THE CALAMITY HOWLER #173
 
Resent-Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 08:28:59 -0500 (CDT)


THE CALAMITY HOWLER

August 28, 2007 Issue #173

Sometimes an intended epithet can be turned to good advantage in
the sole surviving issue of the Decatur, Texas Times one finds the
way Populists not only accepted the label `calamity howler but
insisted that they had ample reason to howl and would continue to
howl until their objectives had been attained. --- THE POPULIST
MIND, edited by Norman Pollack

EDITOR\PUBLISHER: A.V Krebs E-MAIL: avkrebs@comcast.net TO RECEIVE:
Send name and address to avkrebs@comcast.net

OVERVIEW:

* ADIOS ALBERTO !!! By Matt Apuzzo * MCKAY SAYS GONZALES RESIGNATION
"TREMENDOUS RELIEF" FOR PEOPLE IN JUSTICE DEPARTMENT By Paul Shukovsky
and Neil Modie * MICHAEL CHERTOFF REMAINS INCRIMINATEDBY THE SMOKING
GUN BURIED IN PLAIN SIGHT By David Fiderer * ANOTHER TACTIC USED
IN SEARCH FOR MINERS By Chelsea J. Carter * THE GALL OF IT ALL By
Sally Jenkins * DEATHS IN IRAQ NEARLY DOUBLE PRE-SURGE LEVEL By
Steve Hurst

ADIOS ALBERTO !!!

By Matt Apuzzo Associated Press August 27, 2007 Alberto Gonzales,
the nation's first Hispanic attorney general, announced his resignation
Monday, driven from office after a wrenching standoff with congressional
critics over his honesty and competence.

Republicans and Democrats alike had demanded his departure over the
botched handling of FBI terror investigations and the firings of
U.S. attorneys, but President Bush had defiantly stood by his Texas
friend for months until accepting his resignation last Friday.
"After months of unfair treatment that has created a harmful
distraction at the Justice Department, Judge Gonzales decided to
resign his position and I accept his decision," Bush said from
Texas, where he is vacationing.

Solicitor General Paul Clement will be acting attorney general until
a replacement is found and confirmed by the Senate, Bush said.

Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff was among those mentioned
as possible successors, though a senior administration official
said the matter had not been raised with Chertoff. Bush leaves
Washington next Monday for Australia, and Gonzales' replacement
might not be named by then, the official said.

"It has been one of my greatest privileges to lead the Department
of Justice," Gonzales said, announcing his resignation effective
September 17 in a terse statement. He took no questions and gave
no reason for stepping down. Bush said the attorney general's "good
name was dragged through the mud for political reasons." Though
some Republicans echoed the president's veiled slap at Democrats,
Gonzales had few defenders left in Washington.

Many Republicans actually welcomed his departure, some quietly and
others publicly so.

Congressional aides and lawmakers agreed that any nomination of a
new attorney general was almost certain to be acrimonious. The
easiest prospects, some said, might be a current or former colleague
of senators charged with the confirmation. Sen. Arlen Specter, the
ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, told reporters Monday
that he would not accept the job, if offered. But, he said, another
current or former senator "might be just the ticket."

"If you have a former senator or a present senator or somebody who
is well known to the Senate or the committee...that's always a big
help if you know the person," Specter told reporters in a telephone
call as he traveled from Warsaw to Paris. Asked, too, about whether
Chertoff might be a good candidate, Specter replied: "I think he's
a first-rate prospect."

Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards applauded Gonzales'
resignation, saying it was "better late than never."

The announcement came as a surprise to many in the administration.
Gonzales was tight-lipped about his thinking before going on vacation
more than a week ago and aides were planning events for the next
several months. After spending time with his family in Texas,
however, and facing the prospect of returning to Washington for
months of continued fights with Congress, he called the president
on Friday. The White House has asked anyone staying past Labor Day
to stay the remainder of the president's term.

Gonzales, formerly Bush's White House counsel, served more than two
years at the Justice Department. In announcing his decision, Gonzales
reflected on his up-from-the-bootstraps life story; he's the son
of migrant farm workers from Mexico who didn't finish elementary
school. "Even my worst days as attorney general have been better
than my father's best days," Gonzales said.

