Now That You Mention It ....

.... why, yes, I have been threatened because of my job. And so have you.

The WaPo has asked this question:

Have you, as a government worker - or someone you know - ever been threatened because of your job? Do you feel safe in the workplace?

Please e-mail your answer to federalworker@washpost.com and include your full name, home town and the agency for which you work. We might include your response in Friday's Washington Post. When answers are particularly sensitive, we will consider a respondent's request to withhold full identification.

I'm sure they were thinking of domestic government workers, but hey, why not reply and let them know what it means to really be threatened because of your job? It could be a very long list.

Read More

Anna Chapman Will Now Solve The World's Most Complicated Mysteries

Anna Chapman, the live action version of Natasha Fatale, has found gainful employment as the host of a new Russian television series, the UK Daily Mail reports:

Vladimir Putin better set his digital recorder!

Russian spy and Putin favourite Anna Chapman still shuns questions about her years undercover in the United States, but starting next week she'll uncover other mysteries on Russian television.

A spokeswoman for REN-TV, a private nationwide channel, announced that Chapman will host a new weekly television show that allows her 'to use all her talents to solve the world's most complicated mysteries.'

The show has been christened 'Secrets of the World with Anna Chapman'.

-- snip --

She has just gained a leading position in the Young Guard (Molodaya Gvardiya), the youth wing of the United Russia party which dominates the country’s politics — and is headed by prime minister Vladimir Putin.

After returning from America in July last year, she and her fellow spies enjoyed a cosy evening with Mr Putin, singing Russian patriotic songs and swapping tales of undercover work.

Oh yeah, Putin will be TIVOing that.

Chapman's plea deal with the U.S. Department of Justice includes a 'no profit' clause that would make it difficult for her to gain by a book or movie deal about her experience in the United States, so her ability to exploit her notoriety is pretty much limited to cheesy TV and photo spreads.

Which brings me to this most complicated mystery that I wish she would solve - how did they get her into that outfit?

Read More

Hard At Work While Comfortably Attired

I think I should try telecommuting every now and then. The combination of OpenNet Everywhere (ONE) and BlackBerries is quite the thing for working from home.

While taking a sick day today, I did the following work:

- Replied to all my routine e-mails
- Dialed in to a teleconference
- Took a phone call from an RSO about an ongoing project
- Finished my response to a tasker that's due tomorrow
- Cleared a cable
- Retrieved a spreadsheet from my IronKey and forwarded it to a requester
- Sent my Division Director some talking points to prep him for a meeting

And I still had time to snooze, read a book, and surf the Intertubes. All without getting dressed. What's not to like about that?

Read More

One Overlooked But Pertinent Fact About The Arizona Tragedy

Being home sick today, I've had hours to read through all the news, speculation, and political squabbling about the horrific mass murder in Tucson last Saturday. Pretty much all of it is useless.

The on-line statements and videos posted by Jared Loughner give no clue about his motive except than that he exhibited disorganized, disrupted, thinking. He plainly was not influenced by any particular type of politics, or even a conspiracy theory, because he would have been unable to follow any coherent line of thought whether left-wing, right-wing, or what have you.

I am no more impressed by gun control arguments now than I ever was before. They are easily evaded, mainly affect the law-abiding, and are futile in the case of the suicidal or with spree killers and mass killers such as Loughner.

Increasing security measures for members of Congress could be helpful, if that means something like having local police attend special events in public venues, and not some unrealistic and unworkable new law.

But then, amid all this crap, I came across a terrific article on NPR about the
missed chance to intervene with Loughter under Arizona's existing mental health laws.

Jared Loughner could have been involuntarily admitted for evaluation under Arizona's progressive mental health laws long before he allegedly showed up at a Tucson grocery store parking lot with a semi-automatic pistol, mental health professionals say.

Whether or not Loughner is mentally ill is unclear. But what is known is that friends, relatives and teachers watched as Loughner's behavior apparently became increasingly erratic, including outbursts in class, isolation and bizarre Internet postings suggestive of someone in the least disturbed and at times incoherent.

Arizona allows for family, friends or even acquaintances to petition a local court for a mental evaluation, said Suzanne Hodges, chief compliant officer at the Community Partnership of Southern Arizona, the group that provides mental health treatment for Pima County, where the shooting occurred. The court would have then sent someone to interview Loughner and determine if he needed treatment — even if he was not an imminent danger to himself or others, as most other state require.

Being in such treatment would have prevented him from purchasing a handgun, according to Arizona's gun laws.

-- snip --

Neither officials, students nor his parents sought to have a court-appointed counselor interview Loughner. Such a failure to intervene, [Dr. Alan J. Lipman, director of the Center for the Study of Violence] said, is a common scenario among friends and relatives who are unaware of available local resources, and colleges dealing with thousands of students, some of whom, like Loughner, are only enrolled in one or two classes and bow out quickly.

