Free Republic

I think that we’re just starting to get the bioinformatics tools (and the general bio tools, like reasonably-priced, reasonably-fast sequencing, and mass-spectrographic proteomics) that will enable biome analyses.

It’s kind of where we were on genomes 10+ years ago, maybe even 20 years ago when the first ABI Prism was the rockin’ thing, if your lab could afford one (half a mill?), and the alternative was the Sanger slog....

There was an interesting paper in one of the bigs (Nature or Science) a few months back, that suggested (especially in press writeups) that a Chinese team had produced dramatic weight loss by resetting fat folks’ gut flora with traditional Chinese remedies.

I read it with interest, and wound up wondering how they ever published the paper. The experimental group as an N of 1 (the one experimental subject was a single 278 lb. man) and the control group appeared to have an N of 0. (i.e., there was no control group).

That’s many things, but it ain’t science. It doesn’t disprove the thesis either, and there are a number of things in this new paper that suggest there might actually be something to flora as either a cause or a consequence of obesity. You can’t see which way the arrow of causation points... yet.

The beauty of science is that they keep plugging till they understand. It’s brought us many wonders in these recent decades, and if the gov. doesn’t make a complete botch of it, it will bring us more wonders at an accelerating rate.

Still, most overweight Americans are overweight as a result of too little activity and too much intake... simple thermodynamics, not advanced biology.

What a tragic loss. America was greater for his life. May a merciful God welcome his Soul in Paradise.

Sorry I haven’t more to add. Haven’t posted in years. Still love you guys and gals.

That’s like the AP article that was headlined “Special operators to anti-Obama groups on bin Laden killing: zip it”:

http://www.stripes.com/news/special-operators-to-anti-obama-groups-on-bin-laden-killing-zip-it-1.186486

The one guy they quote is an SF officer, MAJ Lujan, who did spend 3 years as an ODA leader in 7th Group, with one Afghan tour, and has since polished his Dari and been deployed as an advisor once, while spending time at the Kennedy School at Harvard (aka Democrat’s Daycare) as a grad student and at West Point as a professor. His career shows that he’s really a politician in uniform: a stint as a volunteer on House committee Dem staff, involvement with the Democrats’ GWOT think-tank, the Center for a New American Security, etc.

Somehow they get from one guy, Lujan, to “Special Operators”. See Lujan’s bio here, and if you have the time to read the transcript his sucking up to GEN Keane will gag you.

https://www.foreignpolicyi.org/content/afghanistan-briefing-gen-jack-keane-usa-ret-and-maj-fernando-lujan-usa

In my experience, the graduates of the Military Academy are a bimodal distribution: studs and slugs. The former are dedicated to selfless service. The handful of Pointers we got in SF before it was a branch (i.e. when it was career suicide) were almost all this type. The latter are careerist knob-polishers, political and social climbers who are dedicated to serviceless self. A high percentage of the Pointers who have entered SF since it has become fashionable and career-boosting are this type of man.

I don’t know Major Lujan personally, but I have assigned him to one of those two bins tentatively. And I’m still hooting over the idea of a guy who’s got the uncontrollable camera-and-reporter reflex of Chuck Schumer invoking the ethos of the “quiet professional”.

Meanwhile, the Dems’ message is clear, if false:

“”And let’s not forget that this is the commander in chief who finally led the mission that brought Osama bin Laden to justice,” said [NH Dem Senator Jeane] Shaheen.”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dem-senator-obama-led-seals-mission-kill-bin-laden_650242.html

Mean Jeane was introducing Obama. (Incidentally, if you’re a vet in NH, a VA or other problem raised with her office gets a form letter occasionally, but ignored more usually).

He turned loose GEN Dempsey (I thought he was the weasel who, after Fort Hood, said “the shooting was unfortunate but it would be a tragedy if we let this affect our precious Diversity programs,” but that was a different d-bag, Casey) to explain how political speech is not OK (i.e., if it’s against his padrón).

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/21/dempsey-disappointed-by-anti-obama-campaign-by-ex-military-members/

Obama’s also run an ad suggesting that Mr Romney would not have greenlighted the mission. My personal belief is the he not only would have done it, it wouldn’t have taken multiple attempts to get the idea past Valerie Jarrett (aka the Cruella de Vil of Chicago slumladies).

