TheSkeptical

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Saturday, December 3, 2011

The Hawk 'n' Dove (Democratic Party, Not The Capitol Hill Bar)

Posted on 10:06 AM by Unknown



















The dove became a symbol of pacifism when Picasso's lithograph La Colombe was used for the poster of the World Peace Congress in Paris, April 1949.

If you are under the age of 50, it might come as news that there was once a time when the Democratic Party was not to the left of the Republicans on defense and foreign affairs. Foreign Policy's Passport blog has a piece today about how and when Democrats became doves:

Forty-four years ago this week, the senior senator from the state of Minnesota, Eugene McCarthy, stepped to a podium in the Senate Caucus Room and transformed the Democratic Party. Angered by the war in Vietnam and his belief that President Lyndon Johnson would "set no limit to the price" he was "willing to pay for a military victory," there McCarthy announced his intention to challenge the incumbent president of his own party in four presidential primaries.

McCarthy didn't even bother to declare he was seeking his party's nomination -- after all, in the fall of 1967 everyone knew that Johnson was practically a shoo-in to be the Democratic presidential nominee in 1968.

But a funny thing happened on the way to the Democratic Convention in Chicago. McCarthy didn't end the war, but he ended Johnson's political career and in the process heralded the shift of the Democratic Party from Cold War hawks to anti-war doves. By creating a political opportunity for Democrats, opposed to the war in Vietnam, to directly engage in the electoral process McCarthy helped change the way that all political leaders -- Democrats and Republicans -- talk about national security policy. No longer could national Democrats ignore liberals skeptical of American power; and Republicans were given a renewed opportunity to cast Democrats as a party beholden to their anti-war base. Quite simply, McCarthy's quixotic presidential bid is the gift that keeps on giving.

-- snip --

Two events would ensure that McCarthy's run would be far more than that. First the Tet Offensive on Jan. 30, 1968 ... the surprise Tet attack, which struck at every provincial capital in the country as well as the U.S. embassy in Saigon, shattered the illusion of progress. In the process it exposed Johnson and the members of his administration as serial liars about the war.

Tet set the stage, but it was the "Clean for Gene," anti-war activists that sealed the deal. Trudging through the snows of New Hampshire for the country's first presidential primary, McCarthy's army of well-scrubbed volunteers (no beards or long hair for this crew) spoke to two-thirds of all New Hampshire Democrats in just a six-week period.

[Robert] Kennedy attacked the war in Vietnam with great and laudable venom; but McCarthy became the first presidential candidate to take on the very conceits of American foreign policy. In perhaps his best speech of the campaign, at San Francisco's Cow Palace in May 1968, McCarthy aimed his verbal assaults at the assumptions underpinning the bipartisan consensus that had shaped America's view of the world since the dawn of the Cold War.

"Involvement in Vietnam," McCarthy said, "was no accident. It did not happen overnight. It was a direct result of America's conception of itself as the world's judge and the world's policeman." He ridiculed the beliefs held dear by both Humphrey and Kennedy: "America's moral mission in the world; the great threat from China; the theory of monolithic Communist conspiracy; the susceptibility of political problems to military solutions; the duty to impose American idealism upon foreign cultures" calling them "myths and misconceptions, so damaging in their consequences."

-- snip --

Although the hawks won the battle in 1968, they would in short order lose the war, as a new generation of Democrats inspired by the campaign -- and its model of grass-roots anti-war activism -- would re-shape the party's views on foreign policy. In 1972, they nominated the dovish McGovern, who was as suspicious of American power as McCarthy. In 1977, a Democratic president -- Jimmy Carter -- focused on human rights as an overarching national security priority would take office; in the nearly two decades that followed the doves would maintain a tight hold on the foreign policy direction of the party, opposing the arms build up of the 1980s and the proxy wars fought by the Reagan administration in Central America. Their influence was so pervasive that the party's remaining hawkish wing would abandon the Democrats for Reagan's GOP.

