Rowhouse Logic - Breathtaking Inanity

Wolcott:

The warbloggers profess to be outraged, sickened, and appalled by Mideast violence yet increasingly are giving vent to their own violent fantasies directed at domestic foes, whom they consider traitors, appeasers, etc. They fantasize about their least favorite bloggers being beheaded, or hanging liberal traitors from lamp posts should there be another terrorist attack. Sites like Little Green Footballs, Atlas Shrugs, and their ilk have a lynch-mob mentality that has gotten uglier as the situation in Iraq has worsened. They blame Cindy Sheehan (recently voted “Idiotarian of the Year” at LGF), Michael Moore, and liberal Democrats for how badly the war has gone because they don’t have the courage and honesty to blame the real architects of failure: Rumsfeld, who went to war with too few troops to carry out an occupation; Wolfowitz and the rest of the neocon brain trust, who assured Americans that the invasion would be greeted with flowers and candy, and the war would pay for itself through oil revenues; the U.S. military, which didn’t anticipate a strong insurgency and arrogantly ran roughshod over the Iraqi people early in the occupation, enflaming the insurgency even more; and Bush himself, who in a moment of almost sociopathic hubris, taunted the insurgency with the three words that should be chiseled in disgrace on the wall of his future presidential library: “Bring ‘em on.”he warbloggers profess to be outraged, sickened, and appalled by Mideast violence yet increasingly are giving vent to their own violent fantasies directed at domestic foes, whom they consider traitors, appeasers, etc. They fantasize about their least favorite bloggers being beheaded, or hanging liberal traitors from lamp posts should there be another terrorist attack. Sites like Little Green Footballs, Atlas Shrugs, and their ilk have a lynch-mob mentality that has gotten uglier as the situation in Iraq has worsened. They blame Cindy Sheehan (recently voted “Idiotarian of the Year” at LGF), Michael Moore, and liberal Democrats for how badly the war has gone because they don’t have the courage and honesty to blame the real architects of failure: Rumsfeld, who went to war with too few troops to carry out an occupation; Wolfowitz and the rest of the neocon brain trust, who assured Americans that the invasion would be greeted with flowers and candy, and the war would pay for itself through oil revenues; the U.S. military, which didn’t anticipate a strong insurgency and arrogantly ran roughshod over the Iraqi people early in the occupation, enflaming the insurgency even more; and Bush himself, who in a moment of almost sociopathic hubris, taunted the insurgency with the three words that should be chiseled in disgrace on the wall of his future presidential library: “Bring ‘em on.”

What comes of this adventure? Surely I don’t know. Should the adventure end in some grand miracle by day’s end, some 2212 American soldiers will still be quite dead and some 15955 more will be wounded - often in ways that are too uncomfortable to see let alone live with. Far more will suffer psychological damage that only veterans really know. Due to the failed state of he US Department of Veterans Affairs, we should all expect to see at least a few of them, presenting an irrational front and begging for change at our local subway station in the very near future (tomorrow?). To quote Ricky Watters “For who, for what?”

When we look back on this era and this war as old men and women, my guess is that we’ll be tempted to dismiss it as minor. That is of course, assuming that nothing catastrophic occurs before all is said and done. Numbers, with no analysis, can mask awful truths.

The American military is so far in advance of any other on the face of the earth that mass casualties like those endured in Vietnam, Korea and the First and Second World Wars are almost entirely out of the question. The training and the equipment (even the defective stuff) is amazing. The American military, as it stands now, was designed to capture Moscow - mid nuclear war. No joke. In reality, no fighting force this world has ever known can stand face to face with the American military and expect anything other than complete annihilation.

This, of course leads to guerilla tactics, for which the military seems oddly unprepared. Such tactics are quite effective against a vastly superior force. One could take an hour and read just about any eighth grade history textbook and gain a decent understanding of this. Guerilla tactics are, after all, the reason Pennsylvania and New York are no longer part of the British Empire.

The leadership of our country will, sadly, occupy their seats of power for some years to come. Perhaps we should consider donating them some eighth grade history texts in the hopes they may glean a little understanding of the foe they have chosen. Of course, should that to happen, it would be far, far too late.