Bush steadfastly --- and at times angrily --- refused to give in
to critics, even from his own GOP, who argued that Gonzales should
go. Earlier this month at a news conference, the president grew
irritated when asked about accountability in his administration and
turned the tables on the Democratic Congress. "Implicit in your
questions is that Al Gonzales did something wrong. I haven't seen
Congress say he's done anything wrong," Bush said testily at the
time. Actually, many in Congress had accused Gonzales of wrongdoing.

After the 52-year-old Gonzales called Bush Friday, the president
had him come to lunch at his ranch on Sunday as a parting gesture,
a senior administration official said.

Gonzales, whom Bush once considered for appointment to the Supreme
Court, is the fourth top-ranking administration official to leave
since November 2006, following Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld,
Paul Wolfowitz, who had a high-ranking Pentagon job before going
to the World Bank as its president, and top political and policy
adviser Karl Rove.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, Dem.-Vermont,
reacted to the announcement by saying the Justice Department under
Gonzales had "suffered a severe crisis of leadership that allowed
our justice system to be corrupted by political influence."

As attorney general and earlier as White House counsel, Gonzales
pushed for expanded presidential powers, including the eavesdropping
authority. He drafted controversial rules for military war tribunals
and sought to limit the legal rights of detainees at Guantanamo Bay
_ prompting lawsuits by civil libertarians who said the government
was violating the Constitution in its pursuit of terrorists.

"Alberto Gonzales was never the right man for this job. He lacked
independence, he lacked judgment, and he lacked the spine to say
no to Karl Rove," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Dem.-Nevada

In a warning to the White House, Reid suggested that investigations
into the Justice Department will not end until Congress gets "to
the bottom of this mess." One matter still under investigation is
the 2006 dismissal of several federal prosecutors, who serve at the
president's pleasure. Lawmakers said the action appeared to be
politically motivated, and some of the fired U.S. attorneys said
they felt pressured to investigate Democrats before elections.

Gonzales maintained that the dismissals were based the prosecutors'
lackluster performance records. In April, Gonzales answered "I don't
know" and "I can't recall" scores of times while questioned by
Congress about the firings. Even some Republicans said his testimony
was evasive. Not Bush. The president praised Gonzales' performance
and said the attorney general was "honest" and "honorable."

In 2004, Gonzales pressed to reauthorize a secret domestic spying
program over the Justice Department's protests. Gonzales was White
House counsel at the time and during a dramatic hospital confrontation
he and then-White House chief of staff Andrew Card sought approval
from then-Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was in intensive care
recovering from surgery. Ashcroft refused.

Similarly, Gonzales found himself on the defensive as recently as
March because of the FBI's improper and, in some cases, illegal
prying into Americans' personal information during terror and spy
probes.

AP White House Correspondent Terence Hunt and Associated Press
reporters Jennifer Loven and Lara Jakes Jordan contributed to this
story.

MCKAY SAYS GONZALES RESIGNATION "TREMENDOUS RELIEF" FOR PEOPLE IN
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT By Paul Shukovsky and Neil Modie Seattle
Post-Intelligencer August 27, 2007

Fired U.S. Attorney John McKay had about a dozen of his former
colleagues over to his house Sunday night for dinner. The U.S.
attorneys were in Western Washington for a meeting about border
security and immigration, but the talk was all about Gonzales. "Only
one said he would probably resign during the (congressional) recess,"
McKay said. "But most of others were convinced that he would be
going (at some point). There were some who thought he would stick
it out to the bitter end."

On Monday, Gonzales stepped down. He had been under increasing
scrutiny since the 2006 dismissal of eight federal prosecutors ---
including McKay. Lawmakers said the action appeared to be politically
motivated. "I think it's a tremendous relief to people in the Justice
Department that he is resigning because he has been an embarrassment
to them. Everybody that works in the Justice Department --- in the
work they do every day - it's the search for the truth. Then they
watch the attorney general and he can't remember anything," McKay
of Gonzales' testimony before Congress earlier this year.

McKay said he doesn't feel vindicated. "I knew this day would come.
I am surprised it has taken this long. I am proud of my service and
I am proud to hade been in the Justice Department." McKay said
Gonzales was more interested in loyalty to the president than
advancing the rule of law. "He remarked to us --- in his first
speech to the U.S. Attorneys --- that we worked for the White House,
stunned all of us.

