Laughing Wolf
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Thank You Gene Simmons
Okay, words I never thought I would say. It has been an interesting mix of a day, and I ended up flipping through channels not finding anything worth watching until I hit his reality show. The only reason I stopped was that the info bar that pops up when I switch had the words “Camp Pendleton” and they caught my eye. It seems his daughter had to do a paper on the armed forces, and Gene decided she needed to really do some research—so he arranged for them to go through a taste of Marine boot camp, visit wounded at a VA hospital, and a bit more. The finale was a concert Gene and friends gave for the troops. Gene seriously got choked up visiting the wounded and veterans, and thanked them for what they did, and did so in the right way. I did get a good laugh when there was a Q&A before the concert, and a female Navy rating asked him how many women he had slept with—and when he whispered a number in her ear, she got big eyed and said “Holy SHIT!” and asked him if he was joking. Don’t think he was.
Thank you, Gene. Thank you for caring enough to expose your daughter to all that service means, and showing her what respect means and is. Thank you for taking the time to do the extra things you did, for your child and most of all for the veterans of all ages. Thanks.
Got to clean up the house now, can tell it’s been too long as dust kept getting in my eyes…
LW
who cordially loathes most reality (or any other) programming, but is glad he watched this
UPDATE: Does anyone else think Gene’s son has a strong resemblance to a young Jim Morrison?
Saturday, November 17, 2007
PTSD: A Must Read
If you have served; if you have been LE or related; if you have a family member who has served; and, most especially, if you are friends with, significant other to, or otherwise connected emotionally with someone who has served, then GO READ THIS NOW.
I would add that if you are one of the ones who thinks that someone with PTSD is broken, damaged, crippled, etc., then you really, really need to go read it: they aren’t the one with the problem, you are. Don’t believe me? Then go read, follow the links, and think a bit.
Git, and don’t come back until you have read it.
LW
Thursday, August 02, 2007
Challenge Accepted: Embed II
ENTRY STICKY: SCROLL DOWN FOR NEW CONTENT
Also posted at Blackfive.
A few days ago, I issued a challenge to Paul McLeary and CJR, and Paul has accepted that challenge. As he notes here and in the e-mail exchanges, he stepped in it, which is something with which I think we can all empathize. Our discussions have been interesting, thoughtful, and fruitful.
The result is that we are working together with PMI to go to Iraq and FOB Falcon. Our mutual goal is to go see the reality on the ground, find out what the troops think on the issue of Bleu Beau, blogs, blogging, and a number of other subjects.
In addition to what is done with Paul, I am looking to embed with a Marine unit while there after our time at FOB Falcon.
We do not yet know how much, if any, support will come from CJR. Therefore, we are looking for funding, and I am looking for your help to send me to Iraq. More than that, I see this as an opportunity to try and make it easier for the next trip by getting some additional resources to PMI.
This is not an inexpensive venture. To that end, I would like to ask that you:
• Donate to PMI. Your tax deductible contribution will help cover armor, insurance, and a lot more. Hit the Pay Pal Button and mark it For LW Embed; and, if you send a check, note that it is For LW Embed. Any funds raised over what I need will go to PMI to help support operations and other embeds, including our first embed.
• I hate to do it, but if you go to my newly redesigned digs (Phin and Chris Muir Rock!), you will find a Pay Pal button there too. Donations to me are not tax deductible. Most of my gear is designed for Northern European and Alpine conditions, plus I am going to need some other specialized gear and will have transportation and other misc. expenses. Any and all help you provide above what I need will be donated to PMI as cash and/or as gear. Please note that it is For LW Embed.
• If you work for Apple, a PC laptop manufacturer or distributor, a cell phone company or equipment maker, or a camera maker or distributor, please drop me a line as I have a tax-deductible proposition or three for you that will help PMI and make life easier for embeds.
• If you are over there or have been over there, and have thoughts and suggestions on gear, needs, and such, send them on.
As I noted above, I want to get as many additional resources to PMI as I can. If this goes well, and you the readers support it, I would like to be able to do more trips and/or send out other embeds from Blackfive. The extra resources will help make that possible. Beyond that, I think it important that more informational boots on the ground are made possible. The stories that are out there, the good and the bad, need to be told. Even if it wanted to cover every story out there, the MSM doesn’t have the resources to get them all out. We, the New Media, do.
So, I want to use this as a chance to build funding and to build a cache of gear so that when a request for an embed comes to PMI, they can turn around and say “Here’s your pack, sack, and protective. Need com gear? Okay then, here’s your ticket, good luck!”
To that end, if your donations to me allow, I plan to buy two of non-size-specific gear so that one of everything can go to PMI for the cache. As I stated above, any funds left over will go directly to them as well.
El Coqui: would you please let people in the Tavern (and the larger Bar if possible) know about this? Everyone, will you help spread the word?
So, please dig deep. We are not going to discuss when we are going; but, the more you give and the quicker you give it, the sooner things can be set in motion.
LW
Saturday, December 02, 2006
Some Thoughts On Intelligence: Mores
Before life handed me enough to make a fortune in Nashville could I but set it to music, I had started a post on intelligence gathering and analysis. A precursor post is here. At the risk of getting ahead of myself, some of the comments to this post provide a timely point for discussing what is perhaps the largest problem with, and most difficult aspect of, intelligence analysis: mores.
Mores often are defined as some variation of the customs and conventions that make up a society and allow a person to function within them. To my mind, the best definition I have heard is that they are the blinders we wear as a result of living in a particular culture.
