Month: November 2014

This is Japanese for, “F%$# No.”

No Comments

In the realm of diplomacy, the statement that something is difficult is a polite way of saying, “No.”

But the significance of such a statement will vary across cultures.

From an American, it might mean, “I want a better deal.”

That being said, the Japanese are famously oblique about saying no, so when it’s the Japanese economy minister saying it, this is a remarkably strong statement:

Japan’s Economy Minister Akira Amari said on Saturday he saw progress in Asia-Pacific regional trade negotiations, although it would be difficult to reach an agreement by the end of the year, according to Jiji press.

Trade ministers from the 12 nations participating in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) pact held talks on the sidelines of an annual Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum (APEC) meeting in Beijing

This is a good thing.

The TPP is a very bad thing, even by the standards of trade agreement.

It is a neoliberal corporatist wet dream.

Here’s an Interesting Assesment of the Chinese J-20 Stealth Fighter

No Comments

Basically, the comparison with the F-22 seems to reveal a very different sort of role from the F-22 Lightning:

The J-20’s wing and control surface layout is very different from that of the Lockheed Martin F-22, but the body layout is quite similar, with twin main weapon bays under the belly and side bays for rail-launched air-to-air missiles (AAMs), all located under and outside the inlet ducts. On both aircraft, the main landing gear is housed in the fuselage behind the weapon bays and the engines are close together. The big difference, however, is that the J-20 is 9.5 ft. (17%) longer than the F-22, from the nose to the engine nozzles. Most of this is in the widest part of the fuselage, and since the weapon bays are similar in size, it is almost all available for fuel. It is a reasonable estimate that the J-20 could have as much as 40% more internal fuel capacity than the F-22. The longer body will also improve fineness ratio, with benefits for transonic drag.

 Despite the larger body, the empty weight of the J-20 may be close to that of the F-22, largely because it has less-powerful engines without the heavy two-dimensional thrust-vectoring nozzles of the F-22’s F119s. The J-20 prototypes are believed to be flying with United Engine Corp. (UEC) AL-31F engines. The thrust difference between the two designs is very large: The F-22 has almost as much power in intermediate thrust as the J-20 does in full afterburner, although newer versions of the UEC AL-31/117S/117 could close the gap in later versions of the Chinese aircraft.

 The conventional circular nozzles and the aft-body shape are less conducive to stealth than the F-22, as is the case with the T-50. This is most likely a conscious decision because a fast aircraft can tolerate a higher radar cross-section in the aft quadrant. While some observers have suggested that canards are incompatible with stealth, an engineer who was active in Lockheed Martin’s early Joint Strike Fighter efforts says the final quad-tail configuration was no stealthier than the earlier canard-delta design.

………

 The J-20’s weapon arrangement is similar to the F-22, except that the ventral bays are shorter and narrower, and are apparently capable of accommodating only four weapons the size of the SD-10 AAM. However, they do appear large enough to accommodate bigger folding-wing missiles—and China is reported to be negotiating to buy the Russian Kh-58UShKE, a Mach 4 anti-radar missile that is also intended for internal carriage on the T-50.

The side missile bays differ from those of the F-22 in that the doors can be closed after the missile rail has been extended, and have been seen with a missile—or test shape—with low-aspect-ratio wings and folding tails. So far, no gun has been seen on J-20s, nor has there been a sign of provision for one.

 The J-20 design, therefore, is an air-to-air fighter with an emphasis on forward-aspect stealth, efficient high-speed aerodynamics and range, with a modest internal payload and more than adequate agility for self-defense. The aircraft has considerable potential for development, because of its currently unsophisticated engines. But it is also large and expensive, and continued development of the J-10B shows that China plans to maintain a high-low mix of fighters for a long time to come.

 The J-20’s weapon arrangement is similar to the F-22, except that the ventral bays are shorter and narrower, and are apparently capable of accommodating only four weapons the size of the SD-10 AAM. However, they do appear large enough to accommodate bigger folding-wing missiles—and China is reported to be negotiating to buy the Russian Kh-58UShKE, a Mach 4 anti-radar missile that is also intended for internal carriage on the T-50.