"I'm kind of sad," said McKay. "This isn't a happy day for me. I
am pleased for my colleagues that are still serving because they
want to focus on law enforcement. I had high hopes for Alberto
Gonzales and he has disappointed me tremendously."

Washington lawmakers hailed the resignation of Attorney General
Alberto Gonzales, saying his honesty and competence as leader of
the Justice Department were in question.

"This is a good day for fairness and justice across our nation,"
said Sen. Patty Murray, Dem.-Washington "Every American deserves
to have confidence in our system of justice, but this administration
and Alberto Gonzales in particular, have consistently injected
partisan politics into a process that requires independence." Rep.
Jay Inslee, Dem.-Washington, echoed similar sentiments and he
criticized President Bush's conclusion that Gonzales was driven out
in a "political witch hunt." "The arrogance of this administration
never ceases to surprise," Inslee said. "President Bush blaming
Congress for Alberto Gonzales' problems is like Michael Vick blaming
the Humane Society for his."

While Washington state Democrats responded almost instantly with
public comments to Gonzales' decision, not one Republican from the
state offered a statement. Reps. Dave Reichert, Doc Hastings and
Cathy McMorris Rodgers were mute.

The lesson of Gonzales's tenure "should be that the attorney general
owes his loyalty to the Constitution and the law, not to the person
who hired him," said Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., who led a House
effort to consider whether to impeach Gonzales. "Never again should
the judicial process become a tool of the political operations at
the White House."

McKay noted that the group of eight former U.S. Attorneys fired by
Gonzales are having an annual dinner on December 7, the anniversary
of their sacking. "We're the ones who got fired and kicked into the
cold but were more concerned than Gonzales that the Department of
Justice not be put in a bad light."

This report includes material from P-I reporter Charles Pope and
The Associated Press.

MICHAEL CHERTOFF REMAINS INCRIMINATEDBY THE SMOKING GUN BURIED IN
PLAIN SIGHT By David Fiderer The Huffington Post August 27, 2007

"President Bush will likely nominate Homeland Security Secretary
Michael Chertoff to replace Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General,
senior administration officials told CNN Monday." August 27, 2007

Chairman Susan Collins moved to sideline an examination into the
smoking gun that incriminated Michael Chertoff. She opened the
hearings by directly asking --- and answering --- the critical
question herself. Her answer was both clever and artful; what seemed
straightforward and reasonable was in fact pure nonsense.

Six days later, Chertoff testified and gave substantially the same
dishonest answer. The stunt worked. To this day, the most damning
evidence against Michael Chertoff remains barely acknowledged and
hiding in plain sight. In her opening statement at the Senate
hearings on February 10, 2006 Susan Collins, the Republican Senator
from Maine, asked and answered the question:

"The day after the storm...Secretary Chertoff named Michael Brown
as the lead federal official for the response effort. At the same
time, the secretary declared Hurricane Katrina an Incident of
National Significance, which is the designation that triggers the
National Response Plan. "The National Response Plan, in turn, is
the comprehensive national road map that guides the federal response
to catastrophes. The secretary's action led many to the question
why the Incident of National Significance declaration had not been
made earlier."

"But in reality, the declaration itself was meaningless because,
by the plain terms of the National Response Plan, Hurricane Katrina
had become an Incident of National Significance three days earlier
when the President declared an emergency in Louisiana."

Collins' logic seemed simple enough: A Presidential Emergency
Declaration --- an Incident of National Significance --- National
Response Plan is triggered. Therefore, a declaration of an Incident
of National Significance was a meaningless formality. Chertoff said
the same thing when Joe Lieberman asked him why the declaration was
made on Tuesday August 30, instead of Saturday August 27. The DHS
Secretary testified, "In truth, I didn't need to do it. I was told
I didn't need to do it --- but I just did it to formalize it."

But when you translate the bureaucratic jargon back into English,
Collins' assertion means something different. In effect, she said
that it didn't matter that the fire chief pulled the fire alarm
three days late, because, under the law, it was obvious the alarm
should have been pulled three days earlier.

Contrary to what Collins implied, the National Response Plan does
not rely on emergency responders to construe the statutory implications
of a presidential declaration. No plan for a large mobilization
ever works that way. Emergency plans always rely on clear lines of
communication, on an established chain of command, and on the
dissemination of straightforward, unambiguous directions.