It is a very complex and fascinating subject, for it is something most seldom stop to consider. Each of us is shaped by the country in which we grow up, for each has its own unique history and social makeup. Each of us is shaped by the region, city, or other location as well as the unique social mix that is the family or group in which we are raised. As we grow up, we tend to take certain things as “gospel” in that certain assumptions, outlooks, stories, and more are such a part of our life that we accept them without question.
Such core beliefs shape our lives and our methods of thought in ways much more subtle than mere bias. These beliefs shape the way we process and interpret the data that comes at us in life on a level well below conscious thought. It is part and parcel of the entirely unreasonable, yet natural, human assumption that everyone thinks as we do.
Yet, not everyone does think as we do. Even within the United States, there is a large variance in the mores of people raised in different areas or ethnic and cultural groups. Someone raised on a farm who is used to dealing with animals, butchering them, helping raise them, etc. is going to have a different set of mores from someone born and raised in downtown Chicago. They are going to have very different frames of reference, and one of the early purposes of education/mass education was to provide a common frame of reference so that people from different backgrounds could communicate effectively. This also served to add a new layer into the mores that shaped the people.
From an intelligence standpoint (and political as well), is the fact that we all tend to assume on that deep level that everyone thinks and believes as do we. Some of the worst analysis of events comes from those who insist on presenting analysis based on this assumption, particularly if their mores are extreme even for their culture.
When a majority of people involved with doing some form of analysis all have similar backgrounds and beliefs, be it called corporate culture or sheer institutional inbreeding, the result is that any analysis and interpretation will be shaped by the common mores no matter the internal checks and balances designed to prevent such. It doesn’t matter if it is an intelligence agency or a newsroom: when all have very similar or same mores (beliefs, training, instillation of corporate culture), there literally is no way to avoid skewing the results because the underlying unconscious assumptions are so similar.
An obvious solution is, of course, to bring people who don’t share that tradition. Be it outsiders coming into an institution, or bringing in people from the culture/region/etc. being studied, it is a great way to get a different set of ideas and interpretations. The problem with intelligence can be, however, that such people have an axe or three to grind. They may be people who detest the current regime in the area, which will skew their analysis. They may be reluctant, the people who left on a matter of principle but still love their country, people, and friends—a thing that will also skew thier perceptions. They may also fall prey to the very human trap of not providing complete translation or context because of the fear that doing so may not measure up to the mores and social conventions of the country/organization doing the research. They may be plants put in place to deliberately skew things through false information and deliberately wrong analysis. Finally, they too are constrained by their mores in their analysis.
Another obvious solution is to have a mixture of sources for doing translation, analysis, and interpretation, so that each effectively checks the other. The problem lies in the fact that any such mixture then has to go through the institutional process. For this reason, more than one administration has made use of what Tom Clancy referred to as a “Backstop” program to get an outside/independent source of information and analysis. Of course, that does no good if any or all analysis and recommendations are rejected because it conflicts with the institutional mores of an administration. A study of events/history of the challenges inherent in the collapse of the Soviet Union and rise of the Russian Federation, particularly looking at the time of the tanks and Yeltsin’s stand, is a prime example of this.
A staple of Hollywood and of literary potboilers is the individual who has not only gotten the data, but analyzed what it really means, yet is thwarted in efforts to head off disaster by evil types who reject the data and/or analysis out of hand. From the civilian/military analyst who detects the impending attack to the researcher who detects the next major natural disaster but is ignored or actively suppressed, it is a staple of entertainment. So prevalent is this meme that it has become a part of our culture and even shapes our mores. This has reached the point that there is a collective tendency to try to force people and events to fit it, rather than to simply accept that events are much different and more complex (Plame being a good example). This is not just an American problem, but affects countries and institutions worldwide, and is the root cause of many serious diplomatic and military miscalculations.
One of the hardest things for any analyst to do is to make a conscious effort to set aside their mores. It means studying the situation, the data, and the societal context in which they reside. The short version is to think like the enemy, which can have its own perils. There are those who have done so, and ended up converting to the other side. There are those who have done so and in so doing damaged their ability to work within the mores of their own culture. Yet, to truly analyze and understand any event in the world, be it domestic politics or enemy actions and intentions, we must at least attempt to make the leap to think outside ourselves and our mores. For if we do not, any analysis, interpretation, and action we take will be tragically and fatally flawed.
The information age and the blogosphere offer a strong ray of hope in this area. Take a look at these comments again. In my opinion, some have that tragic flaw, but it is not my opinion of such that matters. What matters is that several informed opinions are there, differing opinions. These have been placed into the marketplace of ideas, and in so doing, a huge step has been taken. While there will be much dreck out there, a lot of good and differing analysis and interpretation is now available for consideration and evaluation. The import of that for critical issues of the day can’t be overstated.
So, a question for you is: can you make a reasonable effort to set aside your cultural blinders and look at the world as unfettered as possible? Or, are you a prisoner of your conscious and unconscious biases? Can you look past these to take a reasoned measure of what is being said and respond in an equally reasoned manner? Or, are you such a prisoner of yourself that you must attack, obfuscate, and avoid reason and facts as ground upon which you dare not tread?
Just some food for thought…
LW
Crossposted at Blackfive
Content copyright C. Blake Powers and the individual authors. Comments become the property of C. Blake Powers and may be altered, edited, deleted, and used by C. Blake Powers or the individual authors without restriction or recompense.