The side missile bays differ from those of the F-22 in that the doors can be closed after the missile rail has been extended, and have been seen with a missile—or test shape—with low-aspect-ratio wings and folding tails. So far, no gun has been seen on J-20s, nor has there been a sign of provision for one.

 The J-20 design, therefore, is an air-to-air fighter with an emphasis on forward-aspect stealth, efficient high-speed aerodynamics and range, with a modest internal payload and more than adequate agility for self-defense. The aircraft has considerable potential for development, because of its currently unsophisticated engines. But it is also large and expensive, and continued development of the J-10B shows that China plans to maintain a high-low mix of fighters for a long time to come.

………

J-20 vs. F-22
J-20 F-22
Overall length (ft.) 66.8 62
Wingspan (ft.) 44.2 44.5
Wing area (sq. ft.) 840 840
Operating empty weight (lb.) 42,750 43,340
Internal fuel (lb.) 25,000 18,000
Normal takeoff weight (lb.) 70,750 64,840
Max. thrust (lb.) 55,000 70,000
Min. thrust (lb.) 34,250 52,000
Clean-fuel fraction, normal T/O 0.35 0.28
Max. thrust-to-weight ratio, combat weight 0.94 1.25
Military thrust-to-weight ratio, combat weight 0.59 0.93
Wing loading at combat weight, lb./sq. ft. 69 66.5
Sources: Lockheed Martin, AW&ST analysis

Basically, the F-22 was designed to provide air supremacy by engaging in air to air combat over an enemy territory protected by an integrated Integrated Air Defense System (IADS).

It is essentially an offensive capability, where there bases relatively close to the battle space.

By contrast, the J-20 is less agile, it has about and less stealthy from the rear quarter, so it is intended to provide area denial, without a significant tankerbility, it has about 30% less installed thrust, and it carries about 40% more internal fuel.

Basically, it reflects a concern that the the US, operating from bases in places like Korea, Japan, and the Philippines, will launch an attack on China and near her allies, (I am thinking Myanmar might end up on the US’s “Axis of Evil”) and the presence of the capabilities of the J-20 would tend to really throw a monkey wrench into any planning.

Seeing as how China is developing the J-31 at the same time, which is roughly analogous to the F-35 (without all the excess baggage that the STO/VL capabilities of the B model), it would appear that the J-20 is directed very specifically toward US adventurism.

As such, I would not expect that they would make a whole bunch of these aircraft.

A few dozen would suffice to provide sufficient deterrence,

This Reeks of Desparation

No Comments

The JSF Program Office is looking to accelerate deliveries of the F-35 to Canada in an attempt to induce them to finish their purchase of the aircraft:

A radical fast-track plan to jump-start Canada’s stalled effort to buy the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is revealed in a briefing document obtained by Aviation Week.

 The Oct. 27 brief from JSF Program Executive Office director USAF Lt. Gen. Chris Bogdan to Air Force secretary Deborah James calls for Canada to receive four F-35s next year, by diverting them from U.S. Air Force low-rate initial production (LRIP) Lot 7 orders. Canada would then buy four Lot 9 aircraft that would be delivered to the Air Force in 2017. According to the briefing, Canada would sign a letter of intent within days — “mid-November” — and Congress would be notified by the end of November.

 Neither the JSF Program Office nor the Canadian Department of National Defense responded to repeated inquiries about the planned deal this week. The legal basis for such an exchange, absent an urgent operational need, is uncertain. The proposed LRIP 9 replacement aircraft are not on contract, and as far as is known, negotiations for them have not started.

 According to the briefing, the Air Force has said it can spare four aircraft — budgeted at more than $160 million each — but with “no flex left” in the schedule for the aircraft to achieve initial operational capability. Aircraft availability is already a risk factor in meeting the objective initial operational capability date of August 2016.