The National Response Plan, or NRP, is no different. It is easy to
understand. It preempts any question about who is in charge and who
has the power to give orders and deploy resources. Once President
Bush declared an emergency on August 27, 2005, 45 hours before
Katrina made landfall, Chertoff had the legal obligation to declare
an Incident of National Significance. That declaration would have
mobilized all federal agencies, all state and local officials and
all major relief agencies who had prepared to follow the agreed-upon
road map. Without that declaration, people wondered who was in
charge.

The road map, the power to direct all federal agencies, all state
and local officials and all major relief agencies resided exclusively
with Michael Chertoff. It never resided with Michael Brown, until
Chertoff conferred such power upon him, at the point when the
disorganization became irreparable.

During the critical three days when Chertoff rejected his legal
duty to activate the Plan, people in New Orleans perished. They did
not die because of bureaucratic inertia, "the fog of war" or a
shortage of bus drivers; those were not contributing factors to a
general breakdown. They were the foreseeable consequences of one
man's deliberate refusal to follow his legal obligations. The smoking
gun is the NRP and Chertoff's obvious refusal to follow it.

The litany of reports and hearings on Katrina all dutifully bypassed
the primary and overriding reason why New Orleans suffered 1,000+
deaths two years ago. That reason is simple, singular and
straightforward. But thanks to the obfuscations of Susan Collins
and other Republicans, we still hear their mantra, "There's plenty
of blame to go around."

Anyone can trace the response failures that occurred before and
after the levies broke, and compare them to the way things were
supposed to work under the NRP. Yet this simple cause-and-effect
analysis is missing or buried in the government reports on the
subject. (Chertoff's failure was not "A Failure of Initiative.")
The evidence shows that Chertoff's crime against humanity was cold
hearted and deliberate. He knew exactly what he was doing.

Even historian Douglas Brinkley pulled his punches in The Great
Deluge. Brinkley lays out the facts that incriminate Chertoff, and
draws the inevitable inference, yet fails to acknowledge the magnitude
of the implications. Brinkley writes:

"Under rules instituted in January 2005, Homeland Secretary was in
charge of all major disasters, whether from international terrorism,
Mother Nature, or infrastructure collapse. Until Chertoff designated
it "an incident of national significance," and appointed someone
(presumably the FEMA director in the case of hurricanes) as the
"principal federal official," relief would be halting at best.
Without that designation, Brown could not legally take charge,
giving orders to local and state officials and overseeing deployment
of National Guard and other U.S. military person,nel. 'I am having
a horrible time,' Brown admitted to Chertoff in a tele,phone
conversation on Monday. 'I can't get a unified command established.'

"A stronger personality than Michael Brown might have seized com,mand
anyway. But even Brown's GOP allies knew he was weak-kneed. The
question that still haunts the events of Monday, August 29, was
not, however, why Michael Brown needed post-Katrina direction and
so much instruction from his boss. The important question was why
Chertoff was so callous, both to Brown's specific relief needs and
to the apocalyptic needs of the entire Gulf Coast region. Brown
tried to maneuver around Chertoff, to appeal directly to President
Bush, but it was hard to get through to the White House.

"Clearly Chertoff didn't just make a mistake during the first days
of Katrina --- he did virtually nothing at all, which was by far
the greater sin. With the hurricane approaching Louisiana and
Mississippi, Chertoff never even went to his office, staying at
home for the crucial forty-eight hours before landfall. Most
astonishing of all, as Katrina ravaged nearly 29,000 square miles
of America on Monday, Chertoff didn't even speak to

"Brown until 8 p.m. When CNN, Fox News, ABC News, and the rest
started reporting the horrific flooding in New Orleans due to the
levee breaks, Chertoff scoffed, dismissing media reports of human
suffering as melodrama. With a cavalier wave of the hand, according
to the Washington Post, Chertoff downplayed the bleak reports as
'rumored or exaggerated.' Worse yet, Chertoff insisted that Brown
and FEMA as a whole were do,ing an "excellent" job. Evan Thomas of
Newsweek was closer to the mark when in his seminal article 'How
Bush Blew It,' he declared that FEMA was 'not up to the job.'

