11 Responses:

1. myasma says:

   19 years ago at 11:44 am

   that is such an exquisitely creepy shot.

2. mindcontrol23 says:

   19 years ago at 2:17 pm

   scroll down
   http://www.roilnoise.com/pr01.htm

3. transiit says:

   19 years ago at 3:25 pm

   So perhaps someone out there can explain to me how the 9/11 commission's recommendation for an "Intelligence Czar" doesn't already exist in the role of "National Security Advisor"

   Is it out of her jurisdiction, was it a backhanded way of saying the current administration needs more intelligence, is it a belief that adding to the bureaucracy is going to make things better, all of the above, none of the above?

   I don't get it.

   -transiit

   • googoobaby says:

     19 years ago at 12:55 am

     The war on terrorism is not about understanding, it's about overstanding -- GYWO

   • simmonmt says:

     19 years ago at 4:15 am

     I think the idea is that you want someone who's actually in charge of the intelligence agencies. "In charge" meaning "able to set budgets and fire people". This is what the role of DCI was supposed to be -- as Director of Central Intelligence, he doesn't just run the CIA, but was also supposed to coordinate everyone else and tell them what to do. Unfortunately, since he doesn't have any budgetary or personnel authority at any of the other agencies, he pretty much ends up just running the CIA.

     The Intelligence Czar is pretty much useless, and wouldn't do anything beyond adding another layer unless he gets this authority. The Pentagon, which runs the other main bit of the intelligence community, really didn't want the DCI controlling their operations, and doesn't want the Intelligence Czar doing it either.

     I fear they'll decide not to force the Pentagon to give up control of their agencies, but will still create a (useless) Czar position just so they look like they're doing something. If that's the case, hopefully someone can quietly do away with it later on down the road.

     If I remember correctly, the same problem existed with the Drugs Czar.

     • transiit says:

       19 years ago at 2:10 pm

       I like unions, so long as they're keeping the workers out of my sausage.

       But I don't like the idea of the incompetant being protected from rightful termination.

       I think about how much of the government is more or less unionized.

       I can't help but think this stinks the same way.

       -transiit

       • simmonmt says:

         19 years ago at 2:09 am

         In some sense, I guess so. The personnel and budgetary authority here is less about getting rid of incompents, and more about giving the Czar a stick with which to "convince" other agencies to pull in the same direction.

         The idea being that while the DCI can currently tell the NSA what to do, he can't do anything to back up that directive, and thus it'll get ignored, and the NSA will do whatever it was going to do anyway. If the Czar has the ability to tell the NSA what to do and to make it stick, then great -- let's have one. If he doesn't have anything with which to back up his requests, then there's no point -- it's just another layer through which intelligence has to flow on the way to the top.

4. insomnia says:

   19 years ago at 5:53 pm

   If I didn't know better, I would say that the shadow indicates a person with another human face on the back of their head. Voldemort?!

   • jck says:

     19 years ago at 2:23 pm

     How did you guess?

5. purgatorius says:

   19 years ago at 7:44 pm

   Ah, Waging the War of Ideas in the Global War on Terror what an appropriate topic for a talk given at the Institute of Peace.

6. zenmonkeykstop says:

   19 years ago at 8:01 am

   Not so much a hairstyle as a carapace, that.