Podcasts about american intelligence

Welcome back to the Grey Dynamics Podcast. Today, we are hosting an episode with Douglas London, a former clandestine service case officer and station chief with over three decades of experience in downrange assignments. London career with Langley ranged from recruiting assets in hostile environments to operating under official cover.Douglas London is also a Adjunct Associate Professor at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service where he teaches Intelligence and National Security Studies. During the episode, the author of “The Recruiter: Spying and the Lost Art of American Intelligence” will share his insights on current tradecraft in human intelligence. Find DouglasLinkedIn ProfileTwitter ProfileThe Recruiter BookRelated LinksThe Spy and the State: The History of American IntelligenceFormer Paramilitary Operations Officer Ric Prado on his life in the ShadowsGrey Dynamics Intelligence Capability Development and TrainingGrey Dynamics Operational SupportGrey Dynamics Open Source Intelligence ServicesGrey Dynamics Case StudiesGrey Dynamics StoryAdvance Your Intelligence Career Today!We are the first fully online intelligence school helping professionals to achieve their long term goals. Our school with tons of new material is currently under construction and will be out there very The Grey Dynamics Podcast is available on all major platforms!YouTubeSpotifyApple PodcastGoogle PodcastAmazon Podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nicholas Reynolds PhD discussing his 2022 book "Need to Know: World War II and the Rise of American Intelligence" with AFIO President, James Hughes.  Interview of Tuesday, 4 March 2025. Interviewer and Host: AFIO President James Hughes.

The Office of Strategic Services (OSS) was an intelligence agency of the United States during World War II. The OSS was formed as an agency of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS)[3] to coordinate espionage activities behind enemy lines for all branches of the United States Armed Forces. Other OSS functions included the use of propaganda, subversion, and post-war planning.

Is code going to be 100% AI-generated a year from now? Reid shares where he diverges from Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei's recent prediction about the future of programming. Plus, he and Aria discuss “vibe revenue,” along with how America can maintain soft power through software.   For more info on the podcast and transcripts of all the episodes, visit https://www.possible.fm/podcast/ 

David Welker, author of "African American Intelligence Contributions during the American Civil War." An article appearing in the International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence.

David Welker, author of "African American Intelligence Contributions during the American Civil War." An article appearing in the International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence.

In today's episode, we examine a disturbing massacre that erupted on the Fort Hood military base outside of Killeen, Texas, during which 13 people were killed and more than 30 people were injured. The story of this mass shooting is dark, and highlights a number of key failures from within the American Intelligence community, and the United States Army itself. You're listening, to MURDER IN AMERICA. - Listen to our new show, "THE CONSPIRACY FILES"!: -Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/5IY9nWD2MYDzlSYP48nRPl -Apple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-conspiracy-files/id1752719844 -Amazon/Audible - https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/ab1ade99-740c-46ae-8028-b2cf41eabf58/the-conspiracy-files -Pandora - https://www.pandora.com/podcast/the-conspiracy-files/PC:1001089101 -iHeart - https://iheart.com/podcast/186907423/ -PocketCast - https://pca.st/dpdyrcca -CastBox - https://castbox.fm/channel/id6193084?country=us - Stay Connected: Join the Murder in America fam in our free Facebook Community for a behind-the-scenes look, more insights and current events in the true crime world: https://www.facebook.com/groups/4365229996855701 If you want even more Murder in America bonus content, including ad-free episodes, come join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/murderinamerica Instagram: http://instagram.com/murderinamerica/ Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/people/Murder-in-America-Podcast/100086268848682/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/MurderInAmerica TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@theparanormalfiles and https://www.tiktok.com/@courtneybrowen Feeling spooky? Follow Colin as he travels state to state (and even country to country!) investigating claims of extreme paranormal activity and visiting famous haunted locations on The Paranormal Files Official Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheParanormalFilesOfficialChannel - (c) BLOOD IN THE SINK PRODUCTIONS 2025 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On today's show, the second of a two-part interview with Bruce Brill, who wrote Deceit of an Ally – A Memoir of Military Anti-Semitism, NSA's Secret Jew Room and Yom Kippur War Treachery. Bruce and four other American US Army servicemen worked for the US National Security Agency (NSA) in 1973. They came to discover a true story of an Un-American Deep-State NSA Cabal in the highest echelon of Washington, D.C.'s Swamp of corruption. They came to learn that US intelligence not only knew Egypt and Syria were going to attack Israel but knew this for a certainty, knew it days in advance, and knew when the attack would commence, contradicting the US intelligence agencies' own claims that everyone was fooled and fully taken by surprise in the events of October 6, 1973, referred to as the Yom Kippur War. Of the 1300 books written about that event, not one reveals how Israel fell prey to a deception perpetrated by their American Ally that cost Israel over 2,600 lives. Brill and his colleagues realized that Israel was NOT informed of what American intelligence knew because Israel's top leaders were intentionally given false intelligence that the Arabs would NOT attack. Precisely fifty years later, this same Cabal of deception once again stepped into action and carried out its evil work before the alleged surprise sneak attack against Israel on October 7, 2023, leading to where we are today in Israeli and Middle East politics. Although the "Jew Room" term is no longer used, it has morphed in name and is still active in the NSA American intelligence community. Here is Bruce Brill to continue his story.

Please, feel free to send a text message here and give us feedback. Also, you may send a text msg or leave voicemail (425) 550-6670Shalom, I am Avi ben Mordechai, and this is Real Israel Talk RadioOn today's show, the second of a two-part interview with Bruce Brill, who wrote Deceit of an Ally – A Memoir of Military Anti-Semitism, NSA's Secret Jew Room and Yom Kippur War Treachery. Bruce and four other American US Army servicemen worked for the US National Security Agency (NSA) in 1973. They came to discover a true story of an Un-American Deep-State NSA Cabal in the highest echelon of Washington, D.C.'s Swamp of corruption. They came to learn that US intelligence not only knew Egypt and Syria were going to attack Israel but knew this for a certainty, knew it days in advance, and knew when the attack would commence, contradicting the US intelligence agencies' own claims that everyone was fooled and fully taken by surprise in the events of October 6, 1973, referred to as the Yom Kippur War.Of the 1300 books written about that event, not one reveals how Israel fell prey to a deception perpetrated by their American Ally that cost Israel over 2,600 lives. Brill and his colleagues realized that Israel was NOT informed of what American intelligence knew because Israel's top leaders were intentionally given false intelligence that the Arabs would NOT attack. Precisely fifty years later, this same Cabal of deception once again stepped into action and carried out its evil work before the alleged surprise sneak attack against Israel on October 7, 2023, leading to where we are today in Israeli and Middle East politics. Although the term "Jew Room" is no longer used, it has morphed in name only and is still active within the CIA/NSA American intelligence community. Find out more about it here in this podcast. Here is Bruce Brill to continue his story. Support the show

The American intelligence community (IC) is a complex network of 18 different agencies constantly vying for authority and resources. This competition, along with the ongoing effort to balance civilian and military organizations within the IC, is the focus of today's discussion. Dr. Jeff Rogg, a senior research fellow at the Global and National Security Institute, joins podcast editor Ron Granieri to explore the history of the U.S. intelligence system, highlighting its civilian-military dynamics and the critical balance between national security and civil liberties. They delve into the roles of key figures like William Donovan and examine the challenges faced by various Directors of Central Intelligence as they navigate the intricate relationship between military and civilian agencies. This insightful conversation also raises questions about potential reforms needed within the intelligence community, especially considering the growing capabilities of surveillance technology and the need to preserve individual freedoms while ensuring national security.

Summary Jim Himes (Website; X) joins Andrew (X; LinkedIn) to discuss the U.S. House Intelligence Committee. Jim has served as the U.S. representative for Connecticut's 4th congressional district since 2009.  What You'll Learn Intelligence The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence: Its role and operations The importance of bipartisan collaboration Transparency and accountability in intelligence  Congressman Himes' personal experiences during 9/11, its impact on his career in intelligence, and 9/11's impact on intelligence at large Reflections Public trust and earning confidence Partnership and cooperation And much, much more … Quotes of the Week “I get asked all the time, ‘Oh my gosh, you see all the threats. Do you sleep at night?' … Yes, I do see with particularly exquisite detail the threats against us. I also get to see the detail of the assets and the people that we deploy against those threats. And because I get to see with great detail the assets and the tools that we have to address those threats, yes, I do sleep at night. Not because they will ever be perfect, but because these are incredibly dedicated people, the technology is amazing, and it is commensurate with the threats out there.” -Jim Himes Resources  SURFACE SKIM *SpyCasts* Digital Innovation and the Next Frontier of Intelligence with Jennifer Ewbank (2024) The Future of OSINT and the Intelligence Community with Jason Barrett (2024) The Future of NATO with Leon Panetta and Expert Panel (2024) CIA Director, Defense Secretary, Gentleman with Leon Panetta (2024) DEEPER DIVE Books Sies, Lies, and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence, A. B. Zegart (Princeton University Press, 2022) The Secret World: A History of Intelligence, C. Andrew (Yale University Press, 2019) The First Congress: How James Madison, George Washington, and a Group of Extraordinary Men Invented the Government, F. M. Bordewich (Simon & Schuster, 2016) Primary Sources  House Intelligence Committee COVID-19 Report (2022) Unclassified Summary of the Second Interim Report on the Origins of the COVID-19 Pandemic (2022) House Intelligence Committee Report on Russian Active Measures (2018) Snowden Report (2016) The 9/11 Commission Report (2004)  H. Res. 658 (1977) *Wildcard Resource* One of Connecticut's very first representatives was a gentleman named Roger Sherman. Sherman is unique not only for being one of Jim's congressional predecessors but also because he is the only person to have signed all four great state papers of the United States.  These include: The Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the Articles of Association, and the Constitution. As a bonus, he also signed the 1774 Petition to the King.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Justin's guest today is Dr. Mark Stout, who has held many positions, both inside and outside the U.S. intelligence community. He's worked as an intelligence analyst for the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research for the CIA, and was a civilian employee for the U.S. Army at the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia. He was also the historian for the International Spy Museum from 2010 until 2013, and was the director of the Master's in Arts Program for Global Security Studies at John Hopkins University, former and founding president of the North American Society for Intelligence History. He's also authored and edited several books, and his articles have been published in many professional journals over the years. He's returned to the podcast to discuss his new book on U.S. intelligence before WWII.Hear Mark's first appearance on episode 44, A Secret US Intelligence Organization: Mysteries of the Pond, here.Connect with Mark:Bluesky: @markstout.bsky.socialCheck out the book, World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence, here. https://kansaspress.ku.edu/9780700635856/Connect with Spycraft 101:Get Justin's latest book, Murder, Intrigue, and Conspiracy: Stories from the Cold War and Beyond, here.spycraft101.comIG: @spycraft101Shop: shop.spycraft101.comPatreon: Spycraft 101Find Justin's first book, Spyshots: Volume One, here.Check out Justin's second book, Covert Arms, here.Download the free eBook, The Clandestine Operative's Sidearm of Choice, here.A podcast from SPYSCAPE.A History of the World in Spy Objects Incredible tools and devices and their real-world use.Support the Show.