"Chertoff 's inaction cost lives. FEMA had been brought into the
gar,gantuan Department of Homeland Security after September 11; now
it was clear somebody needed to pull it out again. It was a huge
black eye for Home,land Security. The Harvard prosecutor performed
just as poorly as the Oklahoman--even worse. Brown, to his credit,
kept trying to get the Bush administration's full attention. Chertoff
had assumed his important cabi,net position with big talk about
keeping Americans safe from man-made and natural disasters.

"He was a principal engineer of the USA Patriot Act and wrote an
article in the neoconservative publication The Weekly Standard full
of bravado about fighting the war on terror 'beyond case-by-case.'
He fancied himself an intellectual, but one who understood trench
war,fare. President Bush, in selecting Chertoff to replace Tom
Ridge, said that 'Mike has shown a deep commitment to the cause of
justice and unwa,vering determination to protect the American
people.'

"His determination to protect the American people did not seem to
extend to those who lived in Gulf towns like Grand Isle, Louisiana;
Ocean Springs, Mississippi; or Dauphin Island, Alabama. The one
quality, in fact, not evident in Chertoff's handling of Katrina was
caring about what the storm inflicted. While fellow citizens were
dying, screaming for help, clutching chunks of floating wood and
palm fronds trying to stay alive, Chertoff, the one "i've been
femaed " 271 American who could have helped the most, turned a
casual, cold, indifferent eye to their plight.

"When Brown put through his 8 p.m. telephone calls on that Monday,
Chertoff was at his home resting. Chertoff 's spokesman later claimed
that the Homeland Security secretary "was hobbled by a lack of
specific informa,tion" regarding Katrina on Monday night. That
clumsy contrivance pre,sumed that Chertoff was discounting or
ignoring the reports from Brown, who was then in the EOC in Baton
Rouge, or those reports streaming in from the affected area that
were all over various FEMA offices. Air Force aerial images of the
swamped Gulf Coast were arriving with increasing fre,quency at EOC,
each showing an obliterated landscape, with water towers and
refineries among the only recognizable landmarks in St. Bernard and
Plaquemines parishes.

"As Homeland Security chief, Chertoff had the most effective
communications network of any cabinet office at his disposal,
in,cluding the resources of the top brass in the Pentagon. He didn't
use it. If nothing else, there were a growing number of images on
television. But he seemed oblivious to Barbour's 'nuclear devastation'
metaphor, and allowed the Great Deluge to run its course willy-nilly.
'What happened was Home,land Security was geared toward terrorism,'
Louisiana Attorney General Charles Foti said. 'They knew that FEMA
could cope with a hurricane. Okay. Maybe. But the Bush administration
refused to come to grips with the flood. Wind damage was not water.
They just didn't get that. In New Orleans, house after house, block
after block, mile after mile was disappearing.' "

Right away, Chertoff started lying about his criminal neglect. Four
times, for good measure, he referred to non-existent newspaper
headlines that said "New Orleans Dodged the Bullet."

ANOTHER TACTIC USED IN SEARCH FOR MINERS By Chelsea J. Carter
Associated Press August 26, 2007

HUNTINGTON, Utah --- Despite three weeks of drilling and digging
that have revealed no signs of six men trapped inside a collapsed
coal mine, officials said Sunday that the search is continuing.
Federal and mine officials said that a seventh borehole was being
punched into the Crandall Canyon mine and that a robotic camera was
being lowered into a hole drilled during previous efforts to find
the men.

The camera is similar to one used to search within the wreckage of
the World Trade Center after the September 11, 2001, attacks. It
can take images in the darkened cavern from about 50 feet away with
the help of a 200-watt light and can travel 1,000 feet from the end
of the test hole --- a much wider range than previous cameras used,
in part because of its ability to crawl through rubble, officials
said. "The families are thrilled to hear this," said Colin King, a
lawyer for the miners' families.

Images from the camera are not expected until Monday.

Robin Murphy, director of the Institute for Safety Security Rescue
Technology at the University of South Florida, however, said her
camera's ability to obtain images in the mine is a long shot. She
said it is not clear whether the camera will fit all the way down
the hole.

The announcement came a day after crews penetrated the mine with a
sixth borehole, finding a debris-filled area too small for the men
to have survived in, officials said. Mine co-owner Robert E. Murray
said the seventh hole will be drilled into the mine's kitchen area,
to which miners are trained to flee in case of collapse. "We haven't
given up hope," he said. Murray previously said the sixth borehole
would be the last before the mine is sealed.

