FA: What lessons did you learn in your Iraq and Afghanistan tours?
SM: In Iraq, when we first started, the question was, “Where is the enemy?” That was the intelligence question. As we got smarter, we started to ask, “Who is the enemy?” And we thought we were pretty clever. And then we realized that wasn't the right question, and we asked, “What's the enemy doing or trying to do?” And it wans't until we got further along that we said, “Why are they the enemy?”
General Stanley McChrystal, USA (Ret.)
On drones:
SM: And although to the United States, a drone strike seems to have very little risk and very little pain, at the receiving end, it feels like war. Americans have got to understand that. If we were to use our technological capabilities carelessly–I don't think we do, but there's always the danger that you will–then we should not be upset when someon responds with their equivalent, which is a suicide bomb in Central Park, because that's what they can respond with.
And further on:
SM: The whole point of war is to take care of people, not just to kill them. You have to have a positive reason that protects people or it's wrong.
And also:
SM: But if you go back in history, I can't find a covert fix that solved a problem long term.
Phi Beta Iota: BRAVO ZULU Huazzaah to the Utah Sheriff's. Oath Keepers is doing its job. This is law enforcement ethics at its best. We must all transfer our money to local credit unions and community banks, and being by-passing the federal government's corruption (as well as state and local corruption), and work to reassert the sovereignty of the individual citizen and the security and prosperity of the individual neighborhoods. Resilience is the goal, intelligence with integrity is the method.
Increasing Public Access to the Results of Scientific Research
By Dr. John Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy
Thank you for your participation in the We the People platform. The Obama Administration agrees that citizens deserve easy access to the results of research their tax dollars have paid for. As you may know, the Office of Science and Technology Policy has been looking into this issue for some time and has reached out to the public on two occasions for input on the question of how best to achieve this goal of democratizing the results of federally-funded research. Your petition has been important to our discussions of this issue.
The logic behind enhanced public access is plain. We know that scientific research supported by the Federal Government spurs scientific breakthroughs and economic advances when research results are made available to innovators. Policies that mobilize these intellectual assets for re-use through broader access can accelerate scientific breakthroughs, increase innovation, and promote economic growth. That’s why the Obama Administration is committed to ensuring that the results of federally-funded scientific research are made available to and useful for the public, industry, and the scientific community.
Moreover, this research was funded by taxpayer dollars. Americans should have easy access to the results of research they help support.
To that end, I have issued a memorandum today (.pdf) to Federal agencies that directs those with more than $100 million in research and development expenditures to develop plans to make the results of federally-funded research publically available free of charge within 12 months after original publication. As you pointed out, the public access policy adopted by the National Institutes of Health has been a great success. And while this new policy call does not insist that every agency copy the NIH approach exactly, it does ensure that similar policies will appear across government.
With a central website, in forum style, to address major issues – divided into local sections, regional sections and global sections, with “votes” at a certain level elevating the problems and solutions to the next level to be voted on by a greater number – we can collectively coordinate to solve the issues of this planet. Social responsibility will be seen as spending 15 minutes a day (or more) reviewing the issues on this site. This seed parameter will see an emergence of human unity as a race and as a planet.
What is there proposed is a stigmergic governance – a way to govern society without a governMENT. In a system with no money or need for exchange, stigmergic governance will work – as long as there are money interests, it is unlikely to, with votes bought, up or down, and other disruptive aspects. This is what I propose in a free energy/robot system where no money is needed (read The End of Entropy for a picture of how this works). If You are unfamiliar with the term, stigmergy, a good place to get a handle on the term is here.
A very good illustration of stigmergy is Linux. In this case, one Individual created a basic program and offered it freely in open source. Others came along and began to improve upon it, create software to run on it, and so on. There was no “leader” in this group – those who wanted to get involved did so – and from the initial basic program, a whole creative “empire” came to be…all entirely free and freely.
