ROBERT STEELE: There is only one person who is both totally committed to President Donald Trump and who has the brains and the balls to be the next Director of National Intelligence. His name is Mike Flynn. The time has come for him to come back into the fight.
Here are the five reforms he can implement in service to the President with results well in time to impact on the 2020 election:
Whole way in which information and society are organized has changed. From stovepipes to networks — growing power of audience and authentity. This is a threat to the whole Westphalian order of nations (i.e. top-down “because we say so” hierarchical authority). State-owned media now setting the new standard for message delivery while the Western media is collapsing for lack of viability of the advertising – print – broadcast models. Western media is spending too much time on minutia of single events and not enough time on framing, context, and meaning.
“It is time for schools to come down from the ivory tower…and start engaging with the public, doing news analysis, data dives, informing the public [in ways that] the media cannot. . . . This is an opportunity as well as a responsibility.”
Translatable Full Text Below the Fold
배 아래에 번역 전체 텍스트
Traduzível texto completo abaixo da dobra
النص الكامل للترجمة تحت طية
Diterjemahkan Full Text bawah Lipat
ਫੋਲਡ ਹੇਠ ਅਨੁਵਾਦ ਪੂਰਾ ਪਾਠ
Перевести Полный текст ниже раза
WASHINGTON, April 10, 2012 – The World Bank today announced that it will implement a new Open Access policy for its research outputs and knowledge products, effective July 1, 2012. The new policy builds on recent efforts to increase access to information at the World Bank and to make its research as widely available as possible. As the first phase of this policy, the Bank launched today a new Open Knowledge Repository and adopted a set of Creative Commons copyright licenses.
The new Open Access policy, which will be rolled out in phases in the coming year, formalizes the Bank’s practice of making research and knowledge freely available online. Now anybody is free to use, re-use and redistribute most of the Bank’s knowledge products and research outputs for commercial or non-commercial purposes.
“Knowledge is power,”World Bank Group President Robert B. Zoellick said. “Making our knowledge widely and readily available will empower others to come up with solutions to the world’s toughest problems. Our new Open Access policy is the natural evolution for a World Bank that is opening up more and more.”
The policy will also apply to Bank research published with third party publishers including the institution’s two journals—World Bank Research Observer (WBRO) and World Bank Economic Review (WBER)—which are published by Oxford University Press, but in accordance with the terms of third party publisher agreements. The Bank will respect publishing embargoes, but expects the amount of time it takes for externally published Bank content to be included in its institutional repository to diminish over time.
The World Bank will be adopting an Open Access Policy as of July 1. In addition, the Bank recently launched the World Bank Open Knowledge Repository (OKR) and became the first major international organization to adopt a set of copyright licenses from Creative Commons. As a result, a wealth of Bank research and knowledge products are now freely available to anyone in the world for use, re-use, and sharing.
Why is this so significant?
How can open access contribute to the goal of eliminating poverty?
How does the new policy impact the Bank’s researchers and authors?
How will the OKR benefit users of Bank knowledge, in particular those in developing countries?
Join us in person at the World Bank or online for a lively conversation about these and other aspects of open access to research, and its potential for development progress.
Peter Suber Director of the Harvard Open Access Project and a leading voice in the open access movement
Cyril Muller Vice President for External Affairs at the World Bank
Michael Carroll American University law professor and founding board member of Creative Commons
Adam Wagstaff Research Manager of the World Bank’s Development Research Group
I have begun drafting my portion of the new Handbook of Intelligence Studies (Routledge, 2013), it is a chapter early on entitled “The Craft of Intelligence.” I pick up where Allen Dulles and Sherman Kent left off. My graphic on Intelligence Maturity captures the essence of my thinking at the strategic level, but of course there is more to come, including the desperate need to restore integrity to all that we do.
In 1988 I ghost-wrote for the Commandant of the Marine Corps an article that he enhanced and signed, “Global Intelligence Challenges in the 1990’s.” At that time my focus was on the difference between the conventional threat and the emerging unconventional threat.