-- snip --

The liberal wing of the party still views Democratic elites and party leaders who supported the war in Iraq with contempt and suspicion (not unrightfully so). For many, it was the ultimate betrayal of the movement that emerged out of the tumult of 1968 and re-opened a wound first gashed by McCarthy in that Senate Caucus Room, 44 years ago. To this day, Democrats continue to be a party defined at its grassroots by reluctance to use military force, support for multilateral institutions, and opposition to the more aggressive elements of the war on terror. There is perhaps no policy issue where the divide between party and president is more acute -- from civil liberties to the war in Afghanistan.

-- snip --

[T]he foreign policy shift that began in 1968 has consistently provided a political opening of its own for Republicans. It became an opportunity to tar Democrats with the broad brush of weakness and fecklessness on national security (a recurrent GOP political attack since the "Who Lost China" debate of the 1950s). This week came word that the Obama administration is reluctant to apologize for a recent cross-border raid that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers, for fear of being portrayed by Republican presidential contenders as soft.

Even today, when Democrats debate national security -- torn between anti-war liberals and hawkish centrists, and reluctant to be cast as wimps and weaklings by Republicans -- they are arguing on a battlefield seeded by Gene McCarthy.


Ten years before Gene, that other Senator McCarthy, the one from Wisconsin, had already caused a shift in public perception about the Democrats and foreign policy. Historian Arthur Herman, my former professor, showed in his re-examination of Joseph McCarthy how the McCarthy era realigned working class, Catholic, and ‘ethnic’ (which in the 1950s meant southern or eastern European) voters from the Democrats to the Republicans over the issue of communism.

Fun fact: that other McCarthy was a great friend and political ally of the Kennedy family. Old Joe Kennedy contributed to McCarthy's campaigns, and frequently invited him to family gatherings at the Kennedy compound in Hyannis Port. McCarthy was particularly close to Robert Kennedy, becoming godfather to his first child and hiring him as an assistant counsel for his Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (January 1953 to August 1953, after which Robert became chief counsel to the minority side until January 1955).


















Have you ever seen the two of them together in a photo before? Probably not. The fact that the Kennedy-McCarthy political alliance has dropped down the memory hole of American politics is itself an indicator of how completely Democrats have denied their hawkish past.

FYI, you can browse through the official records of the McCarthy Committee's 1953-54 hearings here, courtesy of the U.S. Senate Homeland Security Committee. There is so much misconception and convenient mis-remembering about those hearings that going to original sources is necessary.
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Must ... Break ... Lock ... Somehow

Posted on 6:04 PM by Unknown


















I think there must be something about being in a mob that makes a person stupid, or stupider.

Take, for instance, those two Iranian students, or Basiji militiamen or whatever they are, who tried to force open the gate of the British Embassy in Tehran yesterday. The gate was being held shut by a length of chain wrapped around the two leafs of the gate and secured with an ordinary padlock. The two students - and I think they really are students, judging by their complete lack of mechanical aptitude - tried repeatedly to break the lock off using two little spindly sticks.

They could have popped the padlock in two seconds with bolt cutters, or cut the chain with a hacksaw, or shimmed the lock open. All quick and easy methods that require no more sophistication than a junkie burglar would possess. But, no. Instead, these regime supporters decided to poke at the brass lock with sticks. Good luck with that.

Honestly, it looked like the Dawn of Man scene in 2001 - A Space Odyssey, where the apes are trying to learn the use of tools. The biggest difference was the lack of that great Also Sprach Zarathustra sound track. That, and the fact that the apes figured it out in only two minutes and 17 seconds, whereas the Iranians had made no progress at all by the end of this three-minute video clip.



Somebody got the gate open eventually, but I doubt it was those two. I wouldn't be surprised if it was one of the regime's riot cops who did it, out of pity or impatience.

The New York Times has a lot of good coverage of yesterday's mob invasion in the Lede blog. No British diplomats were killed or injured, so in the end it was all just good clean fun.
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Pepper Spray: Better Than A Wood Shampoo, But Still Too Much For Some

Posted on 9:31 AM by Unknown


The casual manner in which the University of California campus police sprayed those protesters reminds me of myself watering the shrubs around my house. It definitely wasn't an instance of self-defense, and it might just have political consequences that won't go away with a little water and a few minutes in the open air.