There are a few officers still serving that I hold in high regard. Below is a discussion I had with one such officer via email recently.
DNI Anon:
Current discussion about drones to kill “high-value targets” may miss the point, ethically and politically. Discussion has centered on the toll a drone exacts on nearby luckless individuals and the fact that some high value-targets can lay claim to being U.S. citizens.
The technology for remote killing has become increasingly precise—from carpet bombing to TLAMS to smart bombs, now hellfire missiles. Extrapolate forward to a remote controlled weapon that promptly and reliably impacts just a single, targeted individual, absolutely no collateral damage. Better, or worse? The catch is the targeting process itself. Our national mantra is “innocent until proven guilty”. How proven and, to what standard of proof? Do we abide the Blackstone ratio, “better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”?
The larger issue, however, is that as precision increases, the barriers to use drop. Previously, a more scatter-shot killing on another’s sovereign soil might occasion war. But, precision technology has lowered the profile for extra-territorial attack and war need not be the outcome. Good, so far as it goes, but less constrained technology can mean less restrained actors …and, technology proliferates.
1. Threat to This Idea. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has fought against this idea, despite the fact that it originated within the CIA in 1969, and has been championed by multiple commissions including the 9/11 Commission (pages 23 and 413) and the WMD Commission. Both CIA and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) appear to fear the impact on the secret world’s budget if an Open Source Agency (OSA), as a sister agency to the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), were to demonstrate that 95% of what the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Homeland Security need to do strategy, policy, and acquisition, can be obtained ethically, legally, and inexpensively. This idea was sent to your predecessor via four separate channels, including from Lawrence Lessig to Alec Ross in the office for Public Diplomacy, and directly to a member of Hillary Clinton’s personal staff, and blocked all four times by INR acting on behalf of CIA. If is for this reason that I humbly and respectfully route this idea to you via your brother and my long-time colleague Jock Gill, a member of President Clinton’s communications staff.
2. Essence of the Idea. The OSA would provide to the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Commerce – and to all their Assistant Secretaries and desk officers – completely unclassified Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) tailored to their needs in detail and in a timely fashion. Being unclassified, this intelligence (decision-support) could be provided at the same time to the Congressional committees, the media, the public, and foreign stake-holders. Stated in relation to the President’s needs at this time, the Open Source Agency would enable the Secretary of State to contribute immediately and forcefully to Open Government, Citizen Engagement, Participatory Budgeting, Global Engagement, and more tangibly, to the rapid creation of a Whole of Government planning, programming, and budgeting process that is rooted in ethical evidence-based decision-support that leverages unclassified decision-support such that the Secretary of State can lead a redirection of how the US Government spends money, toward peace and commerce instead of war.
Click on Image to Enlarge
3. Harmful Gaps Today. At a time when LtGen Dr. Brent Scowcroft and other members of the UN High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges, and Change have identified and prioritized the ten threats shown here, the USA and its military-industrial complex persist in obsessing on inter-conflict and terrorism, the latter a tactic, not a threat. Meanwhile the secret intelligence world is spending over $75 billion a year on secret collection, most of which is not processed, and producing what General Tony Zinni, USMC (Ret) has said is “at best” 4% of what a major commander or Cabinet official requires – to which I would add, “and nothing for everyone else.”
Click to Enlarge
4. Strategic Value of the Idea. The greatest casualty of the Cold War and the Global War on Terror has been the truth. America has become morally and intellectually disengaged from reality.
The truth at any cost lowers all other costs.
The most advanced thinking – far beyond the current concepts of any element of the US Government or any think tank – has converged on the combination of two ideas: Open Source Everything (OSE), and Multinational, Multiagency, Multidisciplinary, Multidomain Information-Sharing and Sense-Making (M4IS2).
