The Lay of the Land: Libya, Korea, Israel, Japan

US OIL $106/BARREL

EU/WORLD OIL $116/BARREL

LIBYA

US/NATO NAVAL BLOCKADE INITIATED (INCLUDING TURKISH NAVAL FORCES)

US/NATO NO FLY ZONE & COUNTERSTRIKE AGAINST LIBYA MILITARY EXPANDED

FRENCH AIRCRAFT CARRIER CHARLES DE GAULLE

USS KEARSARGE CARRIER EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP///26TH MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT
B-2 STEALTH BOMBERS

UKSAS & US SPECIAL OPERATIONS
AIRCRASH: 1 X US F15 FIGHTER JET (2 X PILOTS EXTRACTED BY USMC 26TH MEU)

JAPAN

TOKYO: RADIATION CONTAMINATION

EUROPE: LOW RADIATION ARRIVAL

FUKUSHIMA REACTORS:

ONE: EXPLOSION/LOW RADIATION///TWO: EXPLOSION/LOW RADIATION
THREE: EXPLOSION/LOW RADIATION - ACTIVE SMOKE/EVACUATION
FOUR: DOUBLE EXPLOSION/LOW RADIATION
FIVE: STABLE///SIX: STABLE
USS WASHINGTON CARRIER STRIKE GROUP
USS ESSEX CARRIER EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP///31ST MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT

ISRAEL

HAMAS EMPLACED 1 X IED ADJACENT JERUSALEM CONVENTION CENTER (1 X KIA, 30 X WIA)

GAZA LAUNCH OF GRAD (IRANIAN MADE) ROCKETS INTO 2 X BEERSHEBA, 1 X ASHDOD AND 1 X ASHKELON (5 X WIA)

GAZA LAUNCH OF MORTARS INTO 7 X ESHKOL KIBBUTZ FARMS AND 3 X SHAAR KIBBUTZ FARMS

KOREA/PERSIAN GULF

USS LINCOLN CARRIER STRIKE GROUP (KOREA)
USS ENTERPRISE CARRIER STRIKE GROUP ENROUTE (PERSIAN GULF)
USS VINSON CARRIER STRIKE GROUP (PERSIAN GULF)
USS BOXER EXPEDITIONARY CARRIER STRIKE GROUP (PERSIAN GULF)

The Lay of the Land: Libya, Korea, Afghanistan, Israel, Japan

LIBYA

MILITARY:

PERSONNEL - 120,000ACTIVE///200,000RESERVE, OTHER

AIR - SCUD MRBM, MIG25, SUKHOI, MIRAGE, S200, IGLA, STRELA, OTHER

LAND - T72, MLRS, SA9, SA13, OTHER

SEA - SUMARINES (FOXTROT CLASS), MISSILE FRIGATES (SS-N-2C)

========================

LIBYA

US FORCES:

B-2 STEALTH BOMBERS

KEARSARGE EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP///26TH MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT

US SPECIAL OPERATIONS

(EN-ROUTE) BATAAN EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP

(EN-ROUTE) ENTERPRISE CARRIER STRIKE GROUP

[[[STIKE GROUPS COMPOSED OF MULTIPLE WARSHIPS, ATTACK SUBMARINES & FIGHTER AIRCRAFT]]]

JAPAN

REAGAN CARRIER STRIKE GROUP

WASHINGTON CARRIER STRIKE GROUP

ESSEX EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP///31ST MARINE EXPEDITIONARY UNIT

FUKUSHIMA REACTORS:

ONE: EXPLOSION/LOW RADIATION

TWO: EXPLOSION/LOW RADIATION

THREE: EXPLOSION/LOW RADIATION (SECOND EXPLOSION IMMINENT)

FOUR: DOUBLE EXPLOSION/LOW RADIATION

FIVE: STABLE

SIX: STABLE

TOKYO: LOW RADIATION ARRIVAL

KOREA/AFGHANISTAN

LINCOLN CARRIER STRIKE GROUP (KOREA)

VINSON CARRIER STRIKE GROUP (AFGHANISTAN)

BOXER EXPEDITIONARY STRIKE GROUP (AFGHANISTAN)

ISRAEL

(SATURDAY) 50 X MORTARS/ROCKETS FIRED FROM GAZA (HAMAS) INTO ISRAEL IN LESS THAN 15 MINUES

(THURSDAY) EGYPT MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD MEETING WITH HAMAS

The lay of the land: Middle East, 01/12/2011

Ed.--From a source in the Middle East (not native to it) working in private security. Breaks and corrections have been added for readability.