The New York Times has an article today about the fallout that could result from police forces using pepper spray as a compliance tool rather than as a less-than-lethal option for self-defense.

As pepper spray has become ubiquitous in this country over the last two decades, it has not raised many eyebrows. But now, after images of the campus police at the University of California, Davis, spraying the Kool-Aid-colored orange compound on docile protesters on Friday, pepper spray is a topic of national debate.

It has become the crowd-control measure of choice lately by police departments from New York to Denver to Portland, Ore., as they counter protests by the Occupy Wall Street movement.

-- snip --

To Kamran Loghman, who helped develop pepper spray into a weapons-grade material with the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the 1980s, the incident at Davis violated his original intent.

“I have never seen such an inappropriate and improper use of chemical agents,” Mr. Loghman said in an interview.

Mr. Loghman, who also helped develop guidelines for police departments using the spray, said that use-of-force manuals generally advise that pepper spray is appropriate only if a person is physically threatening a police officer or another person.


The last time we had prolonged civil disturbances in the U.S., in the late 60s and early 70s, police didn't have any riot control chemical agents that were as selective as pepper spray. Back then it was tear gas grenades, and they could indiscriminately effect an acre or so of demonstrators and bystanders. I don't recall any great controversy about them, but maybe that was because they were pretty much the only alternative to wedge formations of police swinging long wooden riot batons.
















Such wonderful memories! When we trained at doing the 'stomp and drag' in Military Police School, our instructors told us to swing our batons for the feet because hippies wear sandals. I see that the feet are still the preferred target area, according to page 68 of this Field Manual, and that hitting the head with a riot baton - AKA a 'wood shampoo' - is still strictly prohibited, so apparently some things never change.

Being doused with pepper spray sounds to me like a good alternative to getting your toes smashed. However, I don't think today's elected officials, or juries, will take such a pragmatic attitude.

The NYT quoted Robert Thompson, a professor of popular culture at Syracuse University who is studying the social impact of pepper spray incidents such as that at UC Davis:

Those jarring images ... were a reminder that “this is a new generation of subduing people, and while the decision to use it may not be right,” he added, “we are in the age of pepper spray, not the age of real bullets.”


Maybe someday somebody will invent a Nerf ball tool for dispersing rioters and non-violent demonstrators, but until then, it will hurt when you get hit.
Read More
Posted in | No comments

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act Signed

Posted on 6:06 PM by Unknown
The U.S. Peace Corps has experienced a large number of assaults on its volunteers overseas, especially sexual assaults, more than one thousand of which were reported between 2000 and 2009 out of a volunteer population that barely exceeded 8,000 in any of those years. And the Peace Corps as an institution has been accused of not handling volunteer safety and security well.

Yesterday, the Peace Corps Director announced that:

President Obama [has] signed into law the Kate Puzey Peace Corps Volunteer Protection Act of 2011, codifying a number of the reforms the Peace Corps has put into place over the past two years to better protect and support Volunteers. The Act is named in honor of Kate Puzey, a Peace Corps volunteer who died while serving in Benin in 2009.

The new law codifies and expands many of the reforms the agency has put in place to enhance safety and security and ensure compassionate and effective response and support to all volunteers. The Peace Corps has:

• Hired a nationally recognized leader in victims’ rights to serve as the agency’s first victim advocate. Victims of crime can now turn to a skilled and experienced Peace Corps staff member dedicated to making certain volunteers receive the emotional, medical, legal, and other support they need both during and after their service.

• Updated and expanded training for volunteers and staff on sexual assault awareness, risk-reduction strategies, bystander intervention, and reporting and response procedures.

• Created an external body of leading experts in the field of sexual assault and returned Peace Corps volunteers to provide advice on Peace Corps’ sexual assault risk reduction and response strategies.

• Established procedures to ensure that allegations by Peace Corps volunteers are handled confidentially and appropriately.


You can read the bill at the Library of Congress website, here.

In addition to codifying measures the Peace Corps already has in place, the law also creates a new requirement that will involve Diplomatic Security more directly with the safety and security of PC volunteers.