To see where Obama stands on terrorism, look up what happened with a guy named Daqduq.

I am retired (sort of; my retirement orders are missing, with which Sen Shaheen has been zero assistance). But I am working in another capacity where I have frequent contact with serving SF and other SOF. At every level from selection candidate to stars. (Hang around long enough and the lieutenants you drank with are lieutenant generals or vice admirals). I am nobody special but had a Gump-like knack for being around the cats who turned out to be Distinguished Members of the Regiment.

The special ops veterans in groups like Special Operations Speaks and Special Opetarions OPSEC Education fund have been taking a lot of hits, and hav even been put on the President’s official Enemies List, which opens them up to such attacks as the IRS leaking their tax returns to Gawker:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/08/21/Obama-Adds-Military-Heroes-to-Enemies-List

The US Naval Institute has it right. when you’re retired (or a reservist out of uniform), you’re a citizen again, and the muzzle comes off.

http://blog.usni.org/2012/08/22/general-dempseys-disappointment-with-free-speech/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsniBlog+%28USNI+Blog%29

Update: The General (BG Neil Tolley) has said that he was speaking hypothetically, but in the indicative, so (to my amazement) Axe actually quoted him accurately. But NO SF went into Nork.

I’ll be posting this same thing to the others that replied to my posts. Still too busy to hang out here much, alas.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

The General (BG Neil Tolley) has said that he was speaking hypothetically, but in the indicative, so (to my amazement) Axe actually quoted him accurately. But NO SF went into Nork.

I’ll be posting this same thing to the others that replied to my posts. Still too busy to hang out here much, alas.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Guys,

rather than repeat my debunking of this on another thread, I’ll ask you to read my posts 57, 58 and 60 over there. In a word, this is a crock which one reporter created. Incompetence? Dishonesty? Pick one, he’s a reporter.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2888868/posts

Nobody. The blogger, David Axe, created this story. I’d bet my retirement it’s not what the general said at all. That much is clear from comparing the other guy’s report of the same panel.

This conference is where the top SOF guys (not just ours) get together with the gadget makers and schmooze. It’s a very important part of the puzzle in arming and equipping our guys (first our SOF, and then the stuff SOF proves out trickles down to regular soldiers and marines — like body armor, night vision, IR laser pointers, frequency hopping radios, .50 and .300 WM sniper rifles, and lots of stuff that’s still in the pipeline.

There are a lot of stories here, but SOCKOR is not going to go sneaking and peeking in the denied area. It will prepare for that, but only do it if war is on (or close).

Guys, here’s the original David Axe story that all these stories (the one on Yahoo, the one at Daily Caller) are based on. I’ve written the ed. of the DC with my real name and background in hopes he will correct his story.

http://the-diplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2012/05/28/u-s-commandos-spy-on-north-korea/

David Axe is NOT a trustworthy source on military affairs.

Without having been there, I read BG Tolley in Axe’s report as saying that in the event of war his forces would do SR (Strategic Reconnaissance), not that they are doing it now. He goes on to say that he’d like to have better sensors, DF-proof commo, and a wireless power system so as to unleash SR teams from betteries. Those are all reasonable requests and the audience at this conference includes the Tony Stary kind of guys who can do that kind of thing — if it’s possible at all.

It also includes a lot of foreign special operations officers from friendly and neutral nations — not the place where a very senior officer lets his freak flag fly.

Axe is jonesing for a scoop so badly, he connected some dots that don’t go together.

This post by the Tampa Bay Online military buff/blogger/reporter seems to reinforce that Tolley was talking about what he’d like to have in his quiver for wartime, NOT what he’s doing today.

http://www.tboblogs.com/index.php/news/comments/storm-the-swarm-soccent-deputy-chief-asks-for-technology-to-stop-threat-of-/

Deep breaths, people. The generals and admirals in charge of SOF are still on America’s side. So are the guys under them.

