Politics

Not much blogging going on here still, but here's my annual list of books read for 2019. Graham T. Allison, Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides's Trap? Ross Anderson, Security Engineering (3rd edition, draft chapters) Herbert Asbury, The Barbary Coast: An Informal History of the San Francisco Underworld Heidi Blake, From Russia with Blood: The Kremlin's Ruthless Assassination Program and Vladimir Putin's Secret War on the West Rutger Bregman, Utopia for Realists: How We Can Build the Ideal World Oliver Bullough, Moneyland: The Inside Story of the Crooks and Kleptocrats Who Rule the World Bryan Caplan and Zach Weinersmith, Open Borders: The Science and Ethics of Immigration C.J. Chivers, The Fighters: Americans in Combat Sefton Delmer, Black Boomerang Nina J. Easton, Gang of Five: Leaders at the Center of the Conservative Crusade (bio of Bill Kristol, Ralph Reed, Clint Bolick, Grover Norquist, and David McIntosh) Ronan Farrow, Catch and Kill: Lies, Spies, and a Conspiracy to Protect Predators Ronan Farrow, War on Peace: The End of Diplomacy and the Decline of American Influence Ian Frisch, Magic is Dead: My Journey into the World's Most Secretive Society of Magicians Anand Giridharadas, Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World Reba Wells Grandrud, Sunnyslope (Images of America series) Andy Greenberg, Sandworm: A New Era of Cyberwar and the Hunt for the Kremlin's Most Dangerous Hackers Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, She Said: Breaking the Sexual Harassment Story That Helped Ignite a Movement Stephen Kinzer, Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change From Hawaii to Iraq Michael Lewis, Flash Boys: A Wall Street Revolt Jonathan Lusthaus, Industry of Anonymity: Inside the Business of Cybercrime Ben MacIntyre, A Spy Among Friends: Kim Philby and the Great Betrayal Joseph Menn, Cult of the Dead Cow: How the Original Hacking Supergroup Might Just Save the World Anna Merlan, Republic of Lies: American Conspiracy Theorists and Their Surprising Rise to Power Jefferson Morley, Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA Sarah T. Roberts, Behind the Screen: Content Moderation in the Shadows of Social Media Hans Rosling, with Ola Rosling and Anna Rosling Rönnlund, Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World--and Why Things Are Better Than You Think Russell Shorto, Amsterdam: A History of the World's Most Liberal City Alexander Stille, The Sack of Rome: Media + Money + Celebrity = Power = Silvio Berlusconi Jamie Susskind, Future Politics: Living Together in a World Transformed by Tech Erik Van De Sandt, Deviant Security: The Technical Computer Security Practices of Cyber Criminals (Ph.D. thesis) Tom Wolfe, The Right Stuff Tim Wu, The Attention Merchants: The Epic Scramble to Get Inside Our Heads Top for 2019: Bullough, Farrow (Catch and Kill), Wu, Chivers, Rosling, Greenberg, Blake, Allison, Caplan and Weinersmith, Kinzer, Delmer. I started the following books I expect to finish in early 2020: Myke Cole, Legion versus Phalanx: The Epic Struggle for Infantry Supremacy in the Ancient World Walter LaFeber, Inevitable Revolutions: The United States in Central America (2nd edition) Brad Smith and Carol Anne Browne, Tools and Weapons: The Promise and Peril of the Digital Age Peter H. Wilson, The Holy Roman Empire: A Thousand Years of Europe's History Two books I preordered and look forward to reading in 2020: Anna Wiener, Uncanny Valley: A Memoir (due out January 14) Thomas Rid, Active Measures: The Secret History of Disinformation and Political Warfare (due out April 21) (Previously: 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005.)

In Andy Greenberg’s Wired article on February 9, 2017, “Trump Cybersecurity Chief Could Be a ‘Voice of Reason," he writes: But when Trump’s draft executive order on cybersecurity emerged last week, it surprised the cybersecurity world by hewing closely to the recommendations of bipartisan experts—including one commission assembled by the Obama administration. The described timing and the link both refer to the original draft cybersecurity executive order, which does not at all resemble the recommendations of Obama's Commission on Enhancing National Cybersecurity or the recommendations of the Center for Strategic and International Studies Cyber Policy Task Force, which both included input from large numbers of security experts. Contrary to what Greenberg says, the executive order he refers to was widely criticized on a number of grounds, including that it is incredibly vague and high level, specifies an extremely short time frame for its reviews, and that it seemed to think it was a good idea to collect information about major U.S. vulnerabilities and defenses into one place and put it into the hands of then-National Security Advisor Michael T. Flynn. That original version of the executive order resembled the Trump campaign's website policy proposal on cybersecurity. The positive remarks, instead, were for a revised version of the cybersecurity executive order which was verbally described to reporters on the morning of January 31, the day that the signing of the order was expected to happen at 3 p.m., after Trump met for a listening session with security experts. The signing was cancelled, and the order has not yet been issued, but a draft subsequently got some circulation later in the week and was made public at the Lawfare blog on February 9. This executive order contains recommendations consistent with both the Cybersecurity Commission report and the CSIS Cyber Policy Task Force report, mandating the use of the NIST Cybersecurity Framework by federal agencies, putting the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in charge of enterprise risk assessment across agencies, promoting IT modernization and the promotion of cloud and shared services infrastructure, and directing DHS and other agency heads to work with private sector critical infrastructure owners on defenses. One key thing it does not do, which was recommended by both reports, is elevate the White House cybersecurity coordinator role (a role which the Trump administration has not yet filled, which was held by Michael Daniel in the Obama administration) to an Assistant to the President, reflecting the importance of cybersecurity. Greenberg's piece seems to assume that Thomas Bossert is in the lead cybersecurity coordinator role, but his role is Homeland Security Advisor (the role previously held by Lisa Monaco in the Obama administration), with broad responsibility for homeland security and counterterrorism, not cybersecurity-specific. Despite Greenberg's error confusing the two executive orders being pointed out to him on Twitter on February 9, the article hasn't been corrected as of February 16. Anonymous (2017-03-06): Dear Mr. Lippard, I apologize for contacting you in this odd way, but as your email does not seem to be publicly available, I found it my only recourse. ...