For Who? For What? Those are damn fine questions at this stage of the game. Granted, they would have been more effective had they been vigorously pursued by those with the power to ask such questions. To ask truth from power is no sin and, in my mind, it represents the defining quality of a great American.

Democracy. This is a word that speaks to the inner reaches of most socially aware Americans. Our nation is, in reality, a republic, but the concept of democracy is our holy grail. It’s what makes us tear up watching fireworks on the Fourth of July or gazing at the humble building where our great nation was formed by men whose lives and livelihood were at risk of punishment by death for even being in a place where such radicalism was discussed. That radicalism was for us.

Our Republic did not come to us by accident or by coercion. Much force was required to expel those who thought our crazed notions were violations of the law of both King and God. Our forefathers, even with all of their many faults, believed more of humanity than any major governing body ever had in the history of civilized human societies. They were right. All humanity deserves the chance to prove that this is so.

Straying away from ideals for a moment, there are very few instances where a just and serious republican form government has evolved when the guns are aimed by an occupying force. Surely Germany and Japan are exceptions, but the building blocks of democracy were already in place in both those nations. Democracy thrives on the sweeping dream of people who believe in the greatness of humanity. Democracy can only exist in places where a large middle class exists. Representative government breaks out in the presence of a sizable middle class because that middle class has vested interest in both stability and effective government.

Is this the case in Iraq?

In truly harsh places, representative government breaks out rarely and when more than a few people are willing to stand up and take a bullet - their heads filled with the nobility of humanity. Their heads filled with lead.
More later…I’m sleepy

As many of you are well aware, I’m just about as lazy a lazy bastard as you’ll ever find. It’s a wonder I manage to bathe myself let alone hold a steady job. So you can imagine the wave of joy that swept over me when I learned that the Army is planning to provide propaganda to bloggers free of charge. You read that right. FREE!

Word comes from RL that the Army has hired PR firm Hass MS&L of Detroit to offer “exclusive editorial content” to blogs willing to run government propaganda.

“The Army believes that military blogs are a valuable medium for reaching out,” account executive Charlie Kondek has written to a number of pro-military blogs in a January 6 Email.

“To that end, the Army plans to offer you and selected bloggers exclusive editorial content on a few issues you’re likely to be interested in,” Kondek says. The Email has been mentioned in Black Five, One Hand Clapping and Fuzzilicious Thinking.

I’m not sure I know what the think of this. Military families are increasingly relying on soldier blogs and support networks based on blogs to keep in touch, and maybe this is an innocuous way for the Army to push its “public affairs” content to the new medium.

But the “content” under discussion, an Army public affairs officer tells me, is not the nitty gritty of deployments and living conditions overseas. It is planned to be an official counter to the perceived unwillingness of the mainstream media to report the “good news” from Iraq and the war on terror.

I was getting sick of sticking to my principals anyway. It’s just so much work and it bores the shit out of the neighbors. You know what be extra special super duper great? If the army would include a George Bush action figure with Kung Fu grip with every blogger propaganda packet. All the kids at my cubicle farm would be so jealous.

Via The Poor Man

I’m not going to attempt to make a grand point here, but I’m curious about what sort of degenerative psychological disorder leaves a moral person comfortable seeing their efforts described as “Pro-War Activism.”

I picked up this image from an article entitled “Some Conservatives Return to Old Argument” in the Wall Street Journal which describes the sort of disconnect amongst professional conservatives (in the professional wrestling way) that one wouldn’t wish on the cruel or the beastly. Alas, they are well paid for their delusions, but that knowledge doesn’t change the fact that there are many among us who believe and believe well. The men and women in spandex who are willing to go to the mat for insanity and for war, if the price is right, are not as troubling to me tonight as those who believe that their wrestling heroes are not frauds. What do we do about that?

(Via some guy you have never heard of)

As you know I’m on something of a hiatus, but I just saw something on Altercation that I wanted to share with those of you who may have missed it. No, it’s nothing to giggle about, but I’ve never been good at appropriate titles.

First off, have a look at the biographical blurb that appears at the bottom of this Martin van Creveld piece in the Forward:

Martin van Creveld, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University, is author of “Transformation of War” (Free Press, 1991). He is the only non-American author on the U.S. Army’s required reading list for officers.