SEC. 7. CONFORMING SAFETY AND SECURITY AGREEMENT REGARDING PEACE CORPS VOLUNTEERS SERVING IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES.

(a) IN GENERAL.— Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Peace Corps shall consult with the Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security and enter into a memorandum of understanding that specifies the duties and obligations of the Peace Corps and the Bureau of Diplomatic Security of the Department of State with respect to the protection of Peace Corps volunteers and staff members serving in foreign countries, including with respect to investigations of safety and security incidents and crimes committed against volunteers and staff members.


This MOU will be something to watch. Exactly what duties and obligations concerning Peace Corps volunteers will DS pick up? And how much can anyone really do about volunteer safety and security, given the very isolated nature of volunteer assignments?
Read More
Posted in Diplomatic Security Service, U.S. Peace Corps | No comments

Egypt's Homeland Security - The Sincerest Form Of Flattery?

Posted on 1:31 PM by Unknown












H/T to gwb for sending me a link that led to this tidbit in a Financial Times article about ongoing political repression in Egypt - Egypt state security feelers still active (registration required by FT):

After some initial moves to purge the security forces, attempts at systemic reform were halted, say analysts and political observers. Under the auspices of the Ministry of Interior, the 100,000-strong state security service has been renamed homeland security and personnel moved around.


I can't believe the Egyptian secret police are actually copying the infelicitous name we gave to DHS. Maybe something got lost in translation.

Does the phrase "homeland security" sound innocuous in Arabic? Or does it have the same unfortunate association with European fascism that it has in English, where "homeland" is a second cousin to "Fatherland?" I'm afraid I'll find out it's the latter.

On second thought, the old name was perfect: the Egyptian State Security Investigations Service. If they need to rebrand, the name "Stasi" is available, and would really suit the situation perfectly.
Read More
Posted in Department of Homeland Security, DHS | No comments

Monday, November 21, 2011

CG Dubai Moves To More Horizontal Surroundings

Posted on 12:35 PM by Unknown



















Consulate General Dubai used to be embedded in a small part of this high-rise office tower, which I believe is the largest and most populous in the Middle East. But now, CG Dubai has its own nice, new, secure and sustainable Fortress inside Dubai's diplomatic enclave.

U.S. Dedicates New Consulate Compound in Dubai, United Arab Emirates:

The multi-building complex, featuring a Consulate Office Building with an interior atrium and a multimedia center, has quickly become a platform to increase U.S. interaction with the Emirati people. The Consulate’s permanent art collection celebrates the exchange of artistic expression between the United States and the UAE through work by contemporary Emirati, American, and regional artists, curated by OBO’s Office of Art in Embassies. Occupying a six-acre site in the heart of Dubai’s diplomatic enclave on the Dubai Creek, the new facility creates a secure, sustainable, and pleasant workplace for approximately 280 employees.

The new Consulate incorporates numerous sustainable features, most notably solar hot water as well as zero use of potable water for irrigation. The facility is registered with the Green Building Certification Institute and is entering the formal review process with enough credits to earn a LEED Gold rating. B.L. Harbert International of Birmingham, Alabama constructed the project, which was designed by Page Southerland Page of Arlington, Virginia. The $147 million project generated jobs in both the United States and UAE.


I notice that OBO and the post have managed to keep photos of the completed new facility off of the internets, for now. If you're curious about what the new place looks like, you can view pastel watercolor artist renderings full of smiling people - a major part of every architect's portfolio - here. A new embassy or consulate never looks as good in real life as it does in those pretty paintings, so take what you see there and dial it down about 20%.

The press release goes on to note:

Since the 1999 enactment of the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act, the Department has moved more than 26,000 people into safer facilities. OBO has completed 87 diplomatic facilities and has an additional 41 projects in design or construction.


You can see photos of those completed new facilities here on OBO's website, in a sort of Fortress Embassies On Parade slideshow.