Bruce Hill, chief executive of UtahAmerican Energy, a part owner
in Crandall Canyon, said the mine company may drill holes even after
the completion of the seventh. The Crandall Canyon miners were last
heard from about 3 a.m. August 6, just before a thunderous shudder
inside the mountain cracked the ribs of the mine and filled passageways
with debris. A second collapse killed three rescuers and injured
six others August 16.

Murray said he is temporarily shutting down another Utah coal mine
and will bring in outside engineers to study its safety.

THE GALL OF IT ALL By Sally Jenkins Washington Post August 22, 2007

Michael Vick and his alter ego Ron Mexico, those suave fakers, are
going away. It looks like Vick will do at least 12 to 18 months in
a federal penitentiary for his crimes, after which the admittedly
faint hope is that he might emerge a more whole and gentle person,
as opposed to a dog slayer and liar. In the meantime, Vick's lawyer
wants us to remember, "Michael is a father, he's a son, he's a human
being --- people oftentimes forget that." Pardon, but if anybody
forgot his humanity, it was Vick. Not us.

It's hard to sort out the high emotions Vick's dogfighting case
provoke, the various hues of anger. It's all confused outrage. How
could an athlete so bedazzling also be so brutal? Why would Vick,
the fortune-kissed, hundred-million-dollar quarterback of the Atlanta
Falcons, wallow in the gore of illegal dogfighting by choice? Why
would anyone ruin animals except out of sheer, dumb meanness? How
could Vick, a man with quite glaring weaknesses and a competitor
who has himself struggled, punish dogs with death for their failures?

There are those who say Vick should suffer the same tortures those
dogs suffered, or at the least his sentence should resemble something
in a scene from "Cool Hand Luke": He should be fitted for manacles,
and forced to break rocks with a shovel all day in the hot sun. And
then there are those milder sorts who think the outrage at Vick is
misplaced, who wonder why, as my friend Gene Robinson put it, some
people are so furious over the barbaric treatment of dogs, and yet
seem to "accept without outrage shameful levels of human carnage."

But outrage at Vick is not misplaced. It may be inarticulate and
bewildered, but it's exactly right. There are myriad reasons to
feel it, the most minor of which is the fact that Vick is a deceiver.
He played the innocent, while hanging with lowlifes. He opened a
wine bar on one front and ran an illicit dogfighting operation in
secret. He swore he was the ignorant victim of a bad childhood and
misplaced loyalties, used by his old friends from the ghetto in
Newport News, when in fact he was a ringleader.

He feigned naivete, when in actuality he was fatally attracted to
the seedy, surrounding himself with dealers and thieves. In retrospect,
all the little so-called mistakes form a pattern that looks chronic:
the friends carrying marijuana who just happened to be driving a
truck registered in his name, the incident in the Atlanta airport
when his traveling companion stole a wristwatch, the woman who sued
him claiming he knowingly gave her herpes and then used the alias
Ron Mexico in treatment.

People are angry at Vick because they sense that dogfighting isn't
a petty crime, but an underworld pursuit. It lies at a "nexus with
other crimes and community violence," and tends to be associated
with "a whole host of peripheral criminal activities," including
gambling and racketeering, drug trafficking and gang activity,
according to the Michigan State College of Law's animal law center.
People are angry at Vick because he's a squanderer who criminally
abused his opportunities and turned his talents to sleaze. He was
on top of the world, and instead of reaching up, reached down.

But more than anything, people are angry with Vick because they
understand that dogfighting is a gratuitous form of cruelty. This
was a calculating, deliberate and sustained cruelty, perpetrated
over a number of years. Sixty-six tortured and battered dogs were
found on his property, and affidavits say he personally helped kill
eight others. Lots of crimes are committed in a moment of passion,
with one lapse in judgment or snap of the temper. This isn't one
of them.

There is an unnerving ruthlessness to the bloodsport of dogfighting,
and to killing something because it isn't good enough. It's tempting
to sympathize with Vick's attempts to blame his benighted youth in
Newport News for his mistakes. Maybe that's what desensitized him.
But it's also possible that something else was at work: galloping
elitism. Vick may not have had many advantages as a small boy, but
he's had every advantage since then.