Pretty decent credentials - the only non-American author who is required reading for officers serving in the United States army. If I was to guess, I’d probably say that he must be a pretty serious guy with something more than a decent understanding of military history. So what to make of this?

For misleading the American people, and launching the most foolish war since Emperor Augustus in 9 B.C sent his legions into Germany and lost them, Bush deserves to be impeached and, once he has been removed from office, put on trial along with the rest of the president’s men. If convicted, they’ll have plenty of time to mull over their sins.

Damn. That’s pretty harsh. I’d like to add that I think the Iraq War is the most batshit crazy war since Emperor Caligula sent his legions to war against the sea god Neptune, returning to Rome with a bounty of sea shells.

Moving right along, have a peek at this rather bleak assessment:

Confronted by a demoralized army on the battlefield and by growing opposition at home, in 1969 the Nixon administration started withdrawing most of its troops in order to facilitate what it called the “Vietnamization” of the country. The rest of America’s forces were pulled out after Secretary of State Henry Kissinger negotiated a “peace settlement” with Hanoi. As the troops withdrew, they left most of their equipment to the Army of the Republic of South Vietnam — which just two years later, after the fall of Saigon, lost all of it to the communists.

Clearly this is not a pleasant model to follow, but no other alternative appears in sight.

Whereas North Vietnam at least had a government with which it was possible to arrange a cease-fire, in Iraq the opponent consists of shadowy groups of terrorists with no central organization or command authority. And whereas in the early 1970s equipment was still relatively plentiful, today’s armed forces are the products of a technology-driven revolution in military affairs. Whether that revolution has contributed to anything besides America’s national debt is open to debate. What is beyond question, though, is that the new weapons are so few and so expensive that even the world’s largest and richest power can afford only to field a relative handful of them.

Therefore, simply abandoning equipment or handing it over to the Iraqis, as was done in Vietnam, is simply not an option. And even if it were, the new Iraqi army is by all accounts much weaker, less skilled, less cohesive and less loyal to its government than even the South Vietnamese army was. For all intents and purposes, Washington might just as well hand over its weapons directly to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Clearly, then, the thing to do is to forget about face-saving and conduct a classic withdrawal.

To be sure, there is plenty in the article to piss off just about everybody and I’ll freely admit to a little cherry picking. What the hell? This is Dick Cheney’s America and I’m just trying to do my part. Silliness aside, the article is really quite devastating and well worth a read, so get to it.

Anyway, back to my hiatus for a bit.

Just another success story in George Bush’s global war on stability and reason. The Independent:

The speaker of the fledgling Iraqi parliament has announced a 24-hour extension to talks over the country’s new constitution on a day of renewed sectarian infighting that left at least 40 people dead.

Hajim al-Hassani declared the second extension to negotiations shortly after the midnight deadline. “We found that time was late and we saw that the matters will need another day in order to reach results that please everyone, ” he said.

The chaos inside the new legislature continued against the background of another surge in violence.

The latest bloodshed ­ including the deaths of 13 policemen and an American ­ came after dozens of masked gunmen occupied parts of Baghdad. President Jalal Talabani escaped an assassination attempt in which eight of his bodyguards were killed and 15 injured. In further evidence of sectarian unrest, the bodies of 36 men, thought to be Kurds, were found in a dry river bed near the Iranian border at Badrah. They had been “executed” with shots to the head.

And still some question the sanity of those who question this madness. I can’t even begin to fathom the mindset. Objective reality does exist, doesn’t it?

That’s my perfectly unqualified response to the question Billmon asks in the title of his post Is Anybody Listening? My gut reaction was to say no, but I think that doesn’t give enough credit to people who are genuinely concerned, so I hedged.

In the post, Billmon focuses on Safia Taleb al-Souhail, Iraq’s ambassador to Egypt who was used, willingly, as prop in last February’s State of the Union Address. Given that the draft Iraq constitution appears to establish something not entirely unlike an Islamic theocracy, hostile to woman’s rights, Al-Souhail is feeling a bit queasy about the mess that is Iraq and the mess that is Bush.

This story is much deeper than one woman’s change of heart about all, or even a little, that is Bush. Should the Iraq constitution result in something less spectacular than a full blown civil war, will anybody, but a few notice that our nation has sold another down the river by replacing oppression and brutality with more of the same? Can that compete with the heart warming madness of the staged embrace between a grieving Marine’s mother and a woman who believed her nation might soon be free from brutality because the most powerful man on earth told her so?