Read More
Posted in Consulate General Dubai, Office of Overseas Buildings Operations | No comments

Friday, November 18, 2011

American Centers vs Fortress Embassies

Posted on 6:49 AM by Unknown













Photo - The Archer K. Blood American Center Library at the American Center, Dhaka, Bangladesh (from Embassy website)

Consumer Notice: This post is certified 100% free of Matters of Official Concern that are not referenced from publicly available sources of information.

H/T to John Brown's Press and Blog Review for posting a link to the agenda transcript for the May 2011 Public Meeting of the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy.

Check the date of that meeting - May 2011. And yet the transcript was only released a couple days ago. Did it take that long to clear the publication? Better late than never.

One part of the transcript piqued my own personal special interest. In the presentation by Ms. Betsy Whitaker, Strategic Communications Officer, Office of the Under Secretary of Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, she remarked on the ongoing attempts to maintain some public diplomacy outreach facilities outside of the Department's famously forbidding Fortress Embassies:

American Spaces are clearly an area of great importance to generations of public diplomacy officers, and platforms of course that can be used sometimes as a sort of politically neutral venue where people can gather and simply learn about the United States through a variety of different media, and also interpersonal interaction.

We have, with, again, the assistance of IIP, created an office for the support of American Centers. In fact, we have the acting director over here, Anne Barbaro. And in working with IIP, we have also worked very, very hard for 18 months now, I think, to create a very good working relationship with our colleagues in Diplomatic Security and the Overseas Building Operations Bureau.

Why? Because we have sought, and I think are gradually achieving, an all-of-department approach to these spaces. DS clearly we need as a partner as we – because one of the reasons, as you know, that many of these centers have been shuttered or called back or pulled back behind embassy gates is simply because of security concerns.

And what we have been doing with OBO is twofold. One, as posts are anticipating the construction of new embassy compounds or new consulate compounds, working with the mission, if it has been part of the planning discussion to think about bringing some of these centers and spaces back in with the rest of the mission, we’re simply asking people just to stop for a second and ask the question, is this a wise move in terms of our outreach, and, you know, is this absolutely necessary in terms of security?

Let me be clear: Under Secretary McHale says security trumps all. And if it is indicated that these facilities must be brought – relocated or brought behind a fortified line of some sort, she of course understands that. But I think what she’s asking is for people just to simply stop and think and consider this, consider whether or not the mission would be interested in coming in for what we call a co-location waiver, whether or not there is a circumstance in which that space could be apart from the mission offices and such.

And we’ve had some good luck. We’ve had a couple of waivers granted in the past year, one in Ouagadougou I recall. And, you know, others are coming in as our missions – and this is, again, an all-of-missions thing – the chief of mission must sign off on these requests – as missions decide, you know, whether or not they’d like to make the request for a co-location waiver.


The issue here is the legal requirement that all U.S. diplomatic offices abroad be collocated on a single embassy compound in the principal place of USG business in that city. You can read all about it here, in 12 FAM 300. The requirement is invoked whenever a new embassy office facility is constructed or acquired.

(By the way, "collocation" is the correct spelling of the word, with two "l"s and no hyphen, although it is almost always misspelled as "co-location." That misspelling is my pet peeve, and correcting it is my lost cause.)

The collocation requirement may be waived, and so the R Bureau routinely puts up a fight to keep public diplomacy outreach facilities outside whenever new embassy compounds are planned. The position as Ms. Whitaker stated it, i.e., that the Department ought to consider waiving the collocation requirement on a case-by-case basis, is impeccably reasonable. This is basic risk management. The program benefits of making public diplomacy facilities easily accessible to the public can, in a rational world, be articulated and weighed against the security risks, and the increased security costs, of having a comparatively 'soft target' official facility in an annex across town from a new embassy compound.

Let the Ambassador make the request, and let the Secretary decide. Everyone signs on the dotted line, and accountability is established. Fair enough.