 Canada is a founding partner in the JSF program, with one of the largest near-term export orders. Its plan to buy 65 F-35As has been controversial since 2010, when prime minister Stephen Harper’s government attempted to bypass Canadian law that states that all major government acquisitions must be competed. The government asserted that the F-35 was the only aircraft that could meet Canadian requirements, but was forced to back down after Canada’s auditor-general reported in 2012 that the project’s costs had not been presented correctly and the air force’s “statement of requirements” had been compiled after the decision to make a sole-source procurement had been made.

 The program to acquire new fighters has been supervised since 2012 by a special secretariat within Canada’s public works department. The most recent development was the announcement at the end of September of a plan to extend the life of Canada’s Boeing Hornet fleet to 2025. This was seen as confirming that Harper’s team had accepted the need to defer the JSF decision past the next general election, which is due no later than October 2015.

 According to one Canadian industry observer close to the fighter program, the F-35 swap proposal is being pushed by Lockheed Martin and the JSF Program Office. “It would be a huge game changer,” the source says, and another observer, former procurement official Alan Williams, calls it “explosive.” The industry source is dubious that it can happen as scheduled: “The decision to go with the F-35 has not been made. This requires three key ministers to sign off and that hasn’t happened yet.” A Harper attempt to lock Canada into the F-35 program before the election would risk an electoral backlash, sources say. “The fighter file is simply toxic right now,” the industry observer says.

This reeks of desperation.  The Air Force is sacrificing its margin in an attempt to prevent Canada from cancelling its order.

If Canada, or for that matter any of the the Nato countries that have signed on, cancels its F-35 order, it’s going to set off a death spiral of cancellations and unit price escalation.

The problem is that the F-35 is too expensive, not just for Canada, and not just for the US, but the entire f%$#ing world.

BTW, the Canadian government is categorically denying this report:

Canada’s Public Works Department denied reports it’s decided to purchase F-35 fighter jets from the U.S.

Reports suggested a leaked U.S. Defence Department document revealed Canada agreed to buy up to four of the controversial planes from the U.S., to be delivered as early as 2016.

The Conservative government shelved its plan to buy the F-35 from Lockheed Martin in 2012 after a scathing report from the auditor general that highlighted cost overruns and other mismanagement problems in the procurement process.

Like I said, desparation.

Bush with a Tan

No Comments

Obama is escalating in Iraq:

President Barack Obama has approved doubling the U.S. military force in Iraq and allowing troops to venture beyond headquarters already established in Baghdad and Erbil, in an escalation of the U.S. effort to defeat Islamic State extremists.

………

The president’s approval to send as many as 1,500 personnel is in addition to 1,600 he previously authorized, 1,400 of whom are in Iraq today protecting U.S. facilities and assisting the Iraqi military. Troops that have been confined to Baghdad, the capital, and Erbil in Kurdish northern Iraq now will be permitted to train and advise Iraqi forces at a number of Iraqi military facilities, according to a White House statement.

This of course, not going any sort of escalation, they promise:

“U.S. troops will not be in combat, but they will be better positioned to support Iraqi security forces as they take the fight” to the Sunni extremists, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said today in the statement.

  • Double the troops.
  • Double the exposure to possible violence.
  • Double the possibility that one of them will be taken captive.

Nope, no escalation here.

Good Point

No Comments

It bears reading, but in the The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf makes a point about Barack Obama that I have been making since 2007:

But here’s what I find alarming: Confronted with a president who 1) spied on every American; 2) covered up torture; 3) continued a War on Drugs ruinous to minorities and whole foreign nations; 4) killed hundreds of innocents in drone strikes; 5) waged war illegally and killed an American citizen without due process (while suppressing the legal reasoning used to do so); 6) let high-ranking national-security officials break the law with impunity; and 7) persecuted whistleblowers—confronted with all of those transgressions, more than four in 10 Americans still approve of the job Obama is doing. And most of them are loyal Democrats. Partisanship and tribalism are overriding the moral compass of too many liberals, who ought to be furious with Obama. National-security policies he unilaterally pursued will be harming the U.S., its moral standing, and its most vulnerable citizens for years if not decades to come, especially since Democrats are poised to make civil illibertarian Hillary Clinton their party’s next leader.