No, not really. We are just that far gone.

Nothing I can add to this one. Enjoy.

Herbert:

Writing about Vietnam in the foreword to David Halberstam’s book “The Best and the Brightest,” Senator John McCain said:

“It was a shameful thing to ask men to suffer and die, to persevere through god-awful afflictions and heartache, to endure the dehumanizing experiences that are unavoidable in combat, for a cause that the country wouldn’t support over time and that our leaders so wrongly believed could be achieved at a smaller cost than our enemy was prepared to make us pay.”

That point is no less relevant now. The administration is not willing to commit to an all-out effort to defeat the insurgents in Iraq, and is equally unwilling to reverse course and bring the troops home. Most Americans are abandoning the idea that the war can be “won.” Polls are showing that they’re tired of the conflict and its relentlessly mounting toll. It’s hard to imagine that the population at large will be willing to sacrifice thousands of additional American lives over several more years in pursuit of goals that remain as murky as ever.

…

The administration has never been straight with the public about the war, and there’s no reason to believe it will start being honest now. There is a desperate need for a serious national conversation about alternatives to the Bush approach in Iraq, which is tantamount to a permanent American military presence in that country.

The president, ensconced in a long vacation, exemplifies the vacuum of leadership on this crucial issue, which demands nothing less than the sustained attention of the wisest men and women the U.S. has to offer. They could be politicians, academics, civic or religious leaders, corporate executives - whoever. The longer they remain on the sidelines, the longer the carnage in Iraq will continue.

I hate to blockquote and extract from this one as it deprives it of its power. Please do go read the whole thing.

If you’d like to hear it, Joe Trippi has posted the audio from a blogger conference call conducted with Cindy Sheehan earlier today. While I was invited, I wasn’t able to listen in live. For some background on Cindy Sheehan, have a look at this post by Will Bunch and this one by Shakespeare’s Sister. Matt, who did participate, has a rundown on the call which is well worth a read. Go have a look. Albert also has a nice post about the confernce call which is also well worth a read.

Matt asks a very good question about this:

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Aug. 10 - Armed men entered Baghdad’s municipal building during a blinding dust storm on Monday, deposed the city’s mayor and installed a member of Iraq’s most powerful Shiite militia.

In light of some recent events, this passage from the Iliad seems more appropriate than it did last week.

But the son of Peleus again began railing at the son of Atreus, for he was still in a rage. “Wine-bibber,� he cried, “with the face of a dog and the heart of a hind, you never dare to go out with the host in fight, nor yet with our chosen men in ambuscade. You shun this as you do death itself. You had rather go round and rob his prizes from any man who contradicts you. You devour your people, for you are king over a feeble folk; otherwise, son of Atreus, henceforward you would insult no man. Therefore I say, and swear it with a great oath- nay, by this my sceptre which shalt sprout neither leaf nor shoot, nor bud anew from the day on which it left its parent stem upon the mountains- for the axe stripped it of leaf and bark, and now the sons of the Achaeans bear it as judges and guardians of the decrees of heaven- so surely and solemnly do I swear that hereafter they shall look fondly for Achilles and shall not find him. In the day of your distress, when your men fall dying by the murderous hand of Hector, you shall not know how to help them, and shall rend your heart with rage for the hour when you offered insult to the bravest of the Achaeans.�

Nothing too surprising here, which makes it all the more disheartening.

Interrogators at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, forced a stubborn detainee to wear women’s underwear on his head, confronted him with snarling military working dogs and attached a leash to his chains, according to a newly released military investigation that shows the tactics were employed there months before military police used them on detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

The techniques, approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld for use in interrogating Mohamed Qahtani — the alleged “20th hijacker” in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks — were used at Guantanamo Bay in late 2002 as part of a special interrogation plan aimed at breaking down the silent detainee.

Military investigators who briefed the Senate Armed Services Committee yesterday on the three-month probe, called the tactics “creative” and “aggressive” but said they did not cross the line into torture.

The report’s findings are the strongest indication yet that the abusive practices seen in photographs at Abu Ghraib were not the invention of a small group of thrill-seeking military police officers. The report shows that they were used on Qahtani several months before the United States invaded Iraq.