Click on Image to Enlarge
5. Operational Implementation of the Idea. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has twice before agreed that an OSA is needed, and also agreed that it should be under diplomatic auspices rather than an element of the secret world. The first time the idea was approved was in 2000 by Sean O’Keefe, then Deputy Director of OMB, who felt it appropriate as a Presidential Initiative to be funded at $125M Initial Operating Capability (IOC), toward $2B at Final Operating Capability (FOC). In 2010 Kathleen Peroff, the Associate Deputy Director for National Security, and her colleagues responsible for Program 50 (Military) and Program 150 (International Affairs) reiterated their agreement in principle with the idea, contingent on a Cabinet officer sponsoring the idea. Now we are in severely constrained budget circumstances, and it may be appropriate to start with a smaller pilot project, perhaps $25M for year one, but the idea is so powerful that it should quickly demonstrate that it merits funding as a means of helping the President decide of both cuts and redirections of funding.
Click on Image to Enlarge
The OSA offers the additional advantage of being able to create a Global Range of Needs Table and a transparent fulfillment dashboard capable of both inspiring donations from the 80% of the one billion rich that do not contribute to charity today; and also capable of holding accountable the Specialized Agencies of the United Nations (UN), the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and all other non-governmental organizations – as the public “sees” that many of them deliver less than 20% of their total budget to those in need, the Secretary of State will have increased influence over funding from others.
6. Tactical Implementation of the Idea. The original budget, when the OSA was proposed as a Global Engagement capability, was suggested by Keith Hall, then Director of the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and former director of the budget staff for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Mindful that the secret world does not do “Global Coverage,” Mr. Hall suggested $10M a year for each of 150 countries and topics not reliably covered – if at all – by the secret world. Congressman Rob Simmons (R-CT-02) and myself added $30M per year for each of the 50 states, to create Community Intelligence Networks that would also help integrate education, intelligence (decision-support) and research across America, creating a Smart Nation. A one-page summary of the Smart Nation Act is attached. At the tactical level we can address three distinct advantages for the Secretary of State of sponsoring the OSA.
Haga clic para ampliar
a. Whole of Government Planning, Programming, and Budgeting. OMB does not manage in the grand strategic sense. The OSA can restore the Secretary of State as the senior Cabinet officer with a mastery of decision support that is as valuable here at home as it is abroad. For the first time, the OSA will provide ethical evidence-based decision-support that treats poverty, infectious disease, and environmental degradation – as well as genocide, trade in women and children, proliferation, and all forms of organized crime – as legitimate intelligence challenges. Decision support that can be shared will mobilize consensus.
Click on Image to Enlarge
b. Common Technical Solutions – Open Source Everything (OSE). Open Government and Open Data are not achievable nationally – nor scalable globally – without an “all in” approach to all the opens. Especially important are Open Cloud, Open Hardware, Open Science, Open Software, Open Spectrum, and Open Standards. A prior endeavor funded by DARPA, STRONG ANGEL, created a suite of collaboration tools on a flash-drive that could be shared with anyone – called TOOZL, it is the first step toward being able to do secure collaboration world-wide with an infinite number of constantly changing information partners.
Click on Image to Enlarge
c. Real Estate – A Once In A Lifetime Opportunity. Congress approved a privately funded Potomac Plaza over the mess of roads between the South-Central Campus and the river. Lauded as a transformative project that would reconnect the city to the river in this sector, the project could be combined with a publicly funded endeavor on the South-Central Campus, putting the OSA there, and funded by the OSA, the other five national educational, intelligence (decision-support) and research endeavors. This will be a tangible manifestation of the Secretary of State’s legacy, a legacy certain to last over a 100 years.
7. Select Planning Group Available. A select group of independent minds are available to discuss this.
Proposed Legislation: The Smart Nation Act
• Within the Department of State, expands the capabilities for Open Government, Citizen Engagement, Participatory Budgeting, Global Engagement and Whole of Government planning, programming, and budgeting, by providing the Secretary of State with oversight authority of the Open Source Agency (OSA) and the Office of Information Sharing Treaties and Agreements.