=========================

ALERTS: USEUCOM & 6THFLEET///USCENTCOM & 5TH FLEET///NATO///U.N.

=========================

Enterprise Carrier Strike Group on location (Mediterranean Sea off coast of Lebanon)

________ Expeditionary Strike Group (classified)

Israeli Defense Forces pre-staging movement

NATO France naval fleet arrivals (Lebanon former French Colony)

Hezbollah has more SCUD & M600 short range ballistic missiles than most nations (capable of hitting all of Israel)

M600 faster set-up & launch version of SCUD

(((USEUCOM-Israel///USCENTCOM-Lebanon)))

2006 ISRAEL/LEBANON WAR

+/- 200 Israeli civilian & military KIA

+/- 1,000 Lebanon civilian & military KIA

USCENTCOM:

http://www.centcom.mil/en/lebanon/

Lebanese [SIC] Hezbollah continues to undermine security throughout the Levant by undermining the authority of the Lebanese government, threatening Israel, and providing training and support to extremist groups outside Lebanon. Syria and Iran continue to violate UN Security Council resolutions and provide support to Hezbollah - support which allowed Hezbollah to instigate and wage a war against Israel in 2006 and reconstitute its armaments afterward.

The Right of Rule: "Drill baby, drill, and mine, baby, mine" and other yucks from the 2008 unelection

The GOP Campaign Trail of Tears--Those catch-phrases worked so well, didn't they? "Joe the plumber," "Bill Ayers," "pals around with terrorists," and all the rest we'll be happy to forget, didn't work so well this time. We know why.

The economy is a mess because the GOP held the White House and most of Congress for several years, and the Democrats stood down and let them run amok. They also won't hold the Bush administration truly accountable for what can only be described as the greatest political and corporate crime wave that this nation has ever seen.

It would more-than-behoove President-elect Obama to at least call for the creation of a massive independent investigation into the crimes committed by the Bush administration and her allies from 2000 to their last day in office. But there are a number of problems with this, namely logistical ones.

President Obama will have his hands-full in his first 100 days in office. Only FDR faced the kind of daunting challenges that the President-elect faces today. Is he up for it? We don't know this, but if he isn't, nobody is, and does he really have the will to do it? It doesn't matter. I personally don't think that President-elect Obama is going to have any choice on a whole swath of issues, except to address them directly and constructively. But it's also unlikely that he's going to have the time to go after Republican--and numerous Democratic--criminals who aided-and-abetted George W. Bush and his agenda. It's also not exactly his job, but that of Congress. There's another very specific problem.

Obama was one of these congressional enablers of the Bush White House, though as far as we know, not criminally. Obama voted for the FISA rewrite that now allows for widespread surveillance of the American public (and retroactive immunity for the telecoms that participated), essentially every major appropriations bill for the endless occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, and a lot of other issues that don't instill trust in those who want the public good addressed.

Cabinet picks like Rahm Emanuel (a man reminiscent of Dutch Schultz) don't bode well either, but it has to be stated again: what choice are they going to have but to drawdown in the Middle East, and what choice are they going to have except to mandate sweeping political and business reforms and social spending? Yes, they could just do nothing, the wrong thing, and even the opposite of what the electorate voted them in to do. But these aren't normal times. They could act--or not act at all--but there are consequences for "business-as-usual" during a major crisis. Besides, President-elect Obama has already given the GOP the ammunition they wanted in another form.

By breaking his promise and not taking anymore government funds for his election, Barack Obama decided against a grassroots election with transparency and threw in his lot with corporate America. Knowing this as more than a little of a mistake tactically, the GOP is already making their own narrative of this new era, and they're going to attempt to steal the Democratic Party's "outsider" card away from them. It won't be very difficult, sad to say. Propaganda has to have a kernal of truth to it, but this time, when the GOP accuses the future Obama administration of being backed by "special interests," they'll be almost entirely correct.