The investigation also supports the idea that soldiers believed that placing hoods on detainees, forcing them to appear nude in front of women and sexually humiliating them were approved interrogation techniques for use on detainees.

Creative use of the word “creative” if you ask me.

I know it’s pointless to quote Kos, since most everyone will have read the post long before they see it here. This one is just about perfect, so I’ll do it anyway.

The best way to tell the anti-war folks to fuck off would be to succeed. Pacify Afghanistan. Defeat the insurgency in Iraq. Destroy Al Qaida.

But that would require a level of competence utterly and completely absent in this administration.

Enough said.

In recent months I’ve gotten away from the practice of showing gruesome pictures of the Iraq war on this website. This is something I used to do on a fairly regular basis. There are a number of good reasons for this, but good reasons aside, and to be perfectly honest, my stomach just can’t take it right now. This is probably shallow - I know.

Anyway, should I choose to resume running war pictures, I’ve decided I’ll use one line from the original Downing Street Memo as the caption for all of them - “There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.” And so it goes.

From the Guardian:

A key Foreign Office diplomat responsible for liaising with UN inspectors says today that claims the government made about Iraq’s weapons programme were “totally implausible”.

He tells the Guardian: “I’d read the intelligence on WMD for four and a half years, and there’s no way that it could sustain the case that the government was presenting. All of my colleagues knew that, too”.

Carne Ross, who was a member of the British mission to the UN in New York during the run-up to the invasion, resigned from the FO last year, after giving evidence to the Butler inquiry.

The whole story was indeed totally implausible, but you probably already knew that. Moving right along…

The mission is opaque. Clear enough?

Taking some inspiration from Kos, I’ve decided to send some certified letters to prominent pro-war Christian ministers, asking them to support the war they support by enlisting their flock. This is the first, and will be sent to Jerry Falwell via certified mail tomorrow morning. I’ll eagerly await his reply and you can be sure I’ll post whatever I get here.

Dr. Jerry Falwell
Thomas Road Baptist Church
701 Thomas Rd
Lynchburg, VA 24514

Dear Dr. Falwell,

I am writing you today to discuss the recent recruitment shortages being experienced by our nation’s military. As you are well aware, a strong nation, in time of war, needs every able-bodied young man and woman to commit to serving in its armed forces. Sadly, the situation, as it stands today, is quite grave. As I’m sure you’re aware, the Army missed it’s recruitment goal for the month of May by some twenty five percent. This cannot stand.

As the leader of one of our nation’s most prominent Christian Ministries, and as a person who has stated that our nation’s war in Iraq is just in the eyes of God, I feel as though you could make a significant contribution to our country’s war effort by urging your flock to join the ranks of the military. The members of your youth ministry alone, could go a long way towards helping to stem the tide of depletions within the ranks of our nation’s military. I would imagine that these young recruits would constitute some of the finest in all of the branches, in that they would understand, by way of your tutelage, the moral righteousness of their undertaking.

Additionally, as the chancellor of Liberty University, you have the opportunity to influence numerous young adults to join the military and help us finally turn the corner in Iraq. If I may be so bold, I would suggest that you offer a combination of earned credits and scholarships to any Liberty University students who adhere to your call that they serve their country in uniform. I must admit to some confusion as to why you have not already taken these, or similar, steps. Knowing that you are man of integrity, I’m not certain why a person of your influence would not guide his flock towards military service in Iraq. Nevertheless, I’m certain it was merely an oversight and I look forward to the real results a Christian man of your stature can bring.

Having been raised in the Presbyterian Church, which tends to advocate peace at nearly all costs, I fear that I may not fully understand all of your teachings with regards to this or any war. I am, however, no theologian so I must ultimately bow to your knowledge of God’s will with regards to war. I would look forward to any personal correspondence which would serve to enlighten me on these matters, and look forward to your efforts to help the war.

Sincerely,

Christopher D. Baldwin

Since there is a core constituency in this county which believes that the Iraq war is right beyond question, they need to step up to the plate, deliver and put their lives where their mouths are by joining the armed services. As Gen. JC Christian is already working on young Republicans, I’ll turn my attention to pro-war Christian preachers.