To see it all with open eyes is to disapprove.

But for the fact that he leaves off the bit about his relentless protection of the corrupt ratf%$#s on Wall Street who destroyed our economy, he lays it out pretty well.

Read the rest.

Wonkett Nails It

No Comments

Democrats Have Great Exciting New Idea: Being Democrats:

Here’s an idea that’s so crazy, it just might work! After the thorough ass-kicking the Democratic Party suffered on Election Day, some Democrats are considering the possibility that maybe running “Democratic” candidates who are embarrassed to be Democrats is not the best way to appeal to the Democratic Party. Crazy, huh? With candidates refusing to support Obamacare, refusing to support Democratic policies, refusing to even say “Hell, yes, I voted for Barack Obama because I am a Democrat, DUH,” the new minority is thinking maybe it’s time to get back to being Democrats.

According to Faiz Shakir, a senior adviser to the soon-to-be-ex Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, the new plan for 2016 is to maybe — maybe — run Democratic candidates on a Democratic platform.

Your mouth to God’s year, Faiz.

Cowardice is bad politics.

I Have to Give an A for Inventiveness

No Comments

The European Union has classified spyware as a restricted item requiring an export license, much like weapons:

Companies which make spyware will have to apply for permission to export the software once new EU regulations come into effect in late December.

Officially referred to as “intrusion software”, the software will now be included on the EU’s list of “dual use” items, defined as “goods, software and technology normally used for civilian purposes but which might have military applications or contribute to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.”

The restriction means that companies will have to apply for a licence to export spyware, although it doesn’t affect the sale of the software within the UK. Inclusion on the dual-use list places the technology alongside nuclear reactors, ultra-high-resolution cameras, and rocket fuel.

While the regulation is implemented by the European commission, the British government supports the restriction of spyware. “The UK has made it clear over the last two years that we believe that while these kind of technologies do have legitimate uses, they also pose threats to national security and to human rights and should be subject to export controls,” said a spokesperson for the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.

Hopefully, this the export of such software to repressive regimes, as FinFisher did with its FinFish spyware, which it probably exported to Egypt, Bahrain, Ethiopia, etc.

Additionally, I hope that it will serve to also restrict the use of such programs by commercial entities.

Things like tracking cookies, and Verizon’s new “super cookies”, should be included in this category.

Taibbi is Back

No Comments

Now that Matt Taibbi is no longer being gaslighted by FirstLook media, he’s back to writing about corruption in finance, and this one is a doozy.

Basically, he has found a whistle blower who taking the step of breaching her confidentiality agreement to reveal extensive and systematic fraud at J.P. Morgan Chase:

She tried to stay quiet, she really did. But after eight years of keeping a heavy secret, the day came when Alayne Fleischmann couldn’t take it anymore.

“It was like watching an old lady get mugged on the street,” she says. “I thought, ‘I can’t sit by any longer.'”

Fleischmann is a tall, thin, quick-witted securities lawyer in her late thirties, with long blond hair, pale-blue eyes and an infectious sense of humor that has survived some very tough times. She’s had to struggle to find work despite some striking skills and qualifications, a common symptom of a not-so-common condition called being a whistle-blower.

leischmann is the central witness in one of the biggest cases of white-collar crime in American history, possessing secrets that JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon late last year paid $9 billion (not $13 billion as regularly reported – more on that later) to keep the public from hearing.

Back in 2006, as a deal manager at the gigantic bank, Fleischmann first witnessed, then tried to stop, what she describes as “massive criminal securities fraud” in the bank’s mortgage operations.

Thanks to a confidentiality agreement, she’s kept her mouth shut since then. “My closest family and friends don’t know what I’ve been living with,” she says. “Even my brother will only find out for the first time when he sees this interview.”