This isn't to say that they're any different, but this time they assiduously kept the McCain campaign on-track for the aforementioned reasons--it gives them a lifeline for their survival and a comeback. This back-and-forth between the two party system doesn't have a lot of milage left in it before a real collapse, and if the new Democratic majority doesn't deliver in a big way, we could see riots and general strikes across the nation.

It's very possible that our economy is going to go into a genuine free-fall, a depression. Without radical reforms and unprecedented government response, change is going to come from below anyway. You could bring back every single American solider, sailor, and pilot, to the continental United States, and it wouldn't quell the disorder.

The question is, will it be constructive or destructive uprising if things reach that point?

My feeling is that it's going to be constructive. Granted that if we have a tragedy, it's going to be all of our faults, but Congress and a future Obama administration will be shouldering a great share of the blame. They directly created this mess by abrogating their responsibility of oversight and checks and balances, and that's for starters.

Yes, "Drill, baby, drill," might sound like the title of a Russ Meyer movie, but equally empty rhetoric came out of the Obama campaign. None of this matters. There is a time when the same old lies don't work anymore, and that time is now. Without a total rollback of the last eight years, we may as well have voted McCain/Palin. Then--at least--we could get this collapse under our belt. Many of the same reforms would come anyway. Reality trumps hope.

Reality: They're only in there because we tolerate them.

This can end when they no longer have the ability to provide. That time is here, now.

HAWKISH DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP SCUPPERS ASSAULT ON BUSH WAR POWERS

WASHINGTON D.C.--You know it was Rahm Emanuel and his faction in the House. Granted, Israel has a right to feeling secure, but Palestinians also have right to a homeland with access to water, roads, and a communications and civil infrastructure. That's a lot of shoulds. Now these twerps in the House have watered-down what the public really wants: an end to this pointless-war.

I don't blame Speaker Pelosi, nor do I blame Maxine Waters, and all the other of the 71 in Congress, but let's just sign the more moderate bill as a step-forward. None of this would have been possible with the GOP-majority, not ever.

But with conservative and moderate Democrats refusing to consider a faster timetable or a cutoff of war funding, party leaders have had to steer a more centrist course on Iraq. They point to polls that show the public opposes cutting off funding or revoking President Bush's authority for the war but backs bringing home troops by next year. They argue that their measure can at least make Bush report to Congress any time he deploys a unit that doesn't meet training or readiness standards, or has not spent at least a year at home between tours. Some left-of-center Democrats say they recognize their party's delicate position, and are coming around to the idea of supporting an Iraq measure that falls short of what they want. (AP, 03.12.2007)

I am 100% certain that Joe Donnelly, my representative, has helped in the scuppering of this. I can forgive him for now as a freshman legislator, but when the meltdown comes to Iraq, he's going to have line-up with the 71 anti-war representatives in Congress.

If he and all the others don't, they had best remember that the 2nd District will be calling him back home to South Bend. He can run his business again, eat ice cream in bed, build a ship in a bottle, go fishing, grow a second prostate, real mover-and-shaker stuff. That'll learn ya.'

One has to understand that you cannot rush any of this. The openings will come of their own accord, and that a misstep can result in the war continuing much-longer than it needs to. But I frankly believe that events on the ground in Iraq are going to decide all of this. We're going to have to lose, and that is what we are doing right now. The Democratic majority didn't lose anything today, this is just how politics works.

They still have the provision of a withdrawal today, which is the reason for Cheney's lame-remarks that the anti-war caucus "are telling the enemy simply to watch the clock and wait us out." A ten-year-old could smell this for the B.S. it is. This--according to AP--is the gridlock within the DNC:

Public opinion has swung the way of Democrats on the issue of the war. More than six in 10 Americans think the conflict was a mistake —the largest number yet found in AP-Ipsos polling. But Democrats have struggled to find a compromise that can satisfy both liberals who oppose any funding for the military effort and conservatives who do not want to unduly restrict the commander in chief. (AP, 03.12.2007)

Restrict the commander in chief? Are you nuts?! Of course he needs to be restricted, you morons. There are claims that the public doesn't want funding to be cut--prove it, what is this poll? We get no name for who did it from AP. Perhaps it was the "mystery man" who gave a press conference in Airforce Two for Vice President Cheney. Who was that guy? Must have been that guy who ejected all those activists from GOP events. You know, the one who said he was a Secret Service agent, when he really wasn't.