Now my focus is on the purpose and process of intelligence as decision-support. We must — we will — move from secret intelligence for the few to open intelligence for the many; from expensive centralized largely worthless intelligence to free and low-cost distributed intelligence relevant to every person at every level on every issue; from intelligence as window-dressing for channeling $80 billion a year to banks and corporations, to intelligence as an integral element of every aspect of a Smart Nation.
This article is completely out of touch with reality and the authors have not bothered to familiarize themselves with the literatures pertinent to their endeavor. Out of 89 cited sources 12 are non-intelligence-related prior publications of the lead author, 1 is a prior publication of the second author, and 11 are ostensibly about intelligence but truly marginal selections. So 12% sources on the subject, 13% self-citation, and 75% escoteric psycho-babble irrelevant to the actual challenge. As an intelligence professional, I am offended that two ostensibly erudite individuals would dare to publish this trype without even a semblance of understanding of the subject under discussion.
Are you still a fringe candidate when you pull in more than half of all votes? Just ask Ron Paul.
Even with the establishment cringing at his libertarian leanings and his ideas otherwise radical for a Republican candidate, Congressman Paul received nearly 54 percent of the votes in an Ohio straw poll over the weekend.
The Ohio Republican straw poll was held in the Buckeye State on Saturday, and the majority of the votes cast went to the Texas congressman who continues to show both success and support in his race for the GOP nomination, despite little attention from the mainstream media.
While news outlets have largely focused in recent weeks on the surging popularity of Herman Cain, the pizzaman only raked in nearly half of what Paul got in the straw poll. Following Paul’s first place victory, Cain came in second with around 26 percent of the votes. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney received around 9 percent, giving him a third place standing. Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, came in fourth.
Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann, both considered top tier candidates earlier in the race, each received less than 5 percent of the vote. In recent weeks their popularity among Republican voters has shown extreme signs of decline.
Paul’s success continues to soar, although he has still not received the same media coverage favored for other Republican hopefuls. In an interview with Alex Jones’ Inforwars last month, former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura offered his support for the candidate. “Ron Paul can win. It’s out there. All you got to do is activate and get the silent voters out to vote,” said Ventura. “You have to give them a reason to see their vote.”
A veteran U.S. State Department foreign service officer lost his security clearance and diplomatic passport this week while the department investigates him over linking to a WikiLeaks document on his blog and publishing a book critical of the government.
Peter Van Buren, who is 51 and has worked for the department for 23 years, had his Top Secret security clearance suspended indefinitely for what the department calls his unwillingness to comply with rules and regulations regarding “writing and speaking on matters of official concern.” This is according to a memo the State Department sent Van Buren.
The move is purely vindictive, according to Van Buren.
Phi Beta Iota: The class action idea is interesting. Robert Steele is pursuing discovery to acquire all emails to and from Jim Clapper, Ron Burgess, and Tish Long about his varied efforts to secure employment within DoD, as well as discovery of all emails and documents surrounding his application for both the DISL jobs across DoD and the lesser DIA jobs [Steele kept book] that were manipulated to exclude Steele from consideration. There is no question but that DIA and DOHA are in violation while DNI (and before that USDI) were complicit, the only question is how much trouble it will be to document this, and how much can be demanded in damages above and beyond loss of $1 million in lost income–including a “by name” request for Steele to be Chief Instructor for Information Operations and Intelligence at COINSOC in Iraq a few years ago where a legal contract was received from Raytheon for $276K a year, and then withdrawn after DOHA told Raytheon no to a simple SECRET clearance without a Statement of Reasons or due process–the exchanges between Raytheon and DOHA will be the starting point for the lawsuit by Robert Steele against the US Government. It will take time, but the absence of integrity in this specific series will become a matter of legal record. If $10 million can be won–half for the legal team–that will be money earned by Steele for having persistent integrity. Integrity is now back in style–DNI, DOHA, and DIA are the last to know this–and of course the Department of State E Veritate Potens.