My personal interest in this matter is only indirectly with public diplomacy, in that I liked the old independent American Libraries and think they ought to be brought back into the mix of PD platforms, but I am directly interested in good risk management. As the wise man who hired me for my first job in DS said when he gave me the Foreign Affairs Handbook that contained our security standards: "These are the standards, but, of course, they have to be applied by reasoning human beings." I have always tried to apply reason to them, and I find they are much more persuasive that way.
Read More
Posted in Diplomatic Security, Office of Overseas Buildings Operations, Public Diplomacy, SECCA | No comments
Newer Posts Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • I'm Hiding From The Cops Under Arrest
    I like a news story with a happy ending : William Velasquez Castillo, an illegal immigrant in Lucedale, Miss., was arrested May 19 by U.S. M...
  • Peshawar - U.S. Consulate Employees Attacked By Suicide Bomber
    Consumer Notice: This post is certified 100% free of Matters of Official Concern that are not referenced from publicly available sources of ...
  • I've Got Pictures Of A U.S. Government Facility (Including Security Countermeasures!)
    Yeah, I've got them right here on the internet. But I'm not violating the prohibition against posting pictures of U.S. Government fa...
  • Friday Document Dumpster Diving (Through Piles Of Green)
    It's big, it's green, it's full of garbage, and you just know that it stinks. The White House backed this dumpster up to Capital...
  • "I Just Work As A Consultant There ... With RAO"
    The WaPo has a ho-hum story today on the Raymond Davis case, one that just recaps the standoff that exists over the matter of Davis's d...
  • Most Eyebrow-Raising Headline of the Week
        "Group guinea pig sex 'too loud' say neighbors" ( here )
  • Chicken Kills Man in Street Fight
    It was a rooster, actually. And the fight wasn't fair, since the rooster was armed with a knife when he killed Jose Luis Ochoa late last...
  • A Novel Idea For Funding Diplomatic Security In Iraq
    U.S. Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska believes that the Iraqi government, and not the U.S. taxpayer, should pay the cost for securing our dipl...
  • New Leadership For DS
    Yeah, I'm happy! I hear that there were some other high-level comings and goings today at the State Department, but the one I've bee...
  • I'm Famous, Kind Of
    I'm still a little bit jet lagged while TDY-ing it, and have been staying up much too late at night, surfing the internet in my hotel ro...