Summary Jefferson Morley and Mark Zaid join Andrew in a debate over the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Mark and Jeff are longtime friends and colleagues with very different viewpoints of what truly happened on November 22nd, 1963.  What You'll Learn Intelligence The lasting questions surrounding the Kennedy assassination Lee Harvey Oswald's intelligence connections The Warren Commission and the JFK Assassination Records The strangest theories Mark and Jeff have heard, and the most plausible explanations of who killed President Kennedy Reflections Public distrust and the search for truth Reactions and responses to tragedy And much, much more … Quotes of the Week  ”That's why I think they probably have something to hide. Because it doesn't make sense otherwise … If they had access to that kind of straightforward story, we would get that.” – Jefferson Morley. Resources  SURFACE SKIM *SpyCasts* The Skinny on American Intelligence & the Law with D.C. “Super Lawyer” Mark Zaid (2024) Rise of Devils: The Origins of Modern Terrorism with James Crossland (2024) Havana Syndrome – A Panel featuring Nicky Woolf, Marc Polymeropoulos, and Mark Zaid (2023) The Past 75 Years with Historian of the CIA Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones (2022) *Beginner Resources* Lee Harvey Oswald, Britannica (2024) [Short biography] JFK Files: What we're learning from newly released Kennedy assassination records, CBS News, YouTube (2022) [6 min. video] Kennedy Assassination Timeline, The Sixth Floor Museum (n.d.) [Timeline of events] DEEPER DIVE Books The Devil's Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America's Secret Government, D. Talbot (Harper Perennial, 2016) JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, J. W. Douglass (Touchstone, 2010) Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA, J. Morley (University Press of Kansas, 2008) Primary Sources  President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (1992) Select Committee on Assassinations Report (1978) Warren Commission Report (1964)  LBJ Address to Congress (1963) Interrogation of Lee Harvey Oswald (1963) JFK Autopsy Report (1963) The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection  *Wildcard Resource* Test how you would do in Kennedy's shoes by playing 13 Days: The Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962 – A two-player board game that tests your quick-thinking strategy and conflict resolution skills.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Summary Jefferson Morley and Mark Zaid join Andrew in a debate over the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Mark and Jeff are longtime friends and colleagues with very different viewpoints of what truly happened on November 22nd, 1963.  What You'll Learn Intelligence The lasting questions surrounding the Kennedy assassination Lee Harvey Oswald's intelligence connections The Warren Commission and the JFK Assassination Records The strangest theories Mark and Jeff have heard, and the most plausible explanations of who killed President Kennedy Reflections Public distrust and the search for truth Reactions and responses to tragedy And much, much more … Quotes of the Week  ”That's why I think they probably have something to hide. Because it doesn't make sense otherwise … If they had access to that kind of straightforward story, we would get that.” – Jefferson Morley. Resources  SURFACE SKIM *SpyCasts* The Skinny on American Intelligence & the Law with D.C. “Super Lawyer” Mark Zaid (2024) Rise of Devils: The Origins of Modern Terrorism with James Crossland (2024) Havana Syndrome – A Panel featuring Nicky Woolf, Marc Polymeropoulos, and Mark Zaid (2023) The Past 75 Years with Historian of the CIA Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones (2022) *Beginner Resources* Lee Harvey Oswald, Britannica (2024) [Short biography] JFK Files: What we're learning from newly released Kennedy assassination records, CBS News, YouTube (2022) [6 min. video] Kennedy Assassination Timeline, The Sixth Floor Museum (n.d.) [Timeline of events] DEEPER DIVE Books The Devil's Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America's Secret Government, D. Talbot (Harper Perennial, 2016) JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, J. W. Douglass (Touchstone, 2010) Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA, J. Morley (University Press of Kansas, 2008) Primary Sources  President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (1992) Select Committee on Assassinations Report (1978) Warren Commission Report (1964)  LBJ Address to Congress (1963) Interrogation of Lee Harvey Oswald (1963) JFK Autopsy Report (1963) The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection  *Wildcard Resource* Test how you would do in Kennedy's shoes by playing 13 Days: The Cuban Missile Crisis, 1962 – A two-player board game that tests your quick-thinking strategy and conflict resolution skills.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As the Second World War started, an unsung cadre of US librarians and other information management professionals was making its way to Europe to acquire printed material that could help American analysts understand international threats. As the war went on, the mission of these experts expanded to also include an unprecedented effort to locate, preserve, and ultimately decide what to do with millions of printed items of Nazi propaganda--and with the books and documents that Germany had seized and hidden during the war. Professor Kathy Peiss, who teached in the Department of History at the University of Pennsylvania, joined host David Priess to discuss this, and more, including many stories from her compelling book Information Hunters: When Librarians, Soldiers, and Spies Banded Together in World War II Europe. They talked about the field of American Studies, her family connection that led her to study librarians and spies in World War II, the World War I-era connections between librarians and national security matters, the cooperation in the early 1940s between America's emerging intelligence efforts and the Library of Congress, extraordinary women who worked to gather materials in war-torn Europe, advances in microfilm technology and use as a result of their efforts, tensions between the US and UK in open source collection, the vital role Lisbon played in information hunting during the war, unique aspects of the material acquisition and preservation effort as the war ended, the heated debate over the destruction of Nazi books, challenges involved in the return of recovered materials, and more. Including zoot suits. Yes, really.Works mentioned in this episode:The book Information Hunters by Kathy PeissThe movie The Monuments MenThe book The Monuments Men by Robert Edsel and Bret WitterThe book The Hunter by Tana FrenchThe book Dr. No by Percival EverettThe book World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence by Mark StoutChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Noam Osband of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As the Second World War started, an unsung cadre of US librarians and other information management professionals was making its way to Europe to acquire printed material that could help American analysts understand international threats. As the war went on, the mission of these experts expanded to also include an unprecedented effort to locate, preserve, and ultimately decide what to do with millions of printed items of Nazi propaganda--and with the books and documents that Germany had seized and hidden during the war. Professor Kathy Peiss, who teached in the Department of History at the University of Pennsylvania, joined host David Priess to discuss this, and more, including many stories from her compelling book Information Hunters: When Librarians, Soldiers, and Spies Banded Together in World War II Europe. They talked about the field of American Studies, her family connection that led her to study librarians and spies in World War II, the World War I-era connections between librarians and national security matters, the cooperation in the early 1940s between America's emerging intelligence efforts and the Library of Congress, extraordinary women who worked to gather materials in war-torn Europe, advances in microfilm technology and use as a result of their efforts, tensions between the US and UK in open source collection, the vital role Lisbon played in information hunting during the war, unique aspects of the material acquisition and preservation effort as the war ended, the heated debate over the destruction of Nazi books, challenges involved in the return of recovered materials, and more. Including zoot suits. Yes, really.Works mentioned in this episode:The book Information Hunters by Kathy PeissThe movie The Monuments MenThe book The Monuments Men by Robert Edsel and Bret WitterThe book The Hunter by Tana FrenchThe book Dr. No by Percival EverettThe book World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence by Mark StoutChatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Noam Osband of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Summary Dennis Eger (LinkedIn) and Shawn Nilius (LinkedIn) join Andrew (X; LinkedIn) to discuss open-source intelligence. Combined, the two have over six decades of service to the U.S. Army.  What You'll Learn Intelligence What is Open-Source Intelligence  How the US Army utilizes and collects OSINT  OSINT across the Intelligence Community How OSINT has impacted the War in Ukraine Reflections The power of information and how you use it Cyber ethics And much, much more … Quotes of the Week “If [civilians are] taking a video and posting it, they become in the cycle … The amount of things that people do on the internet that leaves their data or their information out there – Their data becomes big part of the intelligence cycle and they probably don't even know that they're doing it.” – Dennis Eger. Resources  SURFACE SKIM *SpyCasts* My Life in American Intelligence with Barry Zulauf (2023) Intelligence, Special Operations, and Strategy with Michael Vickers (2023) Ukraine & the Alliance with NATO's Assistant Secretary General for Intelligence David Cattler (2023) Irregular Warfare & Intelligence with IWC Director Dennis Walters (2023) *Beginner Resources* A Brief History of the US Army, R. Guina, The Military Wallet (2024) [Short article] What is Open-Source Intelligence? OSINT Dojo, YouTube (2023) [7 min. video] A Brief History of Open Source Intelligence, C. Colquhoun, Bellingcat (2016) [Short article] DEEPER DIVE Books OSINT Techniques: Resources for Uncovering Online Information, M. Bazzell (2023)  Deep Dive: Exploring the Real-world Value of Open Source Intelligence, R. L. Baker (Wiley, 2023) Open Source Intelligence Methods and Tools: A Practical Guide to Online Intelligence, N. A. Hassan & R. Hijazi (Apress, 2018)  Primary Sources  The IC OSINT Strategy (2024)  Invasion of Ukraine on Google Maps (2022) Ethical Frameworks in Open-Source Intelligence (2022)  Open-Source Intelligence, Department of the Army (2012)  Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (2004)  *Wildcard Resource* While OSINT may seem like the new kid on the intelligence block, its foundations have actually been around perhaps longer than any other -INT. During the Civil War, the Bureau of Military Information collected open-source information from Southern newspapers to track the Confederate army. Check out this letter from Abraham Lincoln citing intelligence gathered on the location of Southern troops.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Did Israel's failure to anticipate Hamas's surprise attack in October 2023 stem from an overreliance on technical rather than human intelligence gathering? And is TikTok really a national security threat to America? Amy Zegart, the Hoover Institution's Morris Arnold and Nona Jean Cox Senior Fellow and author of Spies, Lies, and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence, joins Hoover senior fellows Niall Ferguson, John Cochrane, and H.R. McMaster to discuss Israel's intel failure, whether TikTok is the menace it's portrayed to be, plus how spy films (wrongly) shape the public's view on espionage. Next the fellows discuss the driving forces behind campus unrest across the US and how long the movement will last, followed by a series of other discussions: rebutting anti-American sentiment; the best fast-food burger; the popularity of “Austrian school” economics in South America; and the likely winner were Niall, John, and H.R. to slug it out in a UFC octagon (spoiler alert: Niall and John don't like their chances). 

Summary Mark Stout (X; LinkedIn) joins Andrew (X; LinkedIn) to discuss his new book, World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence. Mark Stout is a former intelligence analyst and former SPY Historian.  What You'll Learn Intelligence The first American intelligence “agencies” Codebreaking during WWI The American Protective League and spy paranoia  WWI's effect on American culture and politics Reflections Challenging common historical thought  Studying the “forgotten” wars  And much, much more … Quotes of the Week “[After World War I] there will never be a time again when the United States won't have squadrons in the Army Air Corps, later the U. S. Air Force, and similarly the Navy. We would never again be without aerial reconnaissance squadrons. There would never again be a time when the United States didn't have at least one code-breaking organization.” – Mark Stout. Resources  SURFACE SKIM *Spotlight Resource*  World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence, Mark Stout (University Press of Kansas, 2023)  *SpyCasts* Rise of Devils: The Origins of Modern Terrorism with James Crossland (2024) Spies: The Epic Intelligence War Between East vs. West with Calder Walton (2023) The Lion and the Fox – Civil War Spy vs. Spy with Alexander Rose (2023)  The Birth of American Propaganda – A Conversation on Manipulating the Masses with John Hamilton (2021) *Beginner Resources* World War I, Explained in 5 Minutes! YouTube (2023) [5 min. video] The Journey of the Intelligence Community, M. Thomas, Office of the Director of National Intelligence (2023) [Timeline of the US IC] The United States in the First World War, National Park Service (2021) [Short article] DEEPER DIVE Books Manipulating the Masses: Woodrow Wilson and the Birth of American Propaganda, J. M. Hamilton (LSU Press, 2020) Codes, Ciphers and Spies: Tales of Military Intelligence in World War I, J. F. Dooley (Copernicus, 2016) The Zimmermann Telegram: Intelligence, Diplomacy, and America's Entry into World War I, T. Boghardt (Naval Institute Press, 2012)  Primary Sources  Treaty of Versailles (1919) Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points Speech (1918) Telegram Announcing Armistice (1918) Sedition Act (1918) The Zimmermann Telegram (1917) Espionage Act (1917)  Woodrow Wilson Third Annual Message, Warns of Espionage (1915)  *Wildcard Resource* 12 Step Method to Reveal Secret Writing (ca. 1913-1924)  Germany was particularly fond of invisible ink as a tactic of spycraft during World War I. If you came across a document suspected of secret writing, you might use these 12 steps to reveal the hidden message …   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's show is FULL of information that most have not heard yet! If you ever wonder how Democrats could have chosen Joe Biden to represent their party, we actually have the complete explanation. In fact, Rush Limbaugh found it in July of 2020. When you hear it, you'll actually know WHY they continue to support Biden! And it's not because of his leadership. Many of us wondered why the American Intelligence agencies that had so seriously exposed totalitarian spying and manipulation of information against Americans seemed to come to a screeching "whoa!" during the Trump years. A former CIA spy explains it in detail. This show is full of things we NEVER knew!

Summary Mark Zaid (X, LinkedIn) joins Andrew (X; LinkedIn) to discuss American intelligence and the law. You've heard of a “lawyer to the stars,” Mark is the “lawyer to the spies” What You'll Learn Intelligence The quirks of being a lawyer in this space How the Espionage Act works in practice  The trial of the Rosenbergs The origins of FOIA and its purpose The Legal foundations underpinning espionage and intelligence Reflections Challenging authority  The delicate balance of secrecy And much, much more … Quotes of the Week “I still love working every day, 30 years later, because there's still something new. As much as I fight for declassification and transparency, I will at times also see information and learn of events where I go, “Oh, I get it. Yeah, that stuff cannot be known. That's incredible what we did. That's pretty wild.” – Mark Zaid. Resources  SURFACE SKIM *SpyCasts* Agent of Betrayal, FBI Spy Robert Hanssen with CBS' Major Garrett and Friends (2023) David Petraeus on Ukraine & Intelligence with the former CIA Director & 4* General (2023) Havana Syndrome – A Panel featuring Nicky Woolf, Marc Polymeropoulos, and Mark Zaid (2023)  How Artificial Intelligence is Changing the Spy Game with Mike Susong (2023)  *Beginner Resources* What Is a Whistleblower? Protections, Law, Importance, and Example, W. Kenton, Investopedia (2022) [Short article] What is a Lawyer? American Bar Association (2019) [Short article] Legal System Basics, CrashCourse, YouTube (2015) [8 min. video] DEEPER DIVE Books State of Silence: The Espionage Act and the Rise of America's Secrecy Regime, S. Lebovic (Basic Books, 2023) Ethel Rosenberg, A. Sebba (Griffin, 2022) Spies on Trial: True Tales of Espionage in the Courtroom, C. C. Kuhne (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2019) Primary Sources  A Letter from Aldrich Ames on Polygraph Testing (2000) Whistle Blower Protection Act (1989)   DoD Polygraph Program (1984) National Security Decision Directive 84 (1983) Inspector General Act (1978) Freedom of Information Act (1966)  Administrative Procedure Act (1946)  Espionage Act (1917) *Wildcard Resource* John Adams, a 2008 HBO Mini-Series chronicling the Founding Father's role in early America John Adams, much like Mark, was a lawyer dedicated to the right to representation. Adams, ever dedicated to the honor of his profession, was the only attorney who agreed to defend the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre. You can read the whole trial here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

American Intelligence officials infested social media companies to regulate content and push a color revolution on America. @AdrianSladeShow on X --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/adrianslade/support

Find me and the show on social media @DrWilmerLeon on X (Twitter), Instagram, and YouTube Facebook page is www.facebook.com/Drwilmerleonctd   TRANSCRIPT: Speaker 2 (00:14): Welcome to the Connecting the Dots podcast with Dr. Wilmer Leon. I'm Wilmer Leon. Here's the point. We have a tendency to view current events as though they occur in a vacuum, failing to understand and to truly appreciate the broader historical context in which most of these events occur. During each episode of this program, my guests and I will have probing, provocative, and in-depth discussions that connect the dots between current events and the broader historic context in which they occur. This will enable you to better understand and analyze the events that impact the global village in which we live. On today's episode, the questions are why are American neocons hell bent on starting a conflict with Russia? What's going on in Ukraine? Who was Alexi Naval? And is NATO really still relevant? For insight into all of this let's turn to my guest. He's a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. (01:31) His most recent book is entitled Disarmament In the Time of Perestroika, he is Scott Ritter. Scott, welcome. Thanks for joining me and let's connect some dots. Well, thanks for having me. And first of all, I have to say I love the name of your show in the intelligence business, connecting the dots is what we do. You never get the full picture. You get little pieces of information, and the question is, how do you connect them to get a proper narrative? So I like the idea. Well, thank you, Scott. I appreciate that. So the answers to each of these questions I think could be a show of their own, but let's start with in 2024, why are neocons so afraid of Russia? I mean, when we go back to this nauseating ongoing narrative, Hillary Clinton blamed Russia for hacking into the DNC server. No evidence was presented, but the narrative held and continues to hold in spite of scientific empiric evidence. (02:39) To the contrary, the whole Russiagate fiasco, even now, representative Mike Turner from Ohio, the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, he warns that Russia may be developing a space-based weapon that can target US satellites, NBC reported on the 19th of this month, alarming new warnings about Russia held zapper erosion. Nuclear power plant may be on the verge of explosion. These are just a few examples and we'll get to the specifics of each of these in a few, but just these are just some overarching examples of example, this Russia phobia. Why? Well, I mean, let's just look at historic examples. At the end of the Second World War, we had built up this economy that was a lot of people forget that before the Second World War happened, we had a thing called the Great Depression, and our economy was not the healthiest in the world, and we used global war as a way to mobilize our economy, to get it up to war footing. (03:48) And there was a recognition that with 12 million guys coming home, we needed jobs. And if we tried to transition back to a civilian economy, we ran the danger of going backwards instead of forward. So we had to keep this military industrial complex up and running. But to do that, you need an enemy, you need a bad guy. Therefore, we have the Iron Curtain, Winston Churchill's, Fulton, Missouri speech in, I think 1946, the creation of nato and then the Red Scare. I mean, Russia has always been communism back then. Not just Russia, but communist China was always the perfect boogeyman to say, Ooh, danger lurks. We therefore now have a justification to militarize our economy and back this up politically by pointing to this threat. Back in the fifties, we had the bomber gap. You remember that? (04:52) Read about it little before my time, but I got you. Yeah, I mean, we weren't around back. We're old Wilber, but we're not that old. But yeah, the idea of, I think the Russians took, had like a dozen bombers, but on a military parade, they just flew them over and over and over again in a circle over Moscow, and the people on the ground looked up and said, oh my goodness, there's a whole bunch of bombers. And so the CIA used this, the Congress used this to justify building more American bombers, even though once we got our satellites up, we went, there's only 12. There's not that many, but we never told the truth. Then there was the missile gap. John F. Kennedy was responsible for that one too. The Russians have missiles. We have to build missiles, missiles, missiles until we found out that they didn't have the missiles. (05:40) But it didn't matter. We continued to build them anyways, and this led to the Cuban missiles crisis, which scared the live and you know what out of everybody and got us on the path of arms control, at least trying to contain, but we still called them the threat. That's all that's happening here. I can guarantee you this Wilmer, the neocons aren't looking for a war with Russia because as politically biased as they are, as fear mongers are, they're not suicidal and they know what the consequences of a war with Russia would be, but what they're doing is they're pushing it right up to the cusp of conflict, especially now when you have an American society that's sort of waking up to the fact that we're spending a lot of money over there when we need to be spending a lot of money back here at home, and people are starting to ask questions. (06:30) So the way that you avoid answering these questions is to create that straw man that threat, the Russian threat. The Russians are evil. You said it perfectly. They interfered with our election. They're doing this, that and the other thing, and therefore we must spend 64 billion in Ukraine even though we can't spend $64 million in Flint, Michigan. I mean, it's this sort of argument that's going on, and this may seem as a somo or a juvenile question, but how dangerous is this? World War? I was to a great degree, started on a fluke. It is in many instances or in many minds attributable to the assassination of Archduke Fran Ferdinand. But that in and of itself isn't what started the war. There were a number of skirmishes and a number of tensions that were going on in Europe, and this was really just the spark that led to World War I. (07:33) If my understanding of history is accurate. So do we find ourselves now, whether it be Russia and Ukraine, China and Taiwan, North Korea and South Korea, I mean the United States, what's going on in Venezuela as the United States is interfering in the Venezuelan elections? There are a number, of course, we've got Gaza in the Middle East, so we've got our hands, we're smoking at the gas station and smoking at a lot of gas stations. I'm going to steal that, by the way. I like that analogy. Just letting everybody know I'm using that from now on. Look, first of all, there's no such thing as a sophomore question. The one thing I learned, and I learned this from guys who are 20 times smarter than me, that the only stupid questions, the one you don't ask, you don't ask, but you're a hundred percent right. Barbara Tuckman wrote a book, the Guns of August, I think it was a PO prize winning book about how we got to World War I. (08:38) And one of the key aspects to that wasn't just the different crises that were taking place, but how people responded to that and the thing that made World War I inevitable, even though everybody, if you read the book, everybody in the summer of 1914, nobody wanted war. Everybody believed it would be avoided, it was just suicidal. But then they got into this cycle of mobilization, mobilizing their societies economically and militarily for conflict because that's just what you did when you had a crisis. But it's okay, we're just mobilizing and we're not really going to war. What scares me about today is there's a recognition on the part of everybody that war would be suicidal, that we don't want this, but look at what we've done. We built up the Ukrainian military from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands and got it equipped, organized, trained to go to war against Russia. (09:44) What do you think we were doing in Ukraine from 2015 to 2022 when we were training a battalion of Ukrainian soldiers every 55 days for the sole purpose of fighting Russians? This helped trigger a conflict. It got Russia to respond. Then we poured more money into Ukraine. What did Russia do? Mobilize People need to put on their hats and go, wait a minute, that's a word we don't want to hear. Russia mobilized not just the 300,000, but the process of mobilization continued to where they trained 450,000 volunteers since January 1st, just for everybody who's wondering what's going on in Ukraine, I know that's going to be later on question. Russia mobilized 53,000 volunteers. This is at a time when Ukraine's thumping people on the head and takes 'em to the front because nobody wants to fight. 53,000 Russians volunteered to go fight in the war since January 1st. (10:42) They're coming in at 1000, 1,500 a day. And let me reiterate, that's not press gangs like they're using in Russia. G roaming the villages taking the men and now women from the streets and putting them into the military. That's not conscription, that's volunteer. And let me make this following point, it's even more interesting than that. It's not a bunch of 22-year-old red meat eating young men who are looking for adventure and romance. The average age of the Russian volunteer going in is about 35 years old. He's married, he has a family, and he has a job. It's the last person in the world that you'd expect to volunteer to go to a war zone. And yet they're doing it because they love their country, because they say we have to do that. What's going on right now is an existential struggle for the survival of Russia against the collective West, which again speaks to the danger of mobilization because Russia is a nation that is mobilizing and has the potential to mobilize even more if necessary. (11:55) And this should scare the heck out of everybody in nato because right now you have nato. What's NATO talking about doing Wilmer mobilizing. They're talking about mobilizing. You have everybody in NATO saying, well, they never say, well, since we kicked this hornets nest and the hornets are now coming out and stinging us, maybe we should stop kicking the hornet's nest. They don't acknowledge the role they played in building the Ukrainian army to trigger this, but what they're saying now is, oh, because Russia now has mobilized and is defeating the proxy army that we built. We have to mobilize in turn. And you have Brits talking about general mobilization, Germans, and what this does. Now, you're a Russian. You're sitting there going, huh? They're talking about mobilizing. Well, if they do that, what do we have to do? I mean, Finland just joined nato. We really don't care until they put on Russia's border, pardon on Russia's border, on Russia's border until they put NATO troops there. (12:50) Now Russia has to say, well, we didn't want to do this. But to give you an example, we keep the determinants mobilized. Wil Russia was compelled to create a new military district, the St. Petersburg military District, because Finland joined nato. There wasn't a St. Petersburg military district. Russia didn't have 70,000 combat troops on the finished border until Finland joined nato. Now, Russia has built mobilized Wilmer. They've put in 70,000 frontline troops divisions ready to march on Helsinki. Not because they wanted to, but because they were compelled to by the mobilization. Bringing Finland and Sweden into NATO is a form of mobilization. What we have here is we are moving in the wrong direction. We are accumulating military power in Europe, and at some point in time you're smoking at the gas station and it's going to go, I'm going to have to use that one, Scott. That's pretty good. (13:51) Feel free. So this time last year, Ukraine was on the front page of every newspaper as of the morning of that we're taping this conversation. I don't see Ukraine referenced. And let me suggest folks, Reid, I don't know if you've read Nikolai Petro and Ted Snyder's piece to end the war in Ukraine expose its core lie. Let me read two quick paragraphs. This is how it opens. The essential argument used to avoid negotiation and continue support for the war in Ukraine is based on a falsehood. That falsehood repeated by President Biden is that when Putin decided to invade, which we can debate that word, he intended to conquer all of Ukraine and annihilated its falsity, has been exposed multiple times by military experts who have pointed out both before and after the invasion, that Russia could not have intended to conquer all of Ukraine because it did not invade with sufficient forces to do so. Scott Ritter, well, look, that was my argument all along. I kept saying they're only going in with around 200,000. Ukraine at the start of the war had around 770,000, and I went, the normal attack defender ratio is supposed to be three to one in favor of the attacker. And Russia's going in with a one to three disadvantage. (15:21) Why? And the answer was because they weren't trying to occupy Ukraine. They were trying to, oh no, it's because Russians can't do math. Well, that too, I mean, I must be Russian because I'm not very good at math either. But my military math was like, this isn't adding up. But Russia's goal is to get 'em to a negotiating table. But I also then when Russia mobilized, because I basically said that Russia's going to have to get 500, 600,000 men to stabilize the frontline just to stabilize the frontline. And they mobilized to do that. And then people said, well, they're going to go on to Odessa. And I went, if they go on to Odessa, they're going to need around 900,000 guys to go on to Odessa and take those things. Russia's got about 900,000 guys there now. So they have enough troops to do that. (16:09) But to go on to Poland, they're going to need about 1.5 million guys. They don't have that. And to go from Poland to Germany, they're going to need around 3 million guys. It's just basic military math. I mean, I could bore you all day about how I come up with these numbers, but it's the logistics of war. It's the scope and scale of the fronts, how to protect flanks, how to sustain offensive operations. The math doesn't lie. I'm pretty good with those numbers and Russia doesn't have it. And here's the thing. We know this. I mean, there's, look, I was a major and I only was a major for a little while. The main part of my military life was spent as a captain. Now, captains are pretty cool, but we're not seniors. We're not the most senior people in the world. So I admit that my perspective was a captain's perspective at senior headquarters. (17:01) I saw the big picture, but I know enough to know what it takes to move troops. I was part of moving 750,000 troops into the Middle East. I know what a tip fiddle is, time phase deployment list, how to surge things in. I planned a core sized operation and had to plan on the logistics sustainability of that. I'm pretty good with the numbers. And so are the people in the Pentagon who are more senior than I am. People who see the bigger picture in more detail. They know what I'm talking about too. And they know no matter how much you talk up somebody, you're only as good as your logistics. I mean, you can have the Lamborghini, but if you ain't got the gasoline, you don't have anything. You have a piece of metal sitting in your driveway, but you got to have the gas and you got to have the gas sustained. (17:53) You got to be able to maintain it, fix it. Lamborghini's brake. You got to have people trained to drive the Lamborghini. We can talk the Russians up all we want to about this, that and the other thing. But the bottom line is they're only human and they can only do that which is physically possible to do. And they don't have the troops to invade NATO to drive on nato. It's a 100% fabrication on the part of these people to justify their own mobilization. But everybody knows that Russia can't. Right now, Russia has sufficient troops to take Odessa to take cargo, to take Nikola, to take nepa, Petros, that's it. They can't do anything more than that. If they want to drive on Kiev, they're going to need another 300,000 troops up in Belarus that they don't have right now. So people just have to put on their thinking caps and think rationally. (18:46) But right now, rational thought isn't in the cards. Apparently, you know a hell of a lot more about this than I do. You speak the language, you listen to the broadcast, I listen to you and other folks, but when I keep hearing statements about what Russia is going to do, the one thing that I never hear following that is evidence to support the position Russia wants to take over Europe. Europe, I've never heard President Putin say that. I've never read anything coming out of Russia that says that. All I hear is Nikki Haley and Joe Biden and Kamala there. There's a litany of folks that'll tell me that, but I haven't seen them present one video of President Putin standing at a podium or taking off his shoe like Stalin and pounding on the podium saying, I'm kicking your, and the other point is, 80% of what I see is defensive, not offensive. Here's another one you might want to use. Don't start nothing, won't be nothing. And it seems as Joe Biden would just shut the up. (20:14) You using my language? I want to be a Marine. Marine. So, okay, you get my point, Scott. Well, here's the thing. If we go back to the January, December, 2021, January 22 timeframe, the US government's running, going, Russia is going to invade, Russia is going to invade. Now, they may have had some intelligence about Russia moving up, logistics and all that stuff, but I said, Russia won't invade right now. They said, why? And I said, because Russia is a nation and the Russian government is ruled by law. Believe it or not. It's their law. It ain't our law, but it's their law. And there are things that have to happen before you can talk about an invasion. I spelled it out. I said, first of all, Russia will not operate in violation of the United Nations charter. So they will have to come up with a cognizable case for invasion. (21:12) And right now, the only one they have is preemptive self-defense. But to get preemptive self-defense, Russia will have to form a security relationship with the Doba, a formal security relationship, which will require the doba to not only declare their independence, but for Russia to recognize that independence. And then once Russia recognizes that independence, then Russia will have to go through, the President will have to go to the Duma, the Duma will have to approve something, go to the Senate, and then the Senate takes it back to the President, who then signs it. And then, and only then can we talk about military intervention. Now, this can take place in a short period of time, but I can promise you guarantee you that Russia ain't crossing the border until that happens. And if we're not seeing that happen, then there will be no military intervention and everybody's like, oh, scout up. Well, everything I said is 100. That's what happened in February. Russia began the process. Now, they did it in a very compact period of time, but every step that I said had to be taken was taken. Why? The rule of law. Putin is not a dictator. Putin is governed by the rule of law. He is not permitted to do things on a whim, and it's the same thing. If he wants to. (22:30) Russian troops cannot operate outside of the border of Russia without the permission of the Duma. He would have to go to them constitutionally, say, Hey, I'd like to send troops to Poland because he can't just send troops to Poland. And then the Duma would say, why are we doing this? What is the threat? And normally, the only reason to justify it is Poland attacked us, so we have to wait for that one. And that's the thing. In order for him to do anything to begin mobilizing, he can't just, why didn't he have 300,000 troops already mobilized to go into Ukraine? Because to justify the mobilization, you need legal justification. He didn't have it, didn't have it, couldn't go to the Duma, couldn't justify it. None of the steps that would be required for Russia to attack Europe are in place. First of all, it's not in Russia's doctrine, their entire approach, and you hit it on the head, their defense. (23:33) Now, the Russians are very good at the counter offensive, so if we attack them, Russian defensive doctors is to receive the attack, to destroy the attack and then to counter attack, and you counter attack to destroy the political center of the beast that attacked you. So yeah, if you want Russian troops in Warsaw, if you want Russian troops in Berlin, attack Russia. But otherwise, don't worry about it because it isn't going to happen. Don't start nothing. It won't be nothing. Won't be nothing. I like it. Alexi Navalny described as, and this is the description, the dominant Western narrative described as Russian President Putin's most formidable domestic opponent fell unconscious and died at polar wolf, Arctic penal colony. Biden described him as a powerful voice for the truth. What has happened to Navali is yet more proof of Putin's brutality. No one should be fooled. Well, the first thing is, if that was true, then what does this say about Biden's unyielding support for genocide in Gaza? What does that say about his brutality looking at the thousands, tens of thousands that people have fought, but that's not the point. If you could quickly unpack the myth of Alexi Navalny and the alleged poisoning and all of that stuff to kind of dispel this myth that Putin has assassinated his most formidable domestic opponent. (25:25) Okay, first of all, we have to understand that the United States government has been in the business of trying to control Russian politics since the collapse of the Soviet Union. The decade of the 1990s was premised on an American policy of promoting democratic reform inside Russia. But what it means by that is by creating institutions that are controlled by the United States and banking and well, money is everything. And what we did in the 1990s is we started using non-governmental organizations. We'd set up these civic societies, these groups for furtherance of democracy, and then we would fund them through various fronts like the National Endowment for Democracy, which in 1983 was created to take over the covert political action functions of the CIA and make it more overt. The US Congress created it, funneled money to it. There's a democratic branch, there's a Republican branch they filter money in. (26:28) The whole idea is again, to create fund, so-called democratic institutions that will lead to the restructuring of a society the way we want it to be restructured. The United States did that in Ukraine in 2014 with the, well, well, we did it before that. If you remember back in the early two thousands, we did a color revolution in Serbia. It was a very successful color revolution, and so we use that as a template that would then repeat it in Georgia, and then we repeated in Ukraine, remember 2004, 2005, the Orange Revolution. What a lot of people don't realize is that we were actively trying to do a color revolution in Russia in 2007, 2008. Why that time period? Again, I don't want to bore people, but this is very important. Vladimir Putin became president end of 1999. He won an election in March of 2000 constitutionally. (27:24) He got to run for two terms, those two terms. It became clear that he was not going to continue the Yeltsin policy of doing whatever the United States wanted to be done, that he was going to try to reform Russia in a Russian image, which we didn't like. So we were pouring money into Russia through these non-governmental organizations for the purpose of carrying out a color revolution in 2007, 2008. The way we were going to do it is in 2007 was the parliamentary elections. The idea of that 2007, 2008 period was that Putin couldn't stand a third term as president, so he was going to do a swap with Dmitri Veev, who at that time was the prime Minister. So Putin was going to become prime minister. Veev would become president, but for this to happen, United Russia, which was Putin's party, had to win the parliamentary election. (28:10) If the opposition could deny United Russia the majority, then Putin couldn't become Prime Minister, and if Putin couldn't become Prime Minister, then vie was vulnerable as president and you could pick him off and suddenly you've swept Putin out of power. This is literally the stated objective of the United States, and we started pouring money into Russia to promote this. One of the guys that got caught up in this was a young lawyer named Alex Navalny. He started working, it's CIA all the way. Look, the CIA trained some people. One of them was this Y Guinea albo. She's a journalist, but she went to Harvard, got groomed by the CIA, whether she knew it or not, but she left the balling, went to Yale. Well, later on, yes, he went to Yale in 2010, but Allach comes in in 2004 and she sets up this political parlor. (29:05) Now she comes from Harvard, she got her PhD. She comes to Russia. The first thing she does is sets up this political parlor funded by British money coming from oligarchs funneled to her through British intelligence. And this parlor attracts these young people, including Navalny, and their job is to create a youth movement that can lead to a color revolution. That's his whole thing. Bottom line is it failed. It failed miserably. But Navalny was identified at that point in time as somebody with potentially started this anti-corruption campaign when mid became the president mid said, I'm against corruption. Naval went good. Let me help you. And he jumped on this thing. He got picked to go to Yale in 2010 where he was groomed by the CIA for what purpose. The next target was, okay, we couldn't stop Putin from doing the swap in 2007, 2008. What we can do now is keep mid in power. (30:01) We can prevent Putin from coming back into office in the 2012 presidential election. Remember Hillary Clinton working the opposition, Michael McFall going in there. It's a big deal. And the volume, he became the front man for this. He went to Yale. He got dipped in, greased by the CIA and he got sent back to Russia. He's a CIA asset, straight up funded by British intelligence trying to overthrow or prevent Putin from coming back in power. Well, what's that thing? If you don't start nothing, there won't be nothing. Don't start nothing. Won't be nothing. Well, Navalny, I mean, before he went to Yale, he spent a summer in Kiro, which is a province about 800 kilometers northeast of Moscow. He got involved in restructuring the timber business, and it looked like he might've done some things that weren't so good. Normally that would be ignored, but he comes back and he immediately starts attacking the interest, the economic interest behind United Russia and Putin. (31:04) And so you started something, okay? So they opened up a criminal case against him, and now you have this situation where Navalny is trying to make himself relevant. And look, he had some traction early on. He ran for Mayor of Moscow and he got 27% of the vote. That ain't bad, but he didn't have any traction outside of Moscow. He couldn't get the kind of numbers necessary to win, but he was a pain in Putin's side. So they started legal, this legal stuff against him, and it ended up in him being convicted of a fraud and embezzlement, some people call it politically motivated. There's no doubt it was politically motivated, but that doesn't mean that the crime didn't take place. He got a suspended sentence. He's on parole. Basically, they did this to keep him from running. They said, because you're convicted, you can't run for office. (31:52) Something needed to happen. And so in 2020, he was poisoned, but he wasn't. Again, I don't want to get too much down the conspiracy track, but let me just put it this way. His medical records clearly show that he wasn't poisoned by Novak. This was a setup to get him out of Russia where he had been effectively neutered over into a safe area, and we know that he landed in Germany, he was flown into Germany, had a miraculous recovery by December. He wait a minute, had a miraculous recovery from Nova Chuck, which from my understanding is one of the most dangerous nerve agents created. I've read. It's so dangerous. It really can't even be used. The story was that he was poisoned at the airport. They poisoned his tea before he got on the plane. No, no. They poisoned his underwear in his hotel room. (32:45) No, no. But wasn't that afterwards, because the story changed. The story changed a couple of times. That's my point that they said that they poisoned his tea in the airport. If I understand it, if you were to put Nova chuck in a cup of tea damn near everybody, at least in that area of the airport would be dead. Then they said, oh, they poisoned his water bottle on the plane. Nobach is so toxic that if they had done that, everybody including the pilot would be dead. Then they poisoned his underwear. The story kept, and this is also interesting to me, is that during all of these changing of the stories, Russia kept saying, send us the toxicology report so that we can investigate this. No toxicology report was ever presented. Yeah, again, I'm not a big conspiracy guy. I don't like it. I am Hamm's razor kind of person. (33:48) But the problem is, CCAM razor points to this because we did get the toxicology, not the ones that the Germans and everybody were saying prove Novare, Wilma, you're a hundred percent right. This is the most deadly substance on the planet, but apparently it can't kill anybody. And by the way, whatever the new name of the kgp is, they're pretty good at assassinating folks as is the ccia. A, if they want you done, cancel your distance and cancel your five bullets. Five bullets in the front of your body tends to do it. You don't have to mess around with Novak. Okay? Yeah. I mean, just look. A Ukrainian pilot, a Russian pilot defected earlier this year to Ukraine and had two of his crew members killed as a result. I mean, he's a murderous traitor in the eyes of the Russians. They just found his body in Spain with five bullets pumped into the front of it. (34:45) That's how the Russians get you. They don't go around doing this Novak stuff. But the point is this Nozek was a manufactured event. It didn't happen. What the German doctors who treated him released the blood work and everything. It showed that Navalny had a whole bunch of different health issues, some serious health issues, and he was also, they found evidence of antidepressants, which is okay. I'm not attacking him, it's not a problem, but it looks like he deliberately overdosed on antidepressants to generate the result that happened so he could be flown out. This was a pre-planned event. I just want everybody to understand that, that Navalny deliberately overdosed on antidepressants to generate a medical crisis that then got him flown out of Russia, because remember, he's on house arrest. He can't leave, but they got him out. What's the first thing that happens after his miraculous recovery? (35:42) They fly him to Germany to a CIA safe house where a film crew comes in and they produce two feature length documentaries in one month, one month, including elaborate computer generated graphics, the whole thing. He claims that he came up with the idea while he was recovering from his and wrote it in a feverish in October, November. Wilmer, I've made a documentary and I'm making one right now. I can guarantee you they didn't get it done in a month. This was prepackaged by the CIA and British intelligence. And then he was, everybody's saying, stay in Germany. And he went, no, I'm going back. Why? Again? In 2021, these election cycles matter. In 2021, Putin was going to change the Constitution so that he could continue to run for office, and he changed the length of the term from four years to six years. He was restructuring the government and everybody who was anybody, including myself, looked at it and went, he's basically guaranteeing that the West will never subvert Russian democracy by doing this. (36:49) He's iron proofing it, bulletproofing it. So the last chance to get rid of Vladimir Putin was to disrupt this effort. Navalny was picked as the guy to do it. Navalny job was to go back to Russia stand trial, and while he's standing trial, they're going to release these documentaries. The first one was called Putin's Palace, which was supposed to expose the corruption of Putin and everything, and the idea that it would generate so much unrest inside Russia that Navalny would be acquitted, put in, become the presidential candidate to oppose Putin. That was the dream. The problem is the people coming up with that didn't understand that Navalny had no support in Russia, never could never get it outside of Moscow. You couldn't get 5%. You might get 12% in Cabo, but that's it. You're not going to win election with 12% support. The numbers I saw for him was about somewhere between two and 5%, more on the 2% side. (37:44) Nationwide, like I said, there's certain bubbles in there where you could get support, but nationwide, he wasn't going anywhere on this. So he goes back and the Russians, what's that? Don't want nothing. Don't start nothing. The Russians know exactly what's going on. I mean, look, Pesco, who's the pre spokesperson in October of 2020, he said, we know what's going on. Navalny is working with the CIA. We know this. We know everything. So they brought him back and they knew what his plan was. They knew what he was supposed to do. So they quickly turned just really quickly because that's what President Putin said to Tucker Carlson when he talked about it's good that you applied to the CIA and that they did not accept you. He was sending a message. I know who you are. I know what you do. Yeah, well, so here's the deal. (38:39) The Russians said, we're not playing this game anymore. We've letting Navali do this stupid stupidity because he's irrelevant. But now you're playing, playing a serious game of messing around with our democracy. So we're just going to end it. The vol, the hammer's coming down, boom, nine years, boom, 30 years, you're in jail for life. Goodbye. Get out of here. Now they did that, and then a lot of people just came out and Bill. Then the Russians turned around and said, okay, we know he's your spy. Do you want him back? We'll trade him for a guy that we want back from Germany. Now, here's the part that gets conspiratorial two days before he died, minute before you get there. Isn't there also footage of Navalny or one of his representatives, but I think it's him talking Tom, I six, about money, about how much money he's going to need to sustain this democracy movement in Russia. (39:38) 2012, Navalny deputy met with a member of MI six in Moscow. Again, how did they get the video? Because the Russians know everything. I mean, when people are sitting there going, Evan Sitz isn't a CIA spy. He couldn't be. I just want to tell you right now, ladies and gentlemen, the Russians have him on film talking about this, about receiving the documents. It's conspiratorial. Putin was very clear about it. He's a CIA spy and Navalny, the Russians know who was paying for him. They know this. So they're sitting there going, we want to give them back. But that's the last thing. The ccia A wants. Why? Because then they have to admit that we're messing around in Russian politics politic. They can't. So this is the part that, this is what I firmly believe, because I believe that Navalny was induced by his handlers to deliberately overdose on depressants in 2020 to get him out, to get involved in the CIA operation to come back in and disrupt the election. (40:37) That is clear. Two days before he died, he was visited by his lawyer. Some people say that his wife was there as well, and they brought medication that's documented. Have you seen Godfather two so many times? I can't tell you how many Freddy five fingers. Freddy. Five fingers. Okay, so Tom goes to talk to Freddie five fingers. You just take a nice warm bath, you slit your words, nice warm bath, open up your veins with the woman. The family will be taken care of, throws the cigar away, shakes his hand, and it's understood. Navalny daughter got a free ride to Stanford courtesy of Michael McFall. Navalny wife now has been appointed. I mean, she was at the Munich Security Conference ready to step in before he died. He died. The script comes in, boom. She's now the new figure of the opposition. She's not tainted by crime. (41:32) She's at Navalny. That's a headline in the Washington Post today. Yeah, she's the new face of the opposition because Navalny had been neutered by the Russians, but as long as he was alive, he was a problem for the CIA. So Freddy five fingers, that's all I'm going to say. He was told Your family will be taken care of. All they have to do is lie in the tub and open up my veins, and it's a quiet, painful day. He overdosed on the drugs they gave him. He went for a walk and he died, didn't come back. His family's taken care of, and that's what I believe happened. I believe that the CIA knocked this guy off in prison. He took a long walk on a very short pier. Yeah. (42:20) So you've got Alexander the Butcher, sarky Ky, the commander of Ukraine's Ground forces. Since the start of the military operation, he is now the new military chief after Emir, Zelensky replaced zany in this leadership shakeup. What does that tell us at this stage of the game? What does that type of move tell us? Are they transitioning now to another phase of this process, recognizing that the war is lost? Again, everything has to have a setup because nothing happens in a vacuum. Ukraine is called the greatest democracy in the world. We know that's not true, but it's called the greatest democracy in the world by America. We overthrew it in 2014. Yes, we would know. But the key aspect of democracies is civil military relations, meaning that the civilian is the commander in chief, and the military always obeys the orders. Let's look at American history. (43:32) George McClellan, Abraham Lincoln McClellan was the commander of the army of the Potomac, and he thought he knew how to win this war, and Abraham Lincoln disagreed and fired him. And McClellan said, sir, yes sir. And he resigned because civil military relations, that's what you do. McClellan went on to challenge Lincoln in the elections and lost, but he didn't launch a coup. That's not what you do. Douglas MacArthur, during the Korean War thought he knew how to win the war, wanted to drop atomic bombs on China. Harry Truman said, Nope, that's not how we're going to do it. And they met in Midway, and Truman fired him, and MacArthur went, sir, yes sir. And he resigned. That's what civil military relations supposed to be in a democracy. Zelensky met with zany, who's the commander of the Ukrainian Armed forces, and he said, I don't like the fact that you're articulating policy that goes against what I want. (44:31) I want to be more aggressive. I have to go out and sell this conflict to the West, and I have to sell it, that we're going to regain all the lost territory. And you, as the general is supposed to say, sir, yes, sir, but you've gone out and given interviews behind my back saying it's a frozen conflict, a stalemate. I can't do that. You're fired and solution. He said, no, I'm not. And Zelensky went. Zany said, not only am I not fired, but here, let me show you this. Here's my picture. Given a medal to a right sector, Nazi from the organization, said, they're going to hang you from the deck, and if you ever go against this, and behind me is a picture of step on Bandera and the right sector flag. Go ahead and fire me now. Zelensky, you're a dead man walking. (45:14) And when Zelensky started calling people up saying Aslu saying no, one of the people he called up was Ky, who said, I just want to tell you right now, Mr. President, myself and the entire Ukrainian general staff support slu, you fire 'em. We come marching, it's over. And now Victoria Newland, and everybody's back there going, can't do this, guys. We're supposed to be giving 64 billion to the world's greatest democracy. We're against coups, and you're getting ready to launch a coup. She flies in panic, and so she cuts a deal. She explains to everybody, if you do this coup, we can't support you. It's over, and then you're all going to die. And the generals realized that, and they went, yeah, we understand that. Zelensky realized that. So zany stepped aside, Zeki took over, but understand what happened. It's a coup. There's one man in charge of Ukraine today, and his name is not Mir Zelinsky. (46:07) His name is Ky. He's the commander of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and they're calling the shots. How do we know this? Because within days of him coming in, he said, we're going over to the general defensive. He's calling the shots. Zelinsky said, we'll never leave at vca. KY came and said, get 'em out. Pull 'em out, red, destroy the line. We're going to be pulling back the military's in charge. And now you have some interesting things because the coup we didn't want to happen may happen because the nationalists are all upset. And there's talk about driving on Kiev right now. The Nazi nationalists are you're talking about, yeah, the Nazis, the N right sector guys who became Ovv, who now have renamed themselves. They're the third assault brigade, and everybody's going, there's no Nazis in Ukraine because there's nothing called the Azov, except the Nazis are so stupid. (47:03) They say, nah, third of assault brigade we're azo. And they do it right on camera, seeling all this kind of stuff in the West, everywhere. Oh, no, we don't want to see this guy's just calling himself the third assault brigade. But no, the Nazis are there. They're upset. It's a mess right now. But America, I'm just telling everybody's this, right? There was a coup deta in Ukraine. The generals are in charge. Zelinsky is a figurehead right now, but the people calling the shot is the military. Now, that's a new reality. I just want to quickly take a step back and to the point you were making about Navalny, to those that think what you're saying is fanciful and crazy, the United States did a similar action. They didn't kill him, but they did a similar action in Venezuela with Juan Gudo. The United States told the world that Juan Gudo was the president of Venezuela, even though Nicholas Maduro is the democratically elected president. (48:11) And when Gudo failed, now the United States is trying to do the same thing with a woman named Marina Machado, and she has been convicted by the Venezuelan Supreme Court as having worked with, I think it's Peru, against the interests of Venezuela. So the Venezuelan Supreme Court said, because you've gone outside the country and tried to overthrow this government, you are no longer qualified to be a candidate for president. The United States is trying to ignore the, dictate the decision of the Venezuelan Supreme Court and put this woman in place. Anyway, I bring that up just to show that what you have talked about in terms of, now I forgot the guy's name, Naval, Naval, Navalny, the United States is doing this in doing this, a number of places, and Venezuela is the most recent. But yeah. How about President Diem in Vietnam? Well, we can go for people going, well, this is fanciful. (49:19) This is out of a guys. We do it all the time. All the time. When leaders become inconvenient to the Sharan, the Sharan, the Sha Saddam Hussein. I just want to remind people, one of the more interesting, I was involved with a lot of defectors, Iraqi defectors in my time as a UN weapons inspector, and one guy that I interviewed many, many times was Wafi Samara. He was the head of military intelligence for Saddam. He ended up being in London and run by the Brits. So I'd go there and the MI six would take you to a safe house, and Wafi would come in and we'd have long conversations, and I tried to extract information from him that could lead to good inspections. But he just sat there and he talked about how the US intelligence would fly in, because the place I wanted to inspect was a specific office with a specific safe. (50:13) And he said, Hey, when you're in that safe, if you go down to this drawer, boom, you might find some photographs that you recognize. And I said, whatcha talking about? He goes, that's where we kept the American Spy satellite photographs that were given to us by American Intelligence officers who came in and sat in that conference room right next to it. You'll see it when you go in there. I did. And we met there, and they would brief us on the spy satellites, give us the newest signals, intelligence laying out the Iranian ground forces, and they helped us plan the chemical weapons attacks against the Iranians in 1988 and afa. We had this wonderful relationship. He gave me the names of all the guys that he worked with. What I'm trying to say is, ladies and gentlemen, there was a time in 19 88, 19 89, where Saddam was our boy. (50:58) US intelligence was there. Then Saddam became inconvenient. He fired scud missiles at Israel, which is a capital crime, and we ended up going to war removing them and having him hung by the neck until dead because his continued survival would've been inconvenient for America. Let me just make it as clear as this. Navalny had become inconvenient because the Russians were sitting on, the Russians never go public about anything, and their words mean everything. And when Pesco said, in October of 2020, we know what the CIA is doing, the cia, we know who he's working with. We know what's happening. It meant they know. They know everything. They have all the financials, they have all the videotapes, they have everything. And the US knew it too. That interview with Tucker is very telling. He said, I'm not going to talk to Biden. There's really nothing for me to say, but he says, our special services are talking. (51:58) They're talking the language of the special services. Having been in the special services and engaged in those kinds of conversations, they're very frank, because we don't have to play games. When you sit down with somebody and they know what your background is, we don't have to pretend. We talk about human recruitment, we talk about technical surveillance, we talk about the tools of the trade, we talk about the language that we know is going on. And so when the special services of Russia sit down with the special services of the CI and say, we know exactly what you guys did. You met here, boom, boom, boom. We got the goods. He's your boy. Do you want him back? And the CIA went, Nope, we don't want him back. We're going to have a lawyer visit him. And again, it may sound something like that, a movie. (52:40) But remember, Hollywood gets its greatest cues from reality. Frank Pan, angel, Freddy, five Fingers, Freddy, five Fingers baby. Favorite scene in the world. And it's real. I mean, I'm giving away my article, but I'm writing an article that this is going to be explained in great detail, and I talk about Freddy Five Fingers. So the next point here that I want to get to with you quickly is Mike Turner, Republican of Ohio, chair of the House Intelligence Committee. He's warning that Russia may be developing a space-based weapon that could target US satellites. And a lot of the narrative that's surrounding what he said over last weekend is that now Russia has violated, there were some treaties I think signed in the mid eighties that the countries agreed that they would not militarize space. But what seems to be left out of this conversation is that I think when the United States announced the Space Force that was militarization of space, therefore the treaty that they now want to wrap themselves in and call foul based upon, really the United States has already violated it. (54:00) So go ahead. Well, the treaty is the 1967 treaty, the outer space Treaty 67. Okay? And it talks about, it doesn't say demilitarization. What it says is that space should be used for exclusively peaceful purposes and that nobody should deploy nuclear weapons in the space. Now, what Turner has to show the stupidity of Mike Turner and these people. Apparently there's raw intelligence. That's the term that's used, and that's an important phrase. Finished intelligence is when I collect information, I corroborate it with different sources. You connect the dots, I connect the dots. That's right. Bingo. Good job, Wilmer. And you connect the dots, and then you write up an assessment that it's fact-based. But here's the important thing. You disguise the sources of information because if you're going to release finished intelligence to a congressman or Congress, they do what politicians do. They talk. They bring in somebody, Hey, read this. (55:05) You're not supposed to write about it, but wink, wink, read this. And they go, oh my God, the Russians are going to put a nuclear weapon in space. What are we going to do about it? Okay, finished. Intelligence gets leaked all the time. Everybody does it. The president on down. It's just the name of the game in Washington dc. Raw intelligence though, is almost never leaked. Why? Because raw intelligence means we haven't protected the source. So Turner released raw intelligence. He released a raw intelligence report to Congress. He put it in the reading room and said, everybody needs to come and read this thing. Now, a lot of people did, a lot of people didn't, but it created a storm because he issued a public statement, which means the media now, because he knows how the game's played. Now, every reporter worked their salt in Washington. (55:55) Dcs found their congressional sourcing. What the hell is on that report? And people started talking. So what we do know now is that the Russians are developing an anti-satellite capability that incorporates a nuclear device designed to generate an electromagnetic pulse that can shut down all of our satellites in outer space. Now, why is this important? Understand this. Turner released his report on Wednesday, knowing that on Thursday, the gang of eight, four senators, four Republicans from the Intelligence Committee, the leadership was going to meet with the White House National Security Council about this very report and talk about it. So why would you release it when they're already going to talk about it? What are you trying to do? (56:42) On Wednesday, the day he released his report, SpaceX sent up a Falcon Nine rocket with two satellites. These satellites were experimental missile monitoring satellites, part of a constellation of satellites that the United States started deploying last year. We deployed 28 of them last year. It's going to be a constellation of hundreds. It's sort of like a militarized starlink. And the purpose of this constellation is give America total control over the informational domain. That means that we communicate faster, we navigate, we can target, we can collect. We've militarized space. And the Russians have said, they've written reports to Secretary General saying, Hey, this is a violation of the outer space treaty. You're militarizing space. You're creating an advantage at a time when you say you want to strategically defeat Russia, remember, that's the American objective. And the Russians are saying, if you do this, you could launch a first strike against us, and we might not be able to respond. (57:45) You're getting a unilateral advantage here, and if we do go to war, you're going to have this total control over intelligence, collection, communications, et cetera, that gives you an operational and tactical advantage. We can't allow this to happen. So what the Russians did is they developed a weapon. They haven't deployed it yet, but it's a weapon that it will go up. And in one winding flash of a moment, that doesn't threaten any life here in America. It's not like they're going up there with a giant dirty bomb. It's going to be a neutron type device, a small device that's geared towards emitting radiation, the pulse, and it's going to blind the entire in an instant shut down this entire satellite network. But here's the important thing. From Turner's perspective, the entire American military approach to war depends on this. If we don't have this satellite thing, we put talk about putting all the eggs in one basket, we have literally put all the eggs in one basket. (58:44) Everything we do depends on this. If you shut that satellite network down, ladies and gentlemen, we can't go to war. We can't go to war. It's over. And Turner knows it. So what Turner's trying to do is say, guys, why are we investing all this money? This is going to go on for years when we know the Russians can undo it. This is stupid. We need to either get involved in arms control to prevent this from happening, or we need to come up with a backup plan because these satellites ain't going to work the way you want 'em to work when you want 'em to work. That's noble. But here's the problem. He released raw intelligence, which means the Russians now know how we collected it, and at a time when we need to have continued access to this stream of reporting. Now more than ever, let's imagine that the president says, Hey, what are the Russians up to today on that satellite thing, the thing we've been monitoring, you guys came to me and you said, Hey, boss, we put a, I don't know how they did it. (59:49) We tapped a cable and now we're listening to the conversations of these guys. Oh, wow, that's cool. Okay, but boss, we can't talk about, we can't mention the following words because if we mention the following words, the Russians will know what conversation we listen to, and then they'll stop communicating. Well, raw intelligence gives you those words. It wasn't finished product. Mike Turner compromised his source. We will never listen to them again at a time when we actually need to be monitoring this to come up with a strategy. Remember, let's say we want to do the right thing for once in our pathetic lives as Americans, and we say, maybe it's time we do engage in meaningful arms control. This is when we need to know what Russian intent is. How far along are they? Are they going to deploy this? Is this something that the Russians are doing to get to the negotiating table, or is this something that the Russians are going to keep, no matter what, what's going on, it affects our negotiating strategy. (01:00:44) We don't know now because Mike Turner released the raw intelligence to do an honorable thing to get people, he knew that they were going to sweep it under the rug. He knew that the Gang of eight and the White House were just go, Nope, we're not going to worry about this. We're going to keep deploying the satellites. And he's going, that's stupid. But now we are blind. And that's why I call it Turner's folly. I mean, trying to do the right thing. He did the absolute wrong thing. And now at a time when we need to have this intelligence, it's not there. I know there's a lot of people out there that thinks intelligence is a bad word, and it's been misused throughout history. There's no doubt about that. But I'm here to tell you right now that collecting information of this nature is absolutely essential to the national security of the United States because you want our leaders to be informed about the potential threats that exist around the world. (01:01:32) And there's a need for intelligence, not Iris. I'm not talking about violating American constitutional rights. I'm not talking about, I'm saying there's a need for people like me who did it honorably. It's a tough job. It's a dangerous job. Sometimes you have to do things that you wouldn't want to talk about at the PTA, but it's the reality of the world that you have to go out there and you have to get this information so that your leaders are informed so they can make the right decisions. And Mike Turner has cost us that information at a time when we desperately need it. Final question for you. And that surrounds nato and Donald Trump's comments about nato, and there seems to be an awful lot of furor about his talking about defunding NATO and all this kind of stuff, when all that I can read and understand is that NATO is now really obsolete and that it's a money laundering scheme. (01:02:26) Yeah, let me put it this way. There's a foreign minister of Lithuania Landsburg out there, and he's, I mean, Lithuania, the Baltic countries, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, they're making a lot of noise right now about Article five and how it's essential that NATO must come to the collective defense. But Lithuania is talking about, for instance, blockading Coing grad, the Russian enclave on the Baltic Sea. They're talking about sanctions. They're talking about a whole bunch of stuff that could lead to a war with Russia. And they're saying, that's okay because we're nato, and NATO will protect us. (01:03:05) The American people need to understand that Lithuania has a population of 2.8 million. The greater East Coast megapolis from Boston to Washington DC is 50 million people. Do you really think that we're going to sacrifice 50 million people to defend 2.8 million people who are kicking a hornet's nest right now? The answer is no. And that's the bottom line about nato. The American people are waking up to the fact that NATO is not about defending Europe from the evil Russians, NATO's a suicide pill. Because you have nations like Poland, you have nations like Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, that think that because they have this NATO shield behind them, they can behave aggressively to Russian and not have any consequence to it. If they start a war against Russia and a blockade of Coing, grad is an act of war, Russia will respond militarily. And now if you're Joe Biden, it's a sacred thing. (01:04:04) Every inch of NATO soil is sacred. Article five is a sacred, no, it's a suicide pill. It's a trap having poodles trying to get the rottweilers to fight. NATO is an organization that has outlived its usefulness. Donald Trump, he's not the most eloquent person or the most articulate person. And there's a lot about him that just cannot be supported 100%. But I'll tell you right now, he's speaking the mind of many Americans when he says, we ain't doing this anymore. We're not paying your bills. We're not going to be there for you. When you want to kick a hornet's nest. We don't want to get stung. So you're on your own, and that's what's going to happen. I am predicting that nato, it may not last 10 years. It's out. It's on its way out because it's, here's the thing. Remember we talked about mobilization at the beginning? (01:04:56) We talked about mobilization. It's funny to watch the schizophrenia that exists in people like Jan Stoltenberg who stutters his way through everything. Russia is evil, and we must must stand up through Russia. NATO must do, but we cannot afford to mobilize right now. We have no money. Our industry is no longer working, and we don't, but America will pay for it because NATO is a, I mean, it's going back and forth. NATO can't mobilize right now because they don't have the industrial base to mobilize. Not only that, nobody wants to be part the British who are out there. Boris Johnson doing that ridiculous thing. Lance Corporal Johnson reporting, sir, we're going to mobilize the people. First of all, Britain has two aircraft carriers. They built for, I forget how many billions of dollars they can't get out of port because they don't work. They build a whole bunch of new frigates, brand new modern frigates to defend these aircraft carriers, but they don't have enough sailors. (01:05:51) So in order to get the sailors on these new frigates, they have to retire frigates that are still good. So they're military. We're going to fight the Russians. I mean, you hear this British general, we're going to be on the front lines of the next war with Russia, with what? Your military's 72,000. Right now, you can't fill up a soccer stadium, and in five years it's going to be 56,000. Nobody wants to join the British military anymore. Nobody's joining the Navy. Nobody's joining anything because the youth of Europe don't believe in Europe. They don't believe they're not willing to give their lives for this pathetic little enterprise called Europe or nato. So all this talk about 300,000, this, that mobilize. It's all talk. And that's the good news is it's all talk. The better news is I think NATO's done because you used a word that's very important. And normally, as I said, I shy against conspiracies, but NATO's a money laundering scheme, that's all it is. It's an employment vehicle. I mean, I have to be careful. I have relatives that work for nato. They're not Americans, and thank God, I mean, one's married to my sister. So I like the fact that he has a paycheck. It keeps my sister fed and a roof overhead. (01:07:07) But the jobs not a real job. None of NATO's a real job. It's just an employment vehicle for a political economic elite that automatically fallen on these ES because that's what NATO is. It's a sinecure for people just to sit there and collect a paycheck doing nothing. If I have the chance to speak to President Biden, and I know he watches the show regularly, I would have to ask him about the sanctity of NATO that he holds so near and dear, if you believe in NATO to the degree that you do, Mr. President, why did you engage in an act of war as in blowing up the Nord Stream pipeline? Why did you engage in an act of war against a NATO country that being Germany? Because by doing so, article five, the other NATO countries are supposed to respond to Germany's defense in a manner in which they see fit. (01:08:10) So I guess the fact that they didn't respond means they didn't see a manner that they see fit. But I don't hear anybody asking that question. Why? If NATO is NATO and it's sacrosanct as it is, why did you engage in an act of war against a NATO member? That's my final question, Scott Ritter. Well, I mean, it's a great question, but here's even an equally relevant one. Why did the German chancellor stay silent at the press conference in February when the president said that if Russian and invade Ukraine, I'll take out Nord stream. And when he was asked the question, but it's German, how could you do that? It'll get done, I promise you. And Olaf Schultz is sitting there going, not saying a word, not saying a word. So how can you, I mean, the thing about Article five is it has to be invoked by the person attacked. (01:09:05) And Germany never once said, we've been attacked because they were there when it was designed. Olaf Schultz knew all along that this was going to happen because Germany's not a sovereign state. And that's the thing about NATO that people need to understand. It exists only for the United States. It's the exclusive tool of the United States. It exists to promote American national security interests. And this is why when you have Latvia and Poland now believing that NATO's there for their interest, no, it's not. NATO doesn't exist for anybody's interest, but our own. And as Europe wakes up to this reality, they're going to realize that we don't need to be part of NATO anymore because it doesn't benefit us. And there's a lot of talk now about a European security agency and things of that nature. Yeah, and President Putin asked, I thought, a very relevant as we look at, so people say, well, why did the United States blow up nato? (01:10:05) Well, I mean, blow up Nord Stream basically to de-industrialized Germany de-industrialized Europe, and have the Europeans start buying natural gas from the United States and other things. Putin during his speech said, well, you realize they didn't destroy the entire Nord stream pipeline. There is one pipe that can still transmit gas. Why don't you open that up? He said, there's the ability to send gas through Ukraine. Why don't you open that up? There's the ability to send gas through Poland. Why don't you open that up and haven't heard an answer? But that's, you want the best answer. Go ahead. I'll just say this. I grew up in Germany and the car that I loved, I was in love with the Porsche nine 11 SC Turbo, rough modified, and well, guess what's happening. Wilmer Porsche is moving its production to the United States. Michelin, the French Tire company. Michelin has shut down, I think two tire plants in Germany, and they're moving them. (01:11:15) I don't know where they're moving, but they're moving 'em out of Germany. I know that. Can you imagine a Porsche plant and a Michelin plant? I tell you what, there's going to be a new car in my driveway pretty soon. It's going to stay made in the USA on it, but that's what's going on. We've de-industrialized Europe to our benefit. And again, we come b

When did modern intelligence gathering begin? The Gilded Age, of course. Dr. Mark Stout joins the show to discuss his book World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence. The advent of new technologies and the necessities of modern war show how a major transition occurred between the Civil War and World War II.Essential Reading:Mark Stout, World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence (2024).Further Reading: T. R. Brereton, Educating the U.S. Army: Arthur L. Wagner and Reform, 1875-1905 (2000).Jeffrey M. Dorwart, The Office of Naval Intelligence: The Birth of America's First Intelligence Agency, 1865-1918 (1979).Lori A. Henning, Harnessing the Airplane: American and British Cavalry Responses to a New Technology, 1903-1939 (2019).Brian McAllister Linn, "Intelligence and Low-Intensity Conflict in the Philippine War, 1899-1902," Intelligence and National Security 6, no. 1 (1991): 90-114.Betsy Rohaly Smoot, From the Ground Up: American Cryptology during World War I (2023). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Summary Leon Panetta (Panetta Institute) joins Andrew (X; LinkedIn) to discuss his lifetime of American public service. Secretary Panetta was the 2023 recipient of SPY's William H. Webster Award.  What You'll Learn Intelligence Directing the Central Intelligence Agency Intelligence & the Abbottabad Raid Working within the Clinton Administration  A life's dedication to the safety of the American public Reflections The power of patience and the ability to listen Handing immense pressure and responsibility And much, much more … Resources  SURFACE SKIM *SpyCasts* My Life in American Intelligence with Barry Zulauf (2023) David Petraeus on Ukraine & Intelligence with the former CIA Director & 4* General (2023) Intelligence, Special Operations, and Strategy with Michael Vickers (2023) The 75th Anniversary of the CIA with former Director Robert Gates (2022) *Beginner Resources* What Does the Secretary of Defense Do? MasterClass (2022) [Short article] How did the US find and kill Osama bin Laden? 60 Minutes Australia, YouTube (2018) [4 min. video] Leon E. Panetta, Panetta Institute for Public Policy (n.d.) [Short biography] DEEPER DIVE Books The Spymasters: How the CIA Directors Shape History and the Future, C. Whipple (Scribner, 2021) The Gatekeepers: How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency, C. Whipple (Crown, 2018)  Worthy Fights: A Memoir of Leadership in War and Peace, L. Panetta & J. Newton (Penguin Books, 2014) SECDEF: The Nearly Impossible Job of Secretary of Defense, C. A. Stevenson (Potomac Books, 2007)  Primary Sources  Statement on Syria before the Senate Armed Services Committee (2012) Nomination of Hon. Leon E. Panetta to be Secretary of Defense (2011)  Statement to Employees by CIA Director Leon Panetta on the Death of Usama Bin Ladin (2011)  Nomination of Leon Panetta to be Director, Central Intelligence Agency (2009) Memorandum for Leon Panetta on POTUS' Time Investment (1996) Letter from Brown to Panetta Regarding Fiscal Year 1994-1997 (1993) Letter to the Honorable Leon E. Panetta from George Bush (1977) *Wildcard Resource* Secretary Panetta now lives on a lovely vineyard in sunny California. Speaking of wine and spies, check out Vint Hill Winery in Warrenton, Virginia.  In 1942 the US Army set up top-secret SIGINT operations at the now-vineyard after the farm's owner, a Ham Radio enthusiast, set up a wire on the roof of the barn that could reach signals from Berlin. The farm was the site of The Signal Corps cryptographic school, which famously intercepted messages from Hiroshi Oshima in 1943. 

On this episode of "The Federalist Radio Hour," Dr. J. Michael Waller, a senior analyst for strategy at the Center for Security Policy, joins Federalist Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to recount his time as a CIA operative and trace intelligence agencies' path from rejecting communism during the Cold War to embracing cultural Marxism today. You can find Waller's book "Big Intel: How the CIA and FBI Went from Cold War Heroes to Deep State Villains" here. If you care about combatting the corrupt media that continues to inflict devastating damage, please give a gift to help The Federalist do the real journalism that America needs.

On this episode of “The Federalist Radio Hour,” Dr. J. Michael Waller, a senior analyst for strategy at the Center for Security Policy, joins Federalist Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to recount his time as a CIA operative and trace intelligence agencies’ path from rejecting communism during the Cold War to embracing cultural Marxism today. You […]

Spycraft isn't usually what you see in the movies or read about in adventure books. It's gritty, it's ugly, and in modern times often requires just as much history & technology expertise as marksmanship. Intelligence operators are some of the most highly-skilled, dangerous people on the planet. So, when their skills are misused by the political elite against US citizens solely for the gain of political capital, the consequences can ruin careers, lives, and fragile peace. Charles "Sam" Faddis is a former CIA operative who led the first incursion into Iraq in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of that country, and headed the WMD unit of the agency's Counter-Terrorism Center. He also served as an officer of the US Army's Judge Advocate General Corps, so he cares a great deal about preserving justice in a world where due process seems to have given way to backroom dealings within agencies that have no Constitutional mandate, and should by all rights be neutral, owing allegiance to the nation itself, not to any one member of the US government. Faddis chats with Victoria on this episode about his thoughts on members of government using American investigatory & intelligence agencies as a political cudgel, and what can be done to heal the rot that continues to grow within these extraconstitutional bureaus. ***** TOP STORