We can do more than just generate noise.
Posted on 07/22/2004 10:42:15 PM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4
It would be wrong to speculate on Sandy Berger's ultimate motive for removing classified documents from the National Archives. Working with insufficient information is the best way to mislead one's self. However, there might be some value to adopting a preliminary framework for understanding new information as it comes to light. The model that comes readily to mind is to regard Berger's escapade as a kind of information countermeasure. The most common ways to conceal information are to 1) create a decoy signal; 2) generate enough noise to blot out the underlying information; and 3) to reduce the signal of the original information which you want to conceal.
Most readers are broadly familiar with the countermeasures used on military aircraft. They can release decoys, like flares or drones. They can emit signals from jamming pods to white out the enemy radar screens. They can employ a variety of measures to reduce their reflection so that they remain unseen, the so-called stealth technology. Each of these corresponds to one type of countermeasure described above. As an exercise one can hypothetically regard the Plame-Wilson affair, the Richard Clarke book and Sandy Berger's bungled theft as representatives of these three kinds of information countermeasures. The first establishes a false "blip" -- the Bush Lied meme -- which misled intelligent bloggers like Oxblog's Patrick Belton for weeks as he followed this phantom echo. The Richard Clarke book can be considered a noise barrager type of countermeasure. It was for the most part a big sound and light show laced with ominous drumrolls with nothing behind it. When the time came to set Clarke's book against Condoleeza Rice's testimony at the 9/11 hearings there was curious lack of collision, as might be expected once you got past the boundary generated by a noise jammer. Berger's attempt to stuff codeword classified documents into his pants and socks looks like signature-reduction exercise on its face. It was an attempt to excise information; to create a stealth object which could pass through unnoticed.
The presence of countermeasures almost always indicates the presence of real information which the jamming is intended to protect. One of the reasons that coverups are so dangerous is they create the danger of "home-on-jam", where the source of jamming signal is itself targeted. The significance of catching Sandy Berger in the act of purloining classified couments is that it enables investigators to "home-on-jam", to find the beneficiary of the coverup. Where will it lead? Stay tuned. Remember that jamming needs to work just long enough for the real bandit to accomplish its mission.
ping
wretchard matches each tactic well with each explanation.
However, he is making the assertion, for his examples, that each is successful.
Berger was caught. And his actions were so clumsy as to almost makes one think he wanted to get caught. For one in his position, with his knowledge of the workings of the security system of the National Archives, it almost strains credulity to read of his bungling attempts at theft.
I have always taught and preached - NEVER understimate your enemy...NEVER. It will come back to bite you in your 6 when you least expect it.
This time, my money says we are seeing the actions of a dsperate man who was making a sorry-assed attempt at establishing his creds with who he was putting his money on in the next election. And probably getting paid for his actions.
bttt
BUMP
Berger was backing Howard Dean at the time he was going to the Archives. He was a late comer to team Kerry.
I want to know when Richard Clarke actually wrote his book. John Lehman is saying today that the Republicans on the commission were blindsided by the publication of Clarke's book, and his public testimony, which was dramatically different from his previous private testimony. See Rich Lowry's article on NRO for the details.
Nice to see Wretchard weighing in on Berglergate. I'll be staying tuned.
BTTT
In all of the postulation regarding Mr. Bergler's state of mind while breaching National Security, let's not forget one thing.
The successful man becomes arrogant, and the man who lives and breathes security regulations can (not often, but possible) become innured to them. Combine arrogance, a false self-image, and a disdain for underlings, and you can see that Mr. Berglers breach of National Security may indeed have been entirely selfish.
That was just food for thought. Personally, I'm thinking he was acting on behalf of another and I'm not thinking of the presumptuous nominee.
John Lehman is saying today that the Republicans on the commission were blindsided by the publication of Clarke's book, and his public testimony, which was dramatically different from his previous private testimony.
What! You mean Clark....took creative alternatives to the truth? I'm shocked.
See Rich Lowry's article on NRO for the details.
Do you happen to have a link handy?
http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry.asp
The report's evenhanded assignment of blame for pre-9/11 failures makes a hash of Clarke's stilted depiction of Clinton as antiterror hero and Bush as anti-terror disaster. Republican commission member John Lehman blames Clarke's partisan testimony before the commission for the poisonous atmosphere of much of its public work. "We were mugged by Viacom," Lehman says of the company that owns the publisher of Clarke's book and CBS News, which gave Clarke's tome a huge send-off. "They edited his book to make it into an anti-Bush jihad."
We can do more than just generate noise.
Thank you.
"You ever ride the beam?"
Considering the tactics and bungling stupidity of the past administration, I'd say that arrogance still underscores the issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.