Categories

  • . (1)
  • accountability review board (3)
  • ADE 651 (3)
  • Af/Pak (6)
  • Af/Pk (2)
  • Afghanistan (10)
  • Ahmed Ghailani (1)
  • AIPAC (1)
  • al Qaeda (3)
  • Ambassador Carlos Pascual (2)
  • Ambassador Patricia Hawkins (1)
  • Anna Chapman (1)
  • ATF (1)
  • Aunt Zeituni (2)
  • Barrio Azteca (1)
  • Behring Breivik (1)
  • Beirut (1)
  • benghazi (22)
  • Bing (1)
  • Bureau of Overseas Building Operations (12)
  • Bureau of the Public Debt (1)
  • Burka Woman (1)
  • CIA (1)
  • Ciudad Juarez (2)
  • Cold War History (1)
  • Commission on Wartime Contracting (1)
  • Condoleezza Rice (1)
  • Consulate General Dubai (1)
  • Country Reports on Terrorism (1)
  • D-Day (1)
  • Dar es Salaam (1)
  • Department of Homeland Security (1)
  • Department of State (3)
  • Design Excellence (1)
  • DHS (1)
  • Diamond Jubilee (2)
  • Diplomatic History (3)
  • Diplomatic Security (23)
  • Diplomatic Security Service (4)
  • Dominique Strauss-Kahn (2)
  • Drug Enforcement Administration (1)
  • DSS (1)
  • Eyebrow-Raising Headline (1)
  • Fast and Furious (1)
  • FBI (2)
  • Federation of American Scientists (1)
  • Foreign Relations of the United States (3)
  • Fortress Embassy (23)
  • FRUS (4)
  • Gaddafi (1)
  • Gitmo (5)
  • Gitmo Gang (4)
  • Gitmo North (1)
  • Google (1)
  • GT-200 (1)
  • Guantanamo (1)
  • Herat (2)
  • Hillary Clinton (1)
  • Holy City of Washington (1)
  • Hotel Mazar (1)
  • Human Rights Council (1)
  • Internet Freedom (3)
  • Iraq (1)
  • Israel (1)
  • Jane Loeffler (1)
  • Jared Cohen (1)
  • Jerusalem Embassy Act (1)
  • jihobbyist (1)
  • Julian Assange (1)
  • KAOPOTUS (1)
  • Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (1)
  • KUOPOTUS (1)
  • Lahore (1)
  • Lesley Enriquez Redelfs (2)
  • Library of Congress (1)
  • Libya (29)
  • Lome (1)
  • Making Sense of Jihad (1)
  • Marine Security Guards (1)
  • Mazar-e-Sharif (3)
  • Memorial Day (1)
  • Mexican Drug Wars (4)
  • Mexico (9)
  • Michael Scheuer (1)
  • MSG (1)
  • Nairobi (1)
  • National Film Registry (1)
  • National Security Archive (1)
  • New Embassy Complex (1)
  • Niamey (1)
  • Nigel Farage (1)
  • Niger (1)
  • Northern Distribution Network (1)
  • Norway (1)
  • NPR (1)
  • OBO (5)
  • Office of Overseas Building Operations (1)
  • Office of Overseas Buildings Operations (7)
  • Office of Overseas Schools (1)
  • Office of the Historian (5)
  • Overseas Buildings Operations (2)
  • P.J. Crowley (2)
  • Pakistan (32)
  • Pan Am 103 (2)
  • Political Violence Against Americans (1)
  • President Obama (1)
  • Public Diplomacy (7)
  • Qaddafi (6)
  • Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) (1)
  • Queen Elizabeth (2)
  • Rambo (1)
  • Raymond Davis (18)
  • Raymond Ibrahim (1)
  • Rewards for Justice (1)
  • Sanaa (1)
  • SECCA (2)
  • Secret Service Scandal (8)
  • Senator Kerry (1)
  • Sniffex (1)
  • Taliban (1)
  • Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (1)
  • terrorism (3)
  • The Covert Comic (1)
  • The Time Warp (1)
  • The War Nerd (1)
  • Transitional National Council (1)
  • U.S Consulate Lahore (1)
  • U.S Embassy Mexico (1)
  • U.S. Army (1)
  • U.S. Congress (1)
  • U.S. Consulate General Ciudad Juarez (2)
  • U.S. Consulate Karachi (4)
  • U.S. Consulate Lahore (5)
  • U.S. Consulate Matamoros (1)
  • U.S. Consulate Peshawar Pakistan (4)
  • U.S. Consulate Rio de Janeiro (1)
  • U.S. Consulate Tijuana (1)
  • U.S. Embassy Baghdad DipNote (1)
  • U.S. Embassy Islamabad Pakistan (1)
  • U.S. Embassy Islamabad Phttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifakistan (1)
  • U.S. Embassy Libya (1)
  • U.S. Embassy Lusaka (1)
  • U.S. Embassy Mexico City (2)
  • U.S. Embassy Sarajevo (1)
  • U.S. Embassy Tunis (1)
  • U.S. Embassy Valletta (1)
  • U.S. Peace Corps (2)
  • U.S. State Department (1)
  • UK (1)
  • Unabomber (2)
  • Uncle Omar (3)
  • United Nations (2)
  • Unredacted (2)
  • Uzbekistan (1)
  • Vietnam (1)
  • Vladimir Putin (1)
  • Washington DC (1)
  • White House Leaks (1)
  • Wikileaks (13)

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2013 (40)
    • ▼  September (1)
      • The Longest Day, But Not the Longest Memory
    • ►  August (9)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (10)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (5)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2012 (138)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (12)
    • ►  September (5)
    • ►  August (11)
    • ►  July (10)
    • ►  June (12)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ►  April (15)
    • ►  March (10)
    • ►  February (15)
    • ►  January (22)
  • ►  2011 (267)
    • ►  December (14)
    • ►  November (13)
    • ►  October (14)
    • ►  September (19)
    • ►  August (29)
    • ►  July (25)
    • ►  June (18)
    • ►  May (25)
    • ►  April (25)
    • ►  March (25)
    • ►  February (32)
    • ►  January (28)
  • ►  2010 (55)
    • ►  December (37)
    • ►  November (18)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile