Osama bin Laden recently released (first aired on Al Jazeera on 04/23/2006) a new audiotape in which he takes no prisoners. In fact, if he weren't the most wanted man on the planet, most would think of him as absolutely certifiable.
According to his most recent comments, Muslims need to kill all non-Muslims around the globe. And as if that weren't enough, Muslims need to kill traitor Muslims and all those who are liberal. While I am not a big fan of liberals myself, I certainly wouldn't suggest killing them.
In fact, bin Laden said blood is needed to cleanse the matter of the cartoons. That sounds logical. And, look out internationalists, the UN are infidels too. How you like them apples? Oh, and a couple of things you thought he forgot about: veils in France? They still need to pay (probably with their infidel blood) for not allowing Muslims to wear veils. Funny thing, because he wouldn't let Christians practice their religion on Muslim soil, now would he? What is good for the goose is apparently not good for the gander. Oh yeah, one more memory issue: he is still threatening Salman Rushdie. Go figure. For such a pious, religious man, he is certainly ill tempered.
I guess that when a meglogmaniac such as bin Laden can't actually get his picture on television, he gets a little grumpy.
Monday, April 24, 2006
Monday, April 17, 2006
"Jawbreaker" by Gary Berntsen
After having read the above account of one of the most decorated CIA operations officers in this agency's history, all I have to say is, "Wow!"
The premise of the book is that Mr. Berntsen was sent in around the world, whenever something bad happened. In recent times, when American embassies were bombed in 1998, Mr. Berntsen and his team went in to investigate and capture the bad guys. In 1999, they were sent in to go after Osama bin Laden, but were inexplicably pulled out once the had made contact with the Northern Alliance commander who agreed to work with them: Ahmed Shah Massoud.
While operating in Latin America, 9/11 ocurred, and his team (called Jawbreaker) was activated and he was resent to Afghanistan. Rather than attempting to "disrupt" terrorists, Mr. Berntsen was sent in to more or less coordinate the agency's role in the war.
They killed alot of terrorists, but when al-Qaeda leadership was pinned down in Tora Bora, and Berntsen called in for nearly 1000 Army Rangers to block their escape. Washington declined, preferring not to get "bogged down" in a land war in Asia. While this potentially was a mistake of historic proportions, this book left me with good feelings more than regret.
I was proud that we have operators like Mr. Berntsen in our government. In fact, I hope there are alot more like him, since he recently left the agency. If there are, I feel pretty good about our prospects in this "war on terrorism." But, if the agency is instead breeding this new risk aversion (as mentioned above), we are in for some serious trouble.
The premise of the book is that Mr. Berntsen was sent in around the world, whenever something bad happened. In recent times, when American embassies were bombed in 1998, Mr. Berntsen and his team went in to investigate and capture the bad guys. In 1999, they were sent in to go after Osama bin Laden, but were inexplicably pulled out once the had made contact with the Northern Alliance commander who agreed to work with them: Ahmed Shah Massoud.
While operating in Latin America, 9/11 ocurred, and his team (called Jawbreaker) was activated and he was resent to Afghanistan. Rather than attempting to "disrupt" terrorists, Mr. Berntsen was sent in to more or less coordinate the agency's role in the war.
They killed alot of terrorists, but when al-Qaeda leadership was pinned down in Tora Bora, and Berntsen called in for nearly 1000 Army Rangers to block their escape. Washington declined, preferring not to get "bogged down" in a land war in Asia. While this potentially was a mistake of historic proportions, this book left me with good feelings more than regret.
I was proud that we have operators like Mr. Berntsen in our government. In fact, I hope there are alot more like him, since he recently left the agency. If there are, I feel pretty good about our prospects in this "war on terrorism." But, if the agency is instead breeding this new risk aversion (as mentioned above), we are in for some serious trouble.
Inside the CIA by Ronald Kessler
Rather than title my posts "Most Recent Reading" anymore, I will just title them with the name and author of the book I just completed.
This book was a fascinating look inside one of the most secretive US agencies. Like "Running the World," this book starts from the inception of the CIA after World War II in the National Security Act. The purpose of the agency is to provide appropriate intelligence regarding enemy and even friendly nations to the National Security Council, which helps to advise the President. Additionally, the CIA director (DCI) is to be the common link between intelligence agencies (including from Defence, State, Commerce, etc.) to provide intelligence directly to the President.
Some interesting things I learned from the book include:
The CIA is composed of 5 directorates:
- Operations (recruits agents)
- Intelligence (analyze secret and open source data)
- Science & Technology (think Q from James Bond)
- Support/Administration (plants bugs, launders money, in the service of ops)
- Office of the Director
An Operations Officer is an employee of the CIA. S/he recruits agents to betray their countries, who may or may not get paid for their information. CIA agents are not American citizens and do not work for the CIA.
People who work for the CIA are some of the most patriotic and brightest public servants in all of the federal government. Many speak multiple languages, have PhDs, and spend most of their life avoiding taking credit for saving this nation.
Finally, most CIA employees are permitted to let people they know they work for the CIA. It is predominantly the operations officers who cannot divulge who they truly work for.
Many CIA officers have written memoirs or personal accounts since the agency's inception and I suggest you look into some of them. My next book review, "Jawbreaker" is one of them.
This book was a fascinating look inside one of the most secretive US agencies. Like "Running the World," this book starts from the inception of the CIA after World War II in the National Security Act. The purpose of the agency is to provide appropriate intelligence regarding enemy and even friendly nations to the National Security Council, which helps to advise the President. Additionally, the CIA director (DCI) is to be the common link between intelligence agencies (including from Defence, State, Commerce, etc.) to provide intelligence directly to the President.
Some interesting things I learned from the book include:
The CIA is composed of 5 directorates:
- Operations (recruits agents)
- Intelligence (analyze secret and open source data)
- Science & Technology (think Q from James Bond)
- Support/Administration (plants bugs, launders money, in the service of ops)
- Office of the Director
An Operations Officer is an employee of the CIA. S/he recruits agents to betray their countries, who may or may not get paid for their information. CIA agents are not American citizens and do not work for the CIA.
People who work for the CIA are some of the most patriotic and brightest public servants in all of the federal government. Many speak multiple languages, have PhDs, and spend most of their life avoiding taking credit for saving this nation.
Finally, most CIA employees are permitted to let people they know they work for the CIA. It is predominantly the operations officers who cannot divulge who they truly work for.
Many CIA officers have written memoirs or personal accounts since the agency's inception and I suggest you look into some of them. My next book review, "Jawbreaker" is one of them.
Friday, April 07, 2006
US Security
Beginning in the 1950's and extending through the 1970's, the CIA actually monitored (and read) mail leaving this coutry bound for the USSR. During this same period of time, the CIA also secretly held a Soviet defector (Yuri Nosenko) for about three years because they didn't believe his story that he was not involved in the Kennedy assasination. Of course, there was additional evidence that he may have been a Soviet double agent.
Did any President get impeached for violating someone's habeas corpus rights or violating their rights guaranteed by the 4th ammendment to the Constitution of the United States? Of course not. In a time where people were more concerned with the security of the nation and less concerned with "gotcha" politics, Congress held hearings and rewrote the law; much the same of what should happen now.
For those of you, like Senator Russ Feingold, who believe the President should be censured or even impeached, you should know your history a little better to determine the correct way to solve our nation's problems.
Did any President get impeached for violating someone's habeas corpus rights or violating their rights guaranteed by the 4th ammendment to the Constitution of the United States? Of course not. In a time where people were more concerned with the security of the nation and less concerned with "gotcha" politics, Congress held hearings and rewrote the law; much the same of what should happen now.
For those of you, like Senator Russ Feingold, who believe the President should be censured or even impeached, you should know your history a little better to determine the correct way to solve our nation's problems.
Saturday, April 01, 2006
Alan Blinder on Globalization
In the most recent issue of Foreign Affairs, Alan Blinder argued that outsourcing has barely hit our shores. Outsourcing over the next several decades will dramatically increase with impersonal service providers becoming the next big victims (manufacturing was the last). This makes sense to me and it is why education will be so important over the next several decades. Students, particularly in the developed world, will need to increase their experience into jobs which are not likely to be outsourced.
The most interesting tidbit of information that Mr. Blinder acknowledged (and which I firmly believe) is that outsourcing to China is not this nations biggest threat. Most of the outsourced positions to China currently involve manufacturing (i.e. textiles, etc.). The nation that I believe is most likely to take our best jobs is India (and Mr. Blinder agrees). This nation is far more democratic, more likely to receive substantial FDI (foreign direct investment), less likely to have a major political upheaval and produces far more specialized positions (scientists, engineers and doctors) than America does.
We need to discover what India is doing to encourage this, copy it and also encourage these bright students to learn, teach and live in this nation.
The most interesting tidbit of information that Mr. Blinder acknowledged (and which I firmly believe) is that outsourcing to China is not this nations biggest threat. Most of the outsourced positions to China currently involve manufacturing (i.e. textiles, etc.). The nation that I believe is most likely to take our best jobs is India (and Mr. Blinder agrees). This nation is far more democratic, more likely to receive substantial FDI (foreign direct investment), less likely to have a major political upheaval and produces far more specialized positions (scientists, engineers and doctors) than America does.
We need to discover what India is doing to encourage this, copy it and also encourage these bright students to learn, teach and live in this nation.
George Will on Climate Change
In this morning's Washington Post, George Will opined on climate change. Much concern has been recently expressed regarding a potential warming, ostensibly caused by carbon emissions from humans.
This of course was not always the case. Many of the same newspapers, magazines, and scientists were saying:
- "extensive Northern hemisphere glaciation" - Science magazine, December 10, 1976
- "the world's climatologists are agreed"..."prepare for the next ice age" - Science Digest, February 1973
- "a major cooling of the climate is widely considered inevitable"..."well established" that the Northern Hemisphere's climate "has been getting cooler since about 1950" - New York Times, May 21, 1975
So despite there being a consensus on climate change, there really is no consensus. Regardless of this, however, several things are important to do and consider:
- there is too much pollution in this world and everybody needs to work to reduce it
- we need to find ways to utilize our planets resources in a more sustainable way
- as Michael Cricton stipulates in a recent novel, the environmental movement needs to be less dogmatic (i.e. religious) and more pragmatic
Scientists are not helping by saying that we need to dramatically change our behaviour immediately. This alarmism is creating pushback and not furthering the debate whatsoever. Let us discuss the myriad of ways to help our situation and discuss the likely pros and cons of all of this. I am aware this doesn't help with funding, but it is a logical way to remedy problems.
This of course was not always the case. Many of the same newspapers, magazines, and scientists were saying:
- "extensive Northern hemisphere glaciation" - Science magazine, December 10, 1976
- "the world's climatologists are agreed"..."prepare for the next ice age" - Science Digest, February 1973
- "a major cooling of the climate is widely considered inevitable"..."well established" that the Northern Hemisphere's climate "has been getting cooler since about 1950" - New York Times, May 21, 1975
So despite there being a consensus on climate change, there really is no consensus. Regardless of this, however, several things are important to do and consider:
- there is too much pollution in this world and everybody needs to work to reduce it
- we need to find ways to utilize our planets resources in a more sustainable way
- as Michael Cricton stipulates in a recent novel, the environmental movement needs to be less dogmatic (i.e. religious) and more pragmatic
Scientists are not helping by saying that we need to dramatically change our behaviour immediately. This alarmism is creating pushback and not furthering the debate whatsoever. Let us discuss the myriad of ways to help our situation and discuss the likely pros and cons of all of this. I am aware this doesn't help with funding, but it is a logical way to remedy problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