………

She was blocked at every turn: by asleep-on-the-job regulators like the Securities and Exchange Commission, by a court system that allowed Chase to use its billions to bury her evidence, and, finally, by officials like outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder, the chief architect of the crazily elaborate government policy of surrender, secrecy and cover-up. “Every time I had a chance to talk, something always got in the way,” Fleischmann says.

This past year she watched as Holder’s Justice Department struck a series of historic settlement deals with Chase, Citigroup and Bank of America. The root bargain in these deals was cash for secrecy. The banks paid big fines, without trials or even judges – only secret negotiations that typically ended with the public shown nothing but vague, quasi-official papers called “statements of facts,” which were conveniently devoid of anything like actual facts.


And now, with Holder about to leave office and his Justice Department reportedly wrapping up its final settlements, the state is effectively putting the finishing touches on what will amount to a sweeping, industrywide effort to bury the facts of a whole generation of Wall Street corruption. “I could be sued into bankruptcy,” she says. “I could lose my license to practice law. I could lose everything. But if we don’t start speaking up, then this really is all we’re going to get: the biggest financial cover-up in history.”

Read the rest. 

It’s a long read, but well worth it.

The fact that all the big banks are criminal enterprises is now a surprise to anyone who reads the paper, but Taibbi’s description of Fleischmann’s experience with the so called regulators and so called authorities a searing indictment of the deeply craven and corrupt people at the Justice Department, particularly Eric “Place” Holder.

Pig Felching Rat Bastards of the Day

No Comments

Ford Motor Company, who fired about 100 workers by robocall over this weekend:

Nearly 100 workers at Ford’s Chicago Assembly Plant got a robocall on Halloween telling them their services were no longer needed and they were terminated.

It wasn’t a trick or a morbid prank.

Dozens of workers missed the call or didn’t believe it, so they showed up to work Saturday anyway, according to an autoworker who wished to remain anonymous. They found their ID badges had been disabled and were told by security they had been fired.

“As part of our normal business process, we’ve temporarily adjusted our workforce numbers at Chicago Assembly Plant,” Ford Motor Co. said in a statement.

Remember what I said about honey and rabid wolverines?

HR at Ford should get this treatment too.

I Want My Howard Dean!!!

No Comments

What Atrios says:

One thing that I think people tend to forget is that Howard Dean’s 50 state strategy wasn’t simply about fighting everywhere, it was about shoveling money out of DC before the vultures there could get their hands on it. It was about the idea that people who run campaigns out of Washington don’t know what the hell they’re doing, but that as long as the money was sitting there, candidates didn’t have much choice but to deal with them.

In case you doubt the wisdom of his words, note what some anonymous Democratic Party functionary asshat said about all this:

“This is a tsunami. Heads will roll at 1600. And if they don’t, shame,” the insider said, adding: “The president has 60 days to clean house, regrow his spine, and lay out an aggressive, centrist agenda. If he fails at any of those, he might as well just start writing his memoir.”

Note that in the same article, there is someone who gets it:

“Democratic operatives who refuse to acknowledge this is the White House’s fault are out of their f—— minds,” the operative said. “These operatives who don’t understand that the White House fucked up are the same hacks who overcharge House and Senate candidates for shitty consulting work and help lose elections year after year.”

The operative also said Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid hurt the party by delaying ambitious action on immigration and other hot-button issues to protect incumbent senators in southern states.

“It also doesn’t help that Dems completely broke their promise to enact immigration reform. Reid’s strategy of ‘no big bills’ this year that could protect [Arkansas Sen. Mark] Pryor, [North Carolina Sen. Kay] Hagan, and [Louisiana Sen. Mary] Landrieu obviously backfired,” the operative said. “They lost anyway, and we pissed off our base at the same time.”

Let me make a note here:  Were the Democratic Party to adopt a “F%#@ the South strategy”, much in the same way that Republicans have adopted a “F%$# New York City & Hollywood & San Francisco & Boston & non white Americans”, there really wound not be a down side.

Over the past 40 years, the Democratic Party has devoted increasing resources to keep its foothold in the white South, and that is simply not going to happen.