"There was no one single individual to point the finger at," Lipman said, "but it is true that when he was engaging in these bizarre behaviors at the community college, there may have been an opportunity to guide him to treatment. This lack of information about mental disorders and when to intervene and how to intervene is a very serious problem."

This is remarkable news, especially coming on the heels of about a hundred interviews I've seen with people in Loughner's circle who believed - incorrectly - that they had no recourse when he behaved in bizarre and vaguely threatening ways. The college administrators who barred him from campus, the local police who busted him for minor drug possession, his parents, neighbors, and his dwindling number of friends, any of them could have petitioned for a mental observation. Based on what we know of Loughner, any judge or mental health worker who saw him would most likely have concluded that he needed to be committed, and that commitment would have legally disqualified him from later buying a gun.

Most state laws on involuntary commitment are more restrictive than Arizona's. In most states, you can't do anything about someone who is acting out bizarrely until his behavior escalates to violence. You can't do anything, until he does something.

My personal take-away from the tragedy in Tucson is that I'll look into my own state's laws and community mental health resources, and if they aren't as good as Arizona's, I'll ask my state representatives why not.

Read More

My Rules of Bureaucratic Decorum

Unredacted has a post today about what the State Department was hiding from a Freedom of Information Act Request. The answer? Someone's intemperate marginalia:

Having won this game of documentary hide and seek [during a two-year long FOIA request], I had a hearty chuckle, finding it quite funny that 1) a person employed by the Department of State (I don’t know who– are there any graphologists out there?) would write “bunch of crap!!” on a copy of a House resolution, and 2) that the Department of State had tried so hard to prevent the public from knowing it had ever happened.

We can all learn a lesson from this episode. Personally, I stopped writing comments on memos and cables long ago, right after I started doing research in the National Archives. It always made me chuckle to see candid handwritten remarks made on working papers by some long-gone FSO who never realized that one day that document would be in the public domain. Now, I keep my remarks on separate, non-archived, papers. Or better yet, make them orally.

Not that I ever express anything other than the highest regard for our elected representatives, you understand. Or for our President's political appointees, who are never less than exemplary in all their professional qualifications and personal characteristics. I have never seen any reason to speak poorly of our news media and Punditocracy. Or of the many think tanks, NGOs, Beltway Bandits and Grand Army of the Consultancy that live off the taxpayer's dime.

As best I understand the protocol, you are always free to disparage the French and the leaders of some hostile foreign nations, mainly Iran and North Korea. Personally, I do not do so, since I actually have high regard for France, and I think it's bad form to knock foreigners without good cause. That leaves me free to insult Vladimir Putin, since he's a thug with pretensions to grandeur, and Muammar al-Gaddafi, who is sui generis as the Clown Prince of the Middle East. But that's about all, unless you count the United Nations, since that organization is full of blood-sucking parasites and weasels. The same goes for the European Parliament, which is basically the UN of Europe.

And don't get me started on the Chi-Coms. I'll just say that I will go to any expense or inconvenience to avoid buying any product made in the People's Republic of China. I 'look for the laogai label' when I am buying that coat, shirt, or anything else.

I will confess to having had unkind thoughts about @JaredCohen back when he was a government official. But today, @Jared has dried up as a source of parody fodder; he hasn't tweeted anything for five days now, whereas it used to be more like every five minutes. Evidently, he has less free time on his hands at Google than he did when he worked for the State Department.

So to recap my four rules of bureaucratic decorum:

1. It is never appropriate to write down disparaging statements about our elected representatives or their political appointees, with an occasional exception for a really conspicuous blowhard like @Jared.

2. It is rarely in good taste to express criticism of any member of the news media or of a news commentator.

3. Propriety requires the utmost restraint when making remarks about foreign personalities other than Putin and Gaddafi.

4. Feel free to say anything you like about the United Nations and the Chi-Coms.

By following these simple rules, I will have nothing to fear from any FOIA request.

Read More

Our [Canadian] Man in Tehran

Read More

Oh, Canada!

NPR's Weekend Edition Saturday has interviewed Ken Taylor, the former Canadian Ambassador to Tehran who sheltered six U.S. diplomats during the 1979-1980 Iranian hostage crisis and eventually smuggled them safely out of Iran. The program will be broadcast tomorrow. Check your local NPR station, or go to the website.

Here's a photo of Ambassador Taylor receiving the Congressional Gold Medal in 1981 from President Ronald Reagan.












And here are the six rescued embassy officers with President Carter in 1980.














Not listed in order, they are:

• Robert Anders, 34 - Consular Officer
• Mark J. Lijek, 29 - Consular Officer
• Cora A. Lijek, 25 - Consular Assistant
• Henry L. Schatz, 31 - Agriculture Attaché
• Joseph D. Stafford, 29 - Consular Officer
• Kathleen F. Stafford, 28 - Consular Assistant

If you were around back then, you will remember that there was much rejoicing.
















Whether you were around back then or not, it's good to be reminded that the USG has some allies who will be there when we need them, even at the risk of their lives.

Read More