April 2011 – Page 38 – Public Intelligence Blog

Phi Beta Iota: A young man sought advice on whether to join the US secret intelligence world despite its many ethical issues and poor leadership. Below is the answer as provided to us by Robert Steele, to whom the email was addressed. The inquiring email is below the line.

To Anonymous:

This is simple. Continue with your plans to apply for a position with the US Government in secret intelligence. The easiest is via the military as an officer, and frankly, I recommend that because it gives you a unique grounding as a young leader, an understanding of the military mind-set, world travel, etcetera. Joining CIA directly if they take you (they are moderately desperate) has its prospects, but on balance, I would recommend that you invest four years as an officer on active duty, followed by four to eight years at CIA. Treat it as FUN, and a reality learning experience.

As simply as possible, as bad as they are, there is no substitute for the real experience and it is a privilege to work in secret intelligence, completely irrespective of how unethical and reality stupid its leaders might be.

I do NOT recommend the FBI, nor do I recommend the private sector. Think in terms of a 30-40 year career. Getting the clearances is much easier if you go in to government first, and they are worth $20K a year above and beyond normal salaries, should you choose to stay in the secret world.

Two key points:

1) One day we will create a Smart Nation, and those who fully understand both the benefits and the pathologies of secret intelligence will have an important role to play.

2) If you keep your own integrity, and treat this as a learning and observation experience, the loss of integrity by the US intelligence community leaders should not dissuade you from undertaking what is sure to be one of the most satisfying experiences of your life. Illusions and pathologies aside, secret intelligence is as cool as it gets, you will learn a great deal, and it will make you stronger for the future.

Happy to answer any additional questions. As long as you keep it in perspective, if you can get in, you should.

Semper Fidelis,
Robert

Continue reading “Letter to a Young Man: Join the Secret World”

2011/04/03

Cyber-IO: A New Form of Governance?

Advanced Cyber/IO, Civil Society, Collective Intelligence, Cultural Intelligence, InfoOps (IO), Methods & Process, Mobile, Technologies

Information and Communication Technology in Areas of Limited Statehood: A New Form of Governance?

I recently had the distinct pleasure of participating in a fascination workshop on “Information and Communication Technology in Areas of Limited Statehood: A New Form of Governance?” The workshop was organized by the Frei Universität’s program on Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood and co-directed by Professors Gregor Walter-Drop and Steven Livingston.

. . . . . .

My colleague Gregory Asmolov made the link explicit during his excellent presentation on “Russian Wildfires and Alternative Modes of Governance: The Role of Crowdsourcing in Areas of Limited Statehood.” Here’s a summary:

“Because of it’s geographical size, high degree of corruption, and reliance on an extraction economy, governance by government in Russia is often weak and ineffective. Russian political expert Liliya Shevtzova goes so far as to claim that the current regime is an imitation of governance. The 2010 wildfires demonstrated the limited capacity of the state to provide effective emergency response. Information technologies, and crowdsourcing platforms in particular, fulfill the gap of the limited statehood. At the same time, however, the Russian government is also trying to use ICT to increase its claims to effective governance.”

Read full posting….

Phi Beta Iota: This post is much more than a post. To the best of our (naturally limited) knowledge, this is the first and the best statement that clearly distinguished among “imitation governance,” spontaneous “self-governance,” and the role that information technology plays in making a mockery of the first and a reality of the second.

2011/04/032011/04/03

Graphic: Holistic Analytics for Nuclear-Climate

03 Environmental Degradation, 05 Energy, 07 Other Atrocities, 08 Proliferation, 11 Society, 12 Water, Advanced Cyber/IO, Analysis, Balance, Budgets & Funding, Citizen-Centered, Communities of Practice, Earth Intelligence, Earth Orientation, Ethics, History, Leadership-Integrity, Multinational Plus, Peace Intelligence, Policies-Harmonization, Processing, Reform, Strategy-Holistic Coherence, Threats, Tribes, True Cost

Thinking Holistically Energy Central 3 April 2011 JPEG — Click on Image to Enlarge

2011/04/03

The Limits of Air Power

04 Inter-State Conflict, 05 Civil War, 10 Security, 11 Society, Cultural Intelligence, Government, Military

editor spinney time — Chuck Spinney Recommends...

A really excellent piece of work by my good friend Andrew Cockburn.

Los Angeles Times
April 3, 2011

The Limits Of Air Power

Wars cannot be won with precision bombings alone. NATO's air war against Serbia is often touted as a success, but even that took longer than predicted and the cease-fire terms were unchanged.

By Andrew Cockburn

No one following the record of air power as an instrument of national whim should be surprised that Moammar Kadafi's army remains apparently uncowed, even driving Libyan rebels back in headlong retreat despite an onslaught of NATO bombs and missiles. In fact, history is repeating itself in more ways than one.