I received the following spam email today (a link on the email claims, falsely, that I opted in for it in October 2013) from the Christine Jones for governor campaign. Jones is a former GoDaddy executive who looks like a terrible candidate for governor of Arizona. Dear James,         As a Republican candidate for Governor, I am frequently asked where I stand on the issues important to our state-issues ranging from immigration and education to economic development and healthcare.         At a recent forum I was asked one of the single-most important questions that a candidate for political office can face. The question was, "Where does your moral compass come from?"         At three years old, I climbed onto the Sunday School bus that drove the neighborhood kids to the local evangelical church. It was there that I learned about God and His Son, Jesus. Since then, I have let my personal relationship with Him be my moral compass.         One of my life phrases is, "Do the right thing because it's the right thing to do." I am not interested in making excuses or politicizing important issues. I am interested in doing things based on conviction and personal belief. As Governor, I can promise you that I will adhere to my moral compass.         If you would like to hear more about my story and why I am running for Governor, I invite you to join me Tuesday, April 29th, from 6:30-8:00pm at New Life Community Church of the Nazarene in Show Low. I hope you can make it!         Best,         Jones for Governor, Inc · Primary         PO Box 13087         Phoenix, AZ 85002-3087, United States ...

While reading Ross Anderson’s massive tome, Security Engineering: A Guide to Building Dependable Systems (second edition), I came across this paragraph in section 19.7 on “Directed Energy Weapons” (p. 584): Western concern about EMP grew after the Soviet Union started a research program on non-nuclear EMP weapons in the mid-80s.  At the time, the United States was deploying 'neutron bombs' in Europe--enhanced radiation weapons that could kill people without demolishing buildings.  The Soviets portrayed this as a 'capitalist bomb' which would destroy people while leaving property intact, and responded by threatening a 'socialist bomb' to destroy property (in the form of electronics) while leaving the surrounding people intact. This reminded me of a science fiction story I read in Omni magazine at about the time in question, which Google reveals was "Returning Home" by Ian Watson in the December 1982 issue.  In the story, the Americans and the Soviets attacked each other, the Americans using neutron bombs which killed all of the Soviets, and the Soviets using some kind of bomb which destroyed essentially everything except the people.  The ending twist was that the surviving Americans ended up migrating to the Soviet Union and adopting the Soviet culture. Historical Comments wakawakwaka (2012-11-20): hey my skeptic friend can you take a look at the book written by johanna michaelsen who wrote the foreword to lauren stradford's satan underground? its really messed up...is their a way to investigate what really happened with her ? ...

Documents leaked from the Heartland Institute reveal its funding sources (including Charles G. Koch and an unnamed single donor providing about 20% of their total revenue) and recipients of funding (including $5,000/mo to Fred Singer and a plan to raise $90,000 for blogger Anthony Watts in 2012). The Heartland Institute is essentially the Tobacco Institute for climate change denial. See previous posts as this blog with the Heartland Institute tag. UPDATE (February 18, 2012): It appears that one of the documents, the one with the most embarrassing statements, was a forgery–but the statements I’ve made above all appear to be confirmed. UPDATE (February 21, 2012): Climate scientist Peter Gleick has confessed to being the leaker of the documents, but claims the apparently forged document was mailed to him anonymously and he scanned it in before distributing it with the others which he obtained by subterfuge after receiving the anonymous mailing. The oddities and errors in the forged document, however, strongly suggest Gleick himself forged the document after receiving the others. ...

This recent comparison has been making the rounds: As have a few other recent examples: But this has gone on for many years.  A few others from a few years back: I suspect the weekly news magazines are simply basing their cover decisions on what sells in the U.S.  Sad. Historical Comments Michael C. Rush (2011-11-27): Which came first, the chicken or the egg? ...

Chris Mooney has a very interesting interview with anthropologist Scott Atran on the Point of Inquiry podcast, in which Atran argues that terrorism is not the product of top-down, radical religious extremist organizations recruiting the poor and ignorant, but of groups of educated (and often educated in secular institutions) individuals who become disaffected, isolated, and radicalized. Much U.S. counterterrorism and “homeland security” activity assumes the former and thus is attacking the wrong problem. He also argues that reason and rationalism are the wrong tools for attacking religion, defends a view of religion as a natural by-product of the sorts of minds we’ve evolved to have (very similar to Pascal Boyer’s account, which I think is largely correct), and throws in a few digs at the new atheists for making claims about religion that are contrary to empirical evidence. Some of the commenters at the Point of Inquiry/Center for Inquiry forums site seem to be under the misapprehension that Atran is a post-modernist. I don’t see it–he’s not making the argument that reason doesn’t work to find out things about the world, he’s making the argument that the tools of science and reason are human constructions that work well at finding things out about the world, but not so much for persuading people of things, or as the basis for long-term institutions for the sort of creatures we are. Atran shows up in the comments to elaborate on his positions and respond to criticism. My compliments to Chris Mooney for having consistently high-quality, interesting guests who are not the same voices we always hear at skeptical conferences.

Yesterday I received an email that contained yet another argument that Obama’s birth certificate (the PDF’d scan of the “long form” certificate) was a fake, based on erroneous claims about the name of Kenya in 1961 and the name of the hospital which were already debunked at Snopes.com four months ago. But this prompted me to see if there were any more advocates of wild claims about the birth certificate, and I came across Douglas Vogt’s alleged analysis of the birth certificate and, more importantly, a very well-done, detailed debunking of that analysis by Kevin Davidson (known on his blog as “Dr. Conspiracy”), who has done a great job of responding to numerous Obama conspiracy claims. Check out his “The Debunker’s Guide to Obama Conspiracy Theories." Vogt, the author of the analysis which Dr. Conspiracy debunks, is also an example of “crank magnetism”–he is the author of Reality Revealed: The Theory of Multidimensional Reality, a 1978 book which looks like a classic work of crackpottery. Vogt bills himself as a “geologist and science philosopher” who: ...

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ CD8) was shot this morning at an event at a Tucson grocery store, along with several other people. The Tucson Citizen reports that she was “shot point blank in the head." This brings to mind a previous gun incident at another Tucson event at a grocery store in August 2009. The image below is from Sarah Palin’s website, “Take Back the 20." The lower right target sight image on Arizona is Congressional District 8, which was one of the “targets” for candidates who supported the Health Care Reform bill to be defeated. ...

Former Arizona state legislator Pamela Gorman, or someone claiming to be her, took issue with the following passage in her Wikipedia entry: Also in 2005, Gorman was one of several Arizona legislators who supported parental rights legislation which was also supported by the Citizens Commission on Human Rights. She attended the grand opening of the Church of Scientology's "Psychiatry: An Industry of Death" exhibition in Los Angeles in December 2005 at the request of Robin Read, President of the National Federation for Women Legislators.The edit, which was described as "clarification of falsehoods entered about me and other organizations" and came from Cox Communications Phoenix IP 68.231.27.68, added the following right after that text: It was a quick visit which did not include any meals or other "fluff." The goal of the trip was to determine what the Citizen's Commission on Human Rights was about, as they were becoming heavily involved in NFWL. The cost of the roundtrip flight for the small group to tour the museum was reported by CCHR, according to Arizona disclosure laws. Gorman's political enemies have tried for years to make a leap from her touring a museum as a favor to the president of her professional organization to her actually being a Scientologist. Further attempts to alter this page with falsehoods of this nature may be met with legal action.I'm not aware of any online claims that Gorman, who is an evangelical Christian, is a Scientologist, only that she was one of several Arizona legislators who sponsored legislation on behalf of a Scientology front group and accepted gifts from the Church of Scientology. It's good that Gorman was willing to give a bit more context, but it should be noted that this was not simple "parental rights legislation which was also supported by the Citizens Commission on Human Rights," it was a bill that was at least partly written by CCHR. As the Arizona Republic reported at the time, the original text required not only parental consent before mental health evaluations by schools, it required that parents read CCHR anti-psychiatry propaganda before signing a consent form: Another bill introduced this year would have required written consent from parents for any mental-health screenings in schools. The bill was similar to other measures passed in previous years and vetoed by the governor. Sponsored by Sen. Karen Johnson, a member of the commission's international advisory group, the bill had a bipartisan group of 36 co-sponsors. Still, it failed by a tie vote in the Education Committee, in part because of testimony of mental-health advocates. The original text of the bill would have required parents to sign a lengthy consent form that contained paragraph after paragraph of negative information about psychiatric practices.Information about CCHR is easy to come by on the Internet (e.g., at Wikipedia or xenu.net), so it's unclear why Gorman needed to accept a round trip flight to Los Angeles on the CCHR's dime to find out "what the Citizen's Commission on Human Rights was about," or why she sponsored their bill.