From the instant he picked up a football he was over-praised,
overpaid and excused by idolatry. The truth is that athletic prowess
can breed a kind of coldness. We hold star athletes to be more
valuable than other people --- and we literally pay them as if they
are worth more than others. Roy Baumeister, scholar of social
psychology at Florida State, theorizes in his book "Evil: Inside
Human Violence and Cruelty," that heinous acts may not come from a
lack of self-esteem but rather from egotism, a surfeit of self-regard.

If an animal didn't perform well enough, if it wasn't champion
enough, if it was in Vick's judgment flawed, he strangled it, drowned
it, electrocuted it or beat it to death on the ground. Vick and his
pals deliberately enslaved and tormented weaker creatures, and
killed those they considered inferior. The dogs had faces and voices
that would have eloquently expressed their agony, and Vick hurt
them anyway, repeatedly. The crimes may have been committed against
canines, but at issue is basic humanity. Commit those crimes against
people, and the words we'd use for it are fascism, and genocide.
Don't kid yourself: The people who are so angry at Vick are angry
for all the right reason

DEATHS IN IRAQ NEARLY DOUBLE PRE-SURGE LEVEL By Steve Hurst The
Associated Press August 26, 2007 BAGHDAD, Iraq --- This year's U.S.
troop buildup has succeeded in bringing violence in Baghdad down
from peak levels, but the death toll from sectarian attacks around
the country is running nearly double the pace from a year ago. Some
of the recent bloodshed appears the result of militant fighters
drifting into parts of northern Iraq, where they have fled after
U.S.-led offensives. Baghdad, however, still accounts for slightly
more than half of all war-related killings --- the same percentage
as a year ago, according to figures compiled by The Associated
Press.

The tallies and trends offer a sobering snapshot after an additional
30,000 U.S. troops began campaigns in February to regain control
of the Baghdad area. It also highlights one of the major themes
expected in next month's Iraq progress report to Congress: some
military headway, but extremist factions are far from broken. In
street-level terms, it means life for average Iraqis appears to be
even more perilous and unpredictable.

The AP tracking includes Iraqi civilians, government officials,
police and security forces killed in attacks such as gunfights and
bombings, which are frequently blamed on Sunni suicide strikes. It
also includes execution-style killings --- largely the work of
Shiite death squads. The figures are considered a minimum based on
AP reporting. The actual numbers are likely higher, as many killings
go unreported or uncounted. Insurgent deaths are not a part of the
Iraqi count. The findings include:

* Iraq is suffering about double the number of war-related deaths
throughout the country compared with last year --- an average daily
toll of 33 in 2006, and 62 so far this year.

* Nearly 1,000 more people have been killed in violence across Iraq
in the first eight months of this year than in all of 2006. So far
this year, about 14,800 people have died in war-related attacks and
sectarian murders. AP reporting accounted for 13,811 deaths in 2006.
The United Nations and other sources placed the 2006 toll far higher.

* Baghdad has gone from representing 76% of all civilian and police
war-related deaths in Iraq in January to 52% in July, bringing it
back to the same spot it was roughly a year ago.

* According to the Iraqi Red Crescent Organization, the number of
displaced Iraqis has more than doubled since the start of the year,
from 447,337 on January 1 to 1.14 million on July 31. However, Brig.
Gen. Richard Sherlock, deputy director for operational planning for
the Pentagon's Joint Chiefs of Staff, said violence in Iraq ``has
continued to decline and is at the lowest level since June 2006.''

He offered no statistics to back his claim, but in a briefing with
reporters at the Pentagon on Friday he warned insurgents might try
intensify attacks in Iraq to coincide with three milestones: the
sixth anniversary of the September 11 attacks in the U.S., the
beginning of Ramadan and the report to Congress.

The U.S. military did not get all the additional American forces
into Iraq until June 15, so it would be premature to draw a final
statistical picture of the effect of the added troops. But initial
calculations validate fears that the Baghdad crackdown would push
militants into districts north of the capital, including Diyala
province where U.S. force and Iraqi soldiers have conducted major
operation to clear its main city, Baqouba, of al-Qaida in Iraq
fighters. In July, the AP figures show 35% of all war-related
killings occurred in northern provinces. The figure one year ago
was 22%.

The final death count for August also will likely be further oriented
to the north after the savage August 14 attack by suspected al-Qaida
truck bombers near the Syrian border in Ninevah province. At least
500 villagers from the Yazidi sect were killed in the deadliest
civilian attack of the war.

In the first months of this year, many extremists fled to Baghdad
and regions to the north after Sunni tribesmen in Anbar, the sprawling
desert province west of the capital, turned on their erstwhile
al-Qaida allies.

Anthony Cordesman, an Iraq expert at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies in Washington, said many militants are trying
to hang onto footholds in central Iraq. ``Most of the force shifts
are still in the Baghdad ring and Diyala,'' he said in a recent
interview, predicting more spectacular attacks in the days leading
to next month's report to Congress by U.S. commander Gen. David
Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker. ``Will it lead to more bloody
attacks as they try to exploit the American political debate? Yes.''

Nora Bensahel, a military analyst at the Rand Corp., said that
northern Iraq had become increasingly destabilized over the past
few months. The insurgents have made a ``concerted effort to
concentrate attacks in other parts of the country,'' Bensahel said,
in part to escape the increased U.S. troop presence in Baghdad and
in part to give the impression that no place in Iraq is safe.

Mostly, she said, the insurgents have shifted their focus to the
Baghdad suburbs, but they are particularly keen to undermine the
notion that northern Iraq is a ``success story'' for Washington and
its key Iraqi partners --- including the Kurds who have maintained
a near-autonomous state in the north since the early 1990s. Staging
attacks in the north ``has a symbolic effect,'' she said. And beyond
that, Bensahel said the tactic puts the United States in a difficult
situation. ``There isn't an ability to move north in any significant
numbers without abandoning Baghdad'' --- a change in strategy that
Washington is not prepared to make, she said.

But a huge problem also looms in the south, the center of Shiite
political and spiritual influence and the site of Iraq's main oil
fields. There are daily gunbattles between the Mahdi Army militia
--- loyal to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr --- and the
Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, the powerhouse Shiite political party
that controls most of the bureaucracy and police forces in southern
Iraq. This month, the governors of two southern provinces loyal to
the Supreme Islamic Council were killed in roadside bombings.

The clashes are expected to grow more intense as Britain draws downs
its forces in southern Iraq over the coming months. The effect of
the shrinking British presence is already being felt, said Cordesman
in an assessment released August 22. ``The end result was to turn
the four provinces in southeastern Iraq over to feuding Shiite
factions whose actions were mixed with corruption, extortion and
links to criminal activities,'' he wrote. And there are increasing
signs that whole regions of the south are inclined to seek increased
autonomy from the center --- moves that many Iraqis fear could lead
to partition of the country.

In Najaf --- the spiritual heart for Shiites around the world ---
the provincial spokesman, Ahmed Deibel, told AP early this month
that the gas turbine generator there had been removed from the
national electricity grid. The unilateral action has contributed
to several nationwide power blackouts. He said the provincial plant
produced 50 megawatts, while the province needed at least 200
megawatts. ``What we produce is not enough even for us. We disconnected
it from the national grid (August 1) because the people in Baghdad
were getting too much, leaving little electricity for Najaf,'' he
said.

The No. 2 U.S. commander, Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno, has also expressed
fears of a big insurgent attack in the final days before the report
to Congress, but also claimed the offensives have shaken militant
fighters in Baghdad and environs. ``Due to the constant pressure
and depletion of their leadership, extremists have been pushed out
of many population centers and are on the move, seeking other places
to operate within the country,'' Odierno said last week. ``As a
result, we are now in pursuit of al-Qaida and other extremist
elements, and we'll continue to aggressively target their shrinking
areas of influence,'' he said.``Over the coming weeks, we plan to
conduct quick-strike raids against remaining extremist sanctuaries
and staging areas,'' Odierno said.

These newletters are produced by the Calamity Howler. If you do not
wish to receive this e-mail, simply click on the link to
:(http://www.thecalamityhowler.com/?unsubscribeCode=595ca&unsubscribeEmail=rich%40math.missouri.edu)unsubscribe:(http://www.thecalamityhowler.com/?unsubscribeCode=595ca&unsubscribeEmail=rich%40math.missouri.edu).