Below are the working papers that have been posted for discussion in New York City, first with the Day of Rage team (it is neither a Day nor a Rage and it is all about electoral reform), then with the General Assembly at OccupyWallStreet, beginning with a handful of self-selected facilitators.
I will be driving a 1964 MGB, red in color, license VA MGB 64. If we do the human megaphone, it should be around 1700 (5 pm) Thursday or 1100 Friday.
WHO PARTICIPATES IN “WHOLE SYSTEM” CONVERSATIONS? – PARTISANS, STAKEHOLDERS, DOMAINS, AND CITIZENS
by Tom Atlee
Consciously convened conversations have many functions. Many seek simply to get people talking with each other. Others try to bring together what they call “the whole system” to address that system’s collective issues or dreams. Who is involved in these “whole system” conversations?
A “whole system”, in this case, involves all the parties who play – or could play – roles in some social unit or situation. The social unit could be a family or relationship, a group or organization, a community or a whole society. A situation might be, on the one hand, an issue, a problem, or a conflict – or, on the other hand, an inquiry, an opportunity, a shift, or simply a periodic reflection about what’s happening. We can convene conversations around any of these things.
So how do we decide who the parties or players are? How do we “cut the pie” of the whole system? And, if we’re ambitious, how do we elicit a “voice of the whole”?
I see four different approaches to defining who “a whole system” includes. Each approach has its own rationale and appropriate usages. They are not mutually exclusive, but are usually used more or less separately. Perhaps being aware of them and building synergies between them would enhance the power and wisdom of our conversations. These approaches include:
Phi Beta Iota: Tom Atlee is in our view the living founding father of Epoch B–there have been others before him, and there are other now, but for us, he is the spiritual center of gravity for doing the right thing now, here, in America. Please support his work on behalf of all of us.
A hundred and fifty years ago, adults were incensed about child labor. Low-wage kids were taking jobs away from hard-working adults.
Sure, there was some moral outrage at seven-year olds losing fingers and being abused at work, but the economic rationale was paramount. Factory owners insisted that losing child workers would be catastrophic to their industries and fought hard to keep the kids at work–they said they couldn’t afford to hire adults. It wasn’t until 1918 that nationwide compulsory education was in place.
Part of the rationale to sell this major transformation to industrialists was that educated kids would actually become more compliant and productive workers. Our current system of teaching kids to sit in straight rows and obey instructions isn’t a coincidence–it was an investment in our economic future. The plan: trade short-term child labor wages for longer-term productivity by giving kids a head start in doing what they’re told.
Large-scale education was never about teaching kids or creating scholars. It was invented to churn out adults who worked well within the system.
Of course, it worked. Several generations of productive, fully employed workers followed. But now?
Phi Beta Iota: Mr. Johnson is the author of Integrity at Scale, free online, whose many ideas are being integrated into the vision for a Smart Nation Act and the hub of the Smart Nation, an Open Source Agency and global Multinational, Multiagency, Multidisciplinary, Multidomain Information-Sharing and Sense-Making (M4IS2) network of networks. He is a party to the on-going push to establish the Open Source Agency and create a more competent and ethical America.
– – – – – – -BEGIN REFLECTIONS- – – – – – –
As I look at the Open Source idea, I find myself experiencing a fair amount of dissonance between a methodological vision of open source intelligence, at one level, and at a very different level, an aspirational vision that sees it as a way of disinfecting a misguided and corrupt set of bureaucracies.
One mission is potentially endorsable by the powers-that-be. The second mission is not. Ask people to endorse both and it isn’t likely that either will move forward. If corruption prevention is to be the mission, the open source agency will have to find a home outside of government. If transparency of intelligence is the mission, then perhaps it can find a home inside government.
My second source of dissonance has to do with design and scale. Open source intelligence is potentially as vast as all the server farms Google will ever own. How does a relatively modest site, squeezed in between State and Watergate, ever acquire the heft to handle the challenge? The scope of the mission and the scope of the agency seem out of sync with the scope of the real estate footprint.