While I find the idea of a pro-war Christian minister disturbing on all too many levels, if our society is to house such individuals, they should put their believers where their mouths are. Either that, or preach something less discordant and altogether less destructive. I’ll be doing any number of these letters over the coming weeks, because the environment is, as some might say, target rich. I intend, and will try, to be polite, as that is my nature. Should you choose to join in, I certainly don’t ask the same of you.

The reality is this, we have a recruitment situation in the midst of a major war which is simply unsustainable. Something has to break. Right now, the things breaking, are the lives of our active duty military and reservists, who are being called upon to serve tours of duty which are unrealistic and unreasonable. What’s breaking is our nation’s ability to defend itself as effectively as it otherwise could, should a major new threat arise. What’s breaking are the families of our military personnel, who are forced to live with reduced income and the chance that their loved one will be next. What’s broken are the families who have already lost far too much - lost that which cannot be regained. What’s broken is Iraq and its people who have suffered horrific casualties, and whose prospects for a fruitful future dies just a little more with each explosion, gunshot, lost home, lost life and destroyed dream.

If you would like to send a letter of your own to Dr. Falwell, the address provided is acurate. Get to work.

If you still aren’t up to speed on the Downing Street Memo, have a look at this article in the Village Voice. It’s very short and not very detailed, but it highlights many of the key points and you can read it in under 2 minutes.

Matt is live blogging the Conyers Hearing. Go have a look.

Some more from the live chat with Michael Smith:

The attitude they have taken is just flat wrong, to borrow an expression from the White House spokesman on the Downing St Memo.

It is one thing for the New York Times or the Washington Post to say that we were being told that the intelligence was being fixed by sources inside the CIA or Pentagon or the NSC and quite another to have documentary confirmation in the form of the minutes of a key meeting with the Prime Minister’s office. Think of it this way, all the key players were there. This was the equivalent of an NSC meeting, with the President, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Condi Rice, George Tenet, and Tommy Franks all there. They say the evidence against Saddam Hussein is thin, the Brits think regime change is illegal under international law so we are going to have to go to the UN to get an ultimatum, not as a way of averting war but as an excuse to make the war legal, and oh by the way we arent preparing for what happens after and no-one has the faintest idea what Iraq will be like after a war. Not reportable, are you kidding me?

On the lack of preparation:

I am very pro-defence you’re right. All right-thinking people should be. Saddam Hussein might not have been the threat he was painted but there are plenty out there who would be given the chance. As the 9/11 commission showed, America let its defences drop and got caught with a sucker punch. That shows the need to keep up your defences.

We in Europe rely too often on America to bail us out, even if occasionally you come a bit late to the party! Defence budgets are repeatedly cut over here with the armed forces being asked to do more and more. As some of you may have guessed by now before I became a journalist, I served in the army. That makes me all the more angry when people fight wars they dont need to and kill people who dont need to be killed, not least because it is never the politicians who get killed it is the ordinary soldiers.

Bin Laden is a legitimate target, Iraq, even an Iraq led by Saddam Hussein, was not. This was an illegal war but the most criminal part of it all was the lazy, arrogant way they went into it. (British tanks crossing the start lines, in a war being fought about WMD, did not even have any chemical or biological filters fitted because the Ministry of Defence failed to buy them in time.)

Just look at all those memos again, dont look for fixed intelligence, dont look for illegality. Just look at the lack of preparation, look how right all those experts who said it would all turn out badly were and then wonder how many British and American soldiers died because those politicians were too arrogant to take the advice of the experts.

On the questions over the word “fixed”:

There are number of people asking about fixed and its meaning. This is a real joke. I do not know anyone in the UK who took it to mean anything other than fixed as in fixed a race, fixed an election, fixed the intelligence. If you fix something, you make it the way you want it. The intelligence was fixed and as for the reports that said this was one British official. Pleeeaaassee! This was the head of MI6. How much authority do you want the man to have? He has just been to Washington, he has just talked to George Tenet. He said the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. That translates in clearer terms as the intelligence was being cooked to match what the administration wanted it to say to justify invading Iraq. Fixed means the same here as it does there. More leaks? I do hope so and the more Blair and Bush lie to try to get themselves off the hook the more likely it is that we will get more leaks.