Or all those mysterious people who obstructed people--mostly Black and poor--from voting throughout the United States in 2000, 2002, and 2004? Oh yeah, and they tried it in 2006 too. The people who made a truckload full of voting-records in Florida in 2000 vanish, and then to magically-reappear hours later. Who are those guys (and where are the investigations)? What I find most-disturbing, however, is the attempt at scaring the Israelis into a conflict with Iran. It won't work, and it's unknown if either nation would still be standing after a full-on war.

It would be a disaster that I don't want to see happen to Israel and Iran, they are both nations that can be great together, with incredible contributions to world culture, and peaceful solutions are possible. The Bush administration wants war, while the world doesn't. This is a no-brainer, and Iran has a right to its own domestic nuclear power. They deserve to have energy independence, just as does Israel, America, Venezuela, Georgia and Armenia, or any other nation. This is the right to self-determination in its truest-form.

AP: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070313/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070313/ap_on_go_co/iraq_liberals;_ylt=AtqHdB_Ripg4DQmlbVlljuMGw_IE

Ari Emanuel: Hypocrite, Asshole.

Ari Emanuel is a well-known "superagent" in Hollywood who has been blogging on Huffingtonpost over the last year, and is often reasonable in his blogs. However, it seems the Israeli invasion of Lebanon has him sipping the Flavor Aide from Jonestown. Huh?

Cut-to-now: Mel Gibson makes anti-Semitic remarks (while intoxicated) after being pulled-over by the Orange County Sheriff's Department, saying such racist gems as, "The Jews have started every war", and "Are you a Jew?!" to the arresting officers. It's obvious he was intoxicated and anti-Semitic, sigh.

Cut-to a close-shot of Ari Emanuel's photo on Huffpo: The "superagent" (this guy must be an unknown arch-nemesis of mine) calls for a banning of Mel Gibson from Hollywood, demanding that people there stop working with Mel altogether--OK, I've caused some mayhem in my days as an arch-fiend, but this is just hypocritical.

"Why?", you ask? Here's why: Ari Emanuel's brother was a "top advisor to President Bill Clinton" during the 1990s. "Soooooo?", you're saying, as you ponder the information. Ahhhh, here's the whole rub, folks, from imdb:

The youngest of three brothers, Mr. Emanuel grew up in [a] Chicago household headed by a pediatrician (his father) and a psychiatric social worker (his mother). He learned to be competitive from his brothers, Dr. Ezekiel J. Emanuel, an oncologist and chairman of the department of clinical bioethics at the Warren G. Magnusson Clinical Center at the National Institutes of Health and Rahm Emanuel, a top white house advisor to President Bill Clinton. His career began as an assistant to Robert Lantz, the veteran New York agent who represented Milos Foreman. He moved to Los Angeles in 1987 landing a job in the mail room [Ed.--Where he should have remained, for life.] of the Creative Artists Agency.

Coming from what he felt was a place of moral superiority, Mr. Emanuel rightly criticized Mr. Gibson for his anti-Semitic remarks. If it had ended there, that would have been fine. But no, he didn't end it there.

He called for a removal of Mel Gibson from the Hollywood scene altogether.

"Yeah, but what does that have to do with Clinton's bombing of civilian-infrastructures in 1990s Iraq," you're asking? Simple, the brothers Emanuel probably did nothing in trying to dissuade Clinton from causing the deaths of an entire generation of Iraqi children--nada--and they had direct-access to the president. They're petty and hypocritical regarding their take on Mel Gibson.

Would it have worked? I doubt this, but I would like to know if they ever tried, since they have had direct-access to the halls of power...

[Ed., 11.08.2008: I'd imagine that the Emanuels wanted the air strikes on Iraq in the interests of Israeli security. The problem is, Iraq was never a serious threat to them, and everyone knows it. The only good thing you can say about these two clowns is that they "get the job done." So did Jewish-collaborators at Auschwitz, dragging their brothers and sisters to the gas chambers.]