This whole thing is bull****, a fabrication (or an exaggeration stretched to the point of fabrication) by sensationalist blogger David Axe, whose byline is on the Diplomat piece. If you read the TBO blogger’s piece, BG Tolley is clearly talking conditionally. If we go to war, I want to put my men here, and some new gadgets you guys could invent and make would help me do that.

Axe misheard, or was stoned, or just wanted to make the story more exciting. That’s how he rolls. I thought he was going to be better after embedding, but he’s the same old hack.

Let's recap, shall we?

1. Obama's first message to vets comes on inauguration night, where he is the first president in fifty-six years to snub the Medal of Honor recipients' ball. He fobs Biden off on them instead. Democrats gloat... "That'll teach 'em."

2. Obama then floats a proposal to charge wounded warriors for treating their injuries... the better to provide free medical care to crimmigrants, I suppose. Vet haters (mostly inside the administration and media by now) celebrate.

3. Obama immediately cuts the DOD budget 11% while providing billions for every silly cause in perdition. American enemies breathe easier.

4. Obama unilaterally begins disassembling a functioning antimissile defense system. Putin sneers.

5. Obama orders the DOD not to use its most effective radar to track the NK missile launch. Kim doesn't even say thank you.

6. Obama pledges unilateral nuclear disarmament, sooner or later. Tyrants dance in glee.

7. Obama's holdover SECDEF cuts the knees out of our ability to deploy the coming smaller military, by canceling the C-17 along with several other vital weapons systems.

8. Obama's SECSTATE says that we can only solve pirate problems "with no loss of life," i.e. to the pirates.

9. Obama receives 17 or 18 briefings on the pirate standoff, votes "present." For days the Navy is forbidden to act... finally they are given "heads we take credit and tails you take blame" orders. When they act, the President who did all he could to inhibit them lunges for the credit.

10. Now Obama's bull-D DHS secretary publishes a report, written by an "analyst" with a long history at left-wing pressure groups, that calls our vets extremists and calls for them to be monitored.

11. Meanwhile, the NY Times (of all things) reveals that the Obama DHS and NSA (a DOD function) have blown past Bush-era restrictions on domestic spying. The Napolitano report tells us who they want to be spying on. (That would be us).

Boy, this guy sure supports the troops.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Only a PhD could come up with such an excessively complex way to dissmiss what's a much simpler movement.

In fact, American conservatism is a three-legged stool: social (mostly religious) conservatism, economic conservatism, and national-security conservatism. Most conservatives are more strongly one or two and not as much the other; for example, I'm mostly national-security and economic and less a socio-religious guy. But I want to work with social conservatives because we need all three legs of the stool. (Oh, and as far as national-security cons sitting the wars out -- I'm sure some did (and I don't mind, we need good engineers and teachers and businessmen, not just grunts) -- but there are just not a whole lot of liberals in my end of the war. You know, the end you get the combat infantryman badge for.

Most folks have narrower interests than an entire "party line" of conservatism, which is why many cons are uncomfortable with the Republicans. Mike Huckabee, to name a prominent figure, is primarily a socio-religious con; he's not very interested in national security and his economic positions are not conservative. But there are things Mike and I could work together on, even though his and my issues have a relatively small intersection. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is personally very religious/conservative but that is not a big part of his politics; he's primarily an econocon. I can work with Mitt on lots of things, too (and so could Mike. And so can you work with us).

None of us is ever going to get the perfect candidate, because none of us is going to get him- or herself. (Well, unless you're a bigger wheel than I am). But there are loads of people we can work with, including new faces we haven't met yet.

For me the irreducible issues are foreign security (a strong and agile military) and domestic security (and I see gun freedom as important in that). As long as you're not against my issues, and I'm not against yours, we can work together.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Heh.

Though no one was willing to divulge their name due to upcoming legal suits and the fear of being forced to return assets made through Madoff in earlier years, some did share their stories.

So let me get this straight: these chumps want us to bail them out for their losses from the scam, but they want to keep their gains from the scam?

To hell with these freeloaders. 95% loss was not enough.

Fortunately, the lawyers are involved now. That will suck up the remaining 5%.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Hoyt actually concluded that he would use the word “terrorist” more readily than reporters and editors do. He does explain, though, that Hamas can’t be terrorists because they are a social welfare organisation.

Dunno who told him that. Patty Murray maybe, who thinks that the reason Osama is popular in the Moslem world is because he builds day-care centers so that liberated Wahhabi feminists can crack the mud & straw ceiling.

If we can join the Times in calling Hamas a social welfare league, maybe we can reclassify Benito Mussolini as a railway schedules consultant, and Adolf Hitler as a civil engineer — after all, he built a lot of highways, and was responsible for the greatest urban renewal project in the 20th Century.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

The numbers you're seeing of $70/hr etc. are not what the worker gets in salary, but the "labor rate" which includes the burden of all labor costs, including the company's share of payroll taxes, health benefits, net present value of retirement benefits, and the current costs of retirees.

The dollar per hour wage is not too different between the UAWelfare plants and the Japanese transpants, but the benefits are much, much richer at the union plants, and the Japanese transplants are so new that they have almost no retirees to carry.

There are only maybe 300,000 actual union auto workers left, but the UAW also represents about a million widows and retirees. The difference between UAW wages and benefits, and, say, Honda or Nissan USA compensation adds less than $1,000 to the cost of production of an American-nameplate car; but the cost of retiree benefits (ALL those retiress depending on 'em!) adds nearly $2k more. So the Detroit company has to either charge $2.5-$3k more per car than Honda or Toyota (and you know they don't; given the Japanese cars' better reputation, the differential runs the other way). OR they have to "sweat" 2.5-3k in value out of the car -- which explains the cheap, shoddy interiors of Chryslers.

The engineers know how to design a car as good as the Japanese ones can, and Detroit build quality has, really, improved (maybe they put the right bums in the Job Bank). But nobody on Earth knows how to take $3k in value out of a car, and not have it show. So the Detroit cars have to sell for less than their competitors, and that means even more value has to come out. The companies can't even stop making cars, because it costs them the same for workers whether they are working or not, and the materials and components cost less than the cost of stopping and restarting production.

A lot of people are to blame for this problem today, not just the managers (although they screwed up), and not just the workers or the union (although the union seems intent on suicide-bombing the industry now). Congress deserves its share of the blame for CAFE requirements which require only the Detroit Three to make a lot of unwanted crummy econoboxes. They can't even count econoboxes they bring in from, say, Ford of England or Opel, they have to build them here. So, we've established that they need to sweat roughly $2.5 k out of every car, maybe they can with a $40k SUV, but how do they do it with a $12,000 crapbox?

They don't. They lose a fortune on each one, they shuffle them to rental agencies for forty cents on the dollar and the rental agencies dump them in a year at low auction prices, depressing resale prices of privately owned cars.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

If you mean Newburyport or West Newbury, MA, power appeared to have only cut for a short time; digital clocks needed resetting, is all.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Why should we send our sons to die for BO, Rahm E., Reid, Pelosi, et all?

M'dear, you're asking the wrong question, and this is pretty close to what you will hear if you ask those stalwart young Pointers of your acquaintance.

Nobody fights for any politician, let alone such empty suits as those you name. Look at the people around them -- passive-aggressive dweebs who shrank from military service but play tough guy, grifters like Rahm Emanuel. You don't swear an oath to any man, but to the Constitution, and that and the flag and your unit's symbols and traditions give you something to be proud of, without the taint that corrupt politicians bear.

Everybody fights for his unit and men, for the guy beside him, for the gutsy guys you can read about all the time at defenselink.mil or better yet USASOC News Service. To serve with guys like the ones in this story is all the reward any real man needs. You're in the right unit when you have to put in 100% just to keep up, and you worry that the other guys are too good for you (while they all have just the same worry themselves).

Remenber, these Special Forces soldiers are the beneficiaries of generations of trainers and mentors who soldiered through some bleak times for the regiment and served under some pretty contemptible politicians. Where would they be if all of the leaders had quit under Carter, or Clinton? The politicians are, to an SF operator, a factor like the weather. You can't change it so you adapt to it as best you can, and if it's really bad, hunker down and wait for it to pass.

If, God forbid, your son or your friend's should fall, he will not have fallen for "unbelievable corruption." He had fallen in fealty to his oath and in the traditions of his other parents, the Army and the Long Gray Line; and even as the lifelong ordeal of mourning begins for one family, another mother's son steps into the phalanx in his place.

We all come into life owing God one death. The soldier is a rara avis in that he can have some say in the manner in which that divine debt is repaid.

I hope this helps you, even if only a little. I understand and sympathize with your concerns and fears. May Fortune continue to smile on your son for many, many years.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Shinseki did away with the ‘green’ berets and everyone was to wear black so everyone would be equal.

Fortunately, you are misinformed. Qualified members of US Army Special Forces still wear the same rife-green beret that they have (unofficially) since the 1950s and (officially) since it was awarded by Executive Order. In fact, generals can't change that, they'd have to get a new XO.

Also, the Airborne forces (primarily, the 82nd Airborne Division and the 173rd Airborne Brigade) still wear the red beret, as do those who serve in SF but are not SF qualified.

The Rangers, the original owners of the black beret, were permitted to change to a tan beret after much protest, including a Ranger march on DC.

Gen Rick Shinseki did not cover himself in glory when he gave the leg Army a "social promotion." He made the decision unilaterally and then wouldn't defend it publicly, hiding behind his sergeant major, Jack Tilley's, skirts. It was an astonishing display of moral cowardice and, given the lie after lie Tilley deployed to defend the stupid move, reflected poorly on Tilley's integrity, and Shinseki's judgment and integrity.

But, we're now into the fourth generation or so of new privates (and LTs) who have only known the black-beret Army. The berets didn't turn the pogues into Rangers, but seven years of combat for all has done wonders for the quality of training and preparedness in the whole army, including the combat support and service support troopies.

I wish Shinseki well in his role in VA but don't trust him, and as I've said, have a low opinion of his judgment and integrity. I've been privileged to serve under generals who would throw their stars in the dumpster before they'd lie to their officers and men. And I've served under Shinseki. The Venn diagram shows no intersection, dig?

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

PS: I didn't note who the poster was, but as far as Arc Lights are concerned: we're trying to win this war, not lose it. The Russians used the Arc Light approach (there are still depopulated ghost towns in the western desert between Kandahar and Shindand) and see where it got 'em? They lost 13,000 of their own people and hundreds of thousands of their Afghan allies, they laid waste the entire land, and both the bad (takeover) and the good (modernization) that they were trying to do didn't get done.

So yes, sometimes we send men to sneak into a village, they pad up on their feet or HALO in, and grab one guy who's a troublemaker, or one group of guys, and sometimes stealth doesn't work and there's a fight on.

But we can't just blow hob out of the place. Think about this: our guys knew there was an enemy there. How did they know? Did they have a friend or many friends in the village that snuck word out, perhaps? Should we kill our loyal friend to get a bad guy? Should we kill half his extended family? And turn them, in their grief and rage, into more enemies? Or should we take some risks, standing on our legs like men, and show them that we do not shrink from what it takes to beat them at their own game?

PPS: neverdem, many thanks for the ping. - C18F

“My dad is not a criminal!” sobbed one courtroom observer after the verdicts were read.

True, kid. He's a terrorist. And if we had any sense of self-preservation as a society, not to mention, any stones, we'd have simply given him a drumhead court-martial and shot him some rosy dawn.

These creeps still want to force-feed us Sharia: a legal code with no speech, religion, or women's rights. I say, if you want Sharia, go to jail or go home.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

Think of it as a problem in economics, which is, as we all know, the science of allocation of scarce resources. And what resource is more precious, to members of the media, than the momentary attention of Obama?

The problem is, of course, it’s not physically possible for all the willing little mouths to fellate him at once. They have to alternate.

Now, one could let the reporters work it out among themselves; one could simply call on the most strident or urgent; or one (The One) could have central planning. Never much doubt as to which way Obama rolls.

It’s funny when the NYT or somebody writes, “according to reports in Libya’s state-controlled media...” I mean, what’s the difference? The so-called men and women in that room could not have been any more subservient to Obama if he owned them outright.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F