The dynamic that LBJ said over 50 years ago, “I’ll tell you what’s at the bottom of it. If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you. I’ll tell you what’s at the bottom of it. If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.“

We as a nation are not going to change this dynamic until we as a nation stop pandering to it.

Needless to Say, I Wish that I Wasn’t Right

1 Comment

The Republicans have taken over the Senate, as I predicted 12 days ago.

Needless to say, I am kind of bummed about being right.

I expect there to be pressure in the next Congress to impeach Obama, and in response, I expect Obama to try to gut Social Security and Medicare.

I would also lay even odds that, in the spirit of hope and change bipartizanship cowardice, Obama will end up sending troops back to Iraq.

We are unbelievably screwed.

Chickensh%$s on the World Stage

No Comments

As you are no doubt aware, anonymous sources at the White House called Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu a Chickensh%$.

There was a minor sh%$ storm over this, but reaction was, and is, “But he IS a complete chickensh%$?”

He’s a guy with no morals or vision who cannot look past the next election.

Then again, in the least surprising news of so far this week, email have leaked revealing that, despite their contemporaneous denials, the Obama administration was intimately involved in the firing of Shirley Sherrod:(Background here)

A 2010 e-mail from Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack says his department was “waiting for the go-ahead” from the White House before accepting the resignation of Shirley Sherrod, according to newly released documents, despite Obama administration assertions that her ouster was Vilsack’s decision alone.

The e-mail, which was made public Friday in an ongoing federal court case over the matter, shed more light on the evening of July 19, 2010, when the USDA hastily asked Sherrod to resign after a video showing her making supposed racist remarks surfaced on a conservative Web site. Her dismissal turned into a racial firestorm after it became clear that the video had been edited and her remarks were meant to tell a story of reconciliation.

Both the White House and Vilsack have repeatedly said that the agriculture secretary made the decision to ask for Sherrod’s resignation without White House input. The e-mails, along with earlier e-mails obtained by the Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act in 2010 and 2012, make it apparent that Vilsack wanted Sherrod to leave the department and ordered her resignation. But a newly released e-mail sent by Vilsack himself suggests that he was awaiting a decision from White House officials on how to proceed.

“She has offered her resignation which is appropriate,” reads an e-mail from the initials “TJV” to Dallas Tonsager, then the USDA undersecretary of rural development and Sherrod’s boss. Vilsack’s middle name is James. “The WH is involved and we are waiting for the go-ahead to accept her resignation. I suspect some direction from WH soon.”

Israel has a chickensh%$ Prime Minister, and the US has a chickensh%$ president.

Anyone who is surprised by either of these facts has been living under a rock.

Westboro Baptist is Going to be Fabulous, Whether they Like it or Not

No Comments

A federal judge has struck down the gay marriage ban in Kansas.

I am sure that those sociopaths at Westboro Baptist are feeling unhappy, and they deserve every bit of misery that the universe delivers to their door:

Federal Judge Daniel Crabtree today has found that a ban on same-sex marriage violates the violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Judge has placed a temporary, one-week stay on his ruling, until November 11, unless the State of Kansas indicates it will not appeal.

The ACLU had filed the suit, Marie v. Moser, after the U.S, Supreme Court refused to review any same-sex marriage cases, including those in the 10th Circuit’s purview, Utah and Oklahoma.

Kansas voted to add an amendment to its constitution banning same-sex marriage back in 2005.

“In the past year, nearly 50 different rulings have been issued from state and federal courts in favor of the freedom to marry for same-sex couples,” Freedom To Marry notes.

Same-sex couples in Kansas had a day to marry before the state Supreme Court place a stay on an October 9 ruling.

 Fabulous!

Yes, I Voted Today,

No Comments

This morning, before I went to work.

With the exception of voting for Peter Franchot as state comptroller, it was a thoroughly depressing lesser of two evils experience.

And now, I am watching MSNBC, where Rachel Maddow is so happy to be covering the election that it looks like she is having a newsgasm.