIA -- In a nine-page complaint, U.S. Attorney Gen. Michael Mukasey has sued the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense, along with four of its members, in response to an Election Day incident at a polling location in Philadelphia, PA, citing the defendants' intimidation of voters, intimidation of poll workers, and attempted intimidation of poll workers.

On November 4, 2008, defendants and Black Panther Party members Jerry Jackson and Samir Shabazz, dressed in military-style uniforms replete with black berets, combat-style boots, bloused battle dress pants, rank and organization insignia, and black jackets, blocked access to a Philadelphia polling place. Shabazz, according to the complaint, "brandished a deadly weapon," appearing on Fox News video (see below) to be a nightstick or baton, and the pair hurled racist comments and racial slurs at voters both black and white. The complaint stated more details:

Throughout the course of this deployment at the polling location, and while the polls were open for voting, Defendant Samir Shabazz pointed the weapon at individuals, menacingly tapped it [in] his other hand, or menacingly tapped it elsewhere. This activity occcurred approximately eight to fifteen feet from the entrance to the polling location. Defendant Samir Shabazz was accompanied by Defendant Jerry Jackson during this activity, and the two men stood side by side, in apparent formation, throughout most of this deployment.

Full Article

...and another one

Looks like the increased Op Tempo is just a bit too much for the Ruskies. Although to be fair, fatalities are fairly common on US CSG deployments, just not from fires.

One dead in fire aboard aircraft carrier ”Admiral Kuznetsov”

One sailor died in a fire yesterday aboard Northern Fleet’s aircraft carrier “Admiral Kuznetsov”, which currently is on a tour of duty in the Mediterranean.

During take-off and landing drills on the evening of January 6 a fire broke out on the aircraft carrier. One conscript sailor died while trying to extinguish the fire, a military source told Russian news agency Interfax.

According to the source, the fire caused only minor damages to the ship, and the tour will continue as planned.

Interfax has not yet received any official confirmation on the information.

Watch video from “Admiral Kuznetsov’s” unofficial visit to Turkey here

A quick recap of recent Russian naval accidents:
Fire on the Marshal Shaposhnikov (PAC Fleet), two dead (18 Sept 2008)
Accidental Discharge of fire suppression system on the Nerpa (PAC Fleet), 20+ dead (9 NOV 2008)
Fire on Neukrotimy, (BAL Fleet) 1 dead (8 DEC 2008)

The only fleet not having fatal mishaps recently is the Black Sea Fleet. That might be coincidental, or perhaps indicative of better readiness since that fleet had to fight a war recently.

Walker v. Jovanovski's Face

Strange that the NHL never posts the game pics you really want to see. Enjoy!



Next time you want to start something, be ready to finish it, okay Jovo?

Photo credits: 2 from http://newshopper.sulekha.com/photos/slideshow/Sports/1/616406.htm, the other is unknown (posted to photobucket)

Googletrippers: Ed Jovanovski, Matt Walker, Phoenix Coyotes, Chicago Blackhawks, January 6 2008, fight, blood