• Creates an Open Source Agency (OSA), redirecting the necessary funds on a non-reimbursable basis from Program 50 to Program 150, as a sister-agency to the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), with the same arms-length independence that Congress wisely mandated to assure journalist independence, but in this case, to assure the integrity of public intelligence in the public interest across Whole of Government and in all exchanges with foreign and non-governmental entities. The small Headquarters will be constructed on the South-Central Campus, adjacent to both the U.S. Institute of Peace (USIP), which could serve as a partner in global information peacekeeping, and to George Washington University as well as the John F. Kennedy Center conference and parking facilities. All information obtained by open means will be a public good and a copy also provided as acquired to the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), who shall make no claim on the disposition of original open sources and methods. The OSA will be the national proponent for Open Source Everything (OSE) across the education, intelligence (decision-support) and research sectors.
• Creates an Office of Information Sharing Treaties and Agreements, to negotiate no-cost information sharing treaties with Nations, and no-cost information sharing agreements with non-governmental and private sector organizations including universities world-wide, while also adopting OSE standards facilitating both sharing and semantic web sense-making across all languages (33 initially, 183 at full operating capability).
• Creates a Multinational Warning & Decision-Support Center (MWDC) and related global information-sharing and sense-making network.
• Creates a Multinational Multiagency Conference Center to serve as a foundation for local to global outreach and cross-fertilization across all education, intelligence, and research topics.
• In partnership with academic, civil society, and non-profit organizations, creates the World Brain Institute and the Global Game to foster whole systems true cost economics thinking.
• Creates, in partnership with a university providing accreditation and administrative services, a School of Future-Oriented Hybrid Governance, a Horizons College, and a Multidisciplinary Research Consortium.
• Support the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) with an Internet dissemination capability that offers free universal access to all unclassified information acquired by the OSA, with a robust man-machine translation capability that offers free online education in at least 33 major languages and 12 dialects of Arabic as an important new foundation for public diplomacy and information peacekeeping.
• Supports the roles of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the General Services Administration (GSA) as executive level partners of the Open Source Agency, with priority on decision-support from the OSA in support of all federal needs of common concern.
• Expands and enhances the role of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and the General Accountability Office (GAO) with direct access to all available information, advanced analytic processing tools, and sufficient personnel to provide each jurisdiction of Congress with unclassified decision-support that can be shared with constituents and the media. –o–
By fall, according to the former intelligence official, the senior leadership of the C.I.A. had had enough. “They said, ‘No way. We signed up for the core program in Afghanistan—pre-approved for operations against high-value terrorist targets—and now you want to use it for cabdrivers, brothers-in-law, and people pulled off the streets’ ”—the sort of prisoners who populate the Iraqi jails. “The C.I.A.’s legal people objected,” and the agency ended its sap involvement in Abu Ghraib, the former official said.
The C.I.A.’s complaints were echoed throughout the intelligence community. There was fear that the situation at Abu Ghraib would lead to the exposure of the secret sap, and thereby bring an end to what had been, before Iraq, a valuable cover operation. “This was stupidity,” a government consultant told me. “You’re taking a program that was operating in the chaos of Afghanistan against Al Qaeda, a stateless terror group, and bringing it into a structured, traditional war zone. Sooner or later, the commandos would bump into the legal and moral procedures of a conventional war with an Army of a hundred and thirty-five thousand soldiers.”
The former senior intelligence official blamed hubris for the Abu Ghraib disaster. “There’s nothing more exhilarating for a pissant Pentagon civilian than dealing with an important national security issue without dealing with military planners, who are always worried about risk,” he told me. “What could be more boring than needing the coöperation of logistical planners?” The only difficulty, the former official added, is that, “as soon as you enlarge the secret program beyond the oversight capability of experienced people, you lose control. We’ve never had a case where a special-access program went sour—and this goes back to the Cold War.”