The very first bombing raid ever occurred almost 100 years ago on Nov. 1, 1911, when an Italian airman hand-dropped four 4.5-pound bombs on forces defending Tripoli against Italian invaders. This momentous event went down well with the press: “Italian Military Aviator Outside Tripoli Proves War Value of Aeroplane,” headlined the New York Times. But it had little effect on the fighting, thus commencing a pattern of disappointment that has recurred with monotonous regularity in subsequent conflicts, irrespective of advances in technology. Precision bombing, touted as an instrument of victory in World War II and Vietnam, turned out to be anything but, leaving the wars to be decided by foot soldiers on the ground.

Read rest of article….

2011/04/032011/04/03

IO 101: US “Brand” defined by its worst

Ethics, IO Impotency

The worst voice of the brand is the brand

We either ignore your brand or we judge it, usually with too little information. And when we judge it, we judge it based on the actions of the loudest, meanest, most selfish member of your tribe.

When a zealot advocates violence, outsiders see all members of his tribe as advocates of violence.

When a doctor rips off Medicare, all doctors are seen as less trustworthy.

When a fundamentalist advocates destruction of outsiders, all members of that organization are seen as intolerant.

When a soldier commits freelance violence, all citizens of his nation are seen as violent.

When a car rental franchise rips off a customer, all outlets of the franchise suffer.

Seems obvious, no? I wonder, then, why loyal and earnest members of the tribe hesitate to discipline, ostracize or expel the negative outliers.

“You're hurting us, this is wrong, we are expelling you.”

What do you stand for?

Phi Beta Iota: Every officer that goes along with illegal and insane orders is not only allowing the US “brand” to be defined by systemic corruption and careerists gone wild, but is in violation of their Constitutional Oath to protect the Republic against domestic enemies as well as foreign. Get a grip, people! Stop drinking the kool-aid. Challenge authority–honor can be restored.

2011/04/02

The End of Engagement in Afghanistan

07 Other Atrocities, 10 Security, 11 Society, Civil Society, Corruption, Cultural Intelligence, InfoOps (IO), IO Impotency, Military, Misinformation & Propaganda, Peace Intelligence, Strategy

A War College case study for Col Pfaff:

“This Is not the Beginning of the End for the International Community in Afghanistan — This is the End”

A bit more on that story we brought you earlier about the horrific killings in Afghanistan which followed lunatic Pastor Terry Jones' Qu'ran-burning stunt.

I wrote this a while back:

Those reactionaries within our own society who are pushing the Clash of Civilizations are mirror-images of the terrorists that inspire their hyperbolic fear; they're just as xenophobic, just as irrational and, ultimately, are just as great a threat to our security. Both have to be challenged aggressively before they give birth to another, even bloodier generation of culture warriors.

This latest spasm of bloodletting seems like a perfect example. Radical Cleric Terry Jones burns some Qu'rans in an intentional provocation, extremists in Afghanistan kill some people, which ultimately emboldens people like Terry Jones, and so on. A vicious cycle, with the vast majority of people in the middle.

But over at the must-read UN Dispatch, Una Moore, an international development professional based in Afghanistan, says that there's a lot more going on with this attack:

Continue reading “The End of Engagement in Afghanistan”

2011/04/022011/04/02

International Law or Imperial License?

04 Inter-State Conflict, 05 Civil War, 07 Other Atrocities, 10 Security, 11 Society, Corruption, Cultural Intelligence, Government, Military, Peace Intelligence

What kind of law is this?

Anne Orford 29 March 2011

Tags: law | libya | un

Many aspects of the Libyan situation remain unclear: the scope of the mandate given to UN member states by Security Council Resolution 1973, the broader aims of the intervention, how many civilians have been killed and by whom, and who the rebels represent. One thing, however, seems clear: the international intervention is considered to be legal. International lawyers have agreed with the UK government’s advice that Security Council Resolution 1973 ‘provides a clear and unequivocal legal basis for the deployment of UK forces and military assets to achieve the resolution’s objectives’. Legal experts have been quick to suggest that Resolution 1973 gives authority for any action thought necessary not only to protect civilians, but to protect areas inhabited by civilians.

. . . . . .[read entire article]

If today’s Western leadership is really ready, in the words of William Hague, to support the people of the Middle East in their ‘aspirations for a better future’, it will need to do more than use international law to target its enemies while protecting its friends. In rejecting their authoritarian leaders, the current wave of Arab revolutionaries is also rejecting the international system that has profited from their existence. As the US declares yet again that Israel has the right to defend itself against terrorists while bombs rain down on Libya, as protesters continue to be killed in Bahrain, Syria, Yemen and Iraq, and as the numbers of people detained continue to grow, the idea that Nato is working to support the freedom fighters of this Arab spring rings increasingly hollow. The bombing of Libya in the name of revolution may be legal, but the international law that authorises such action has surely lost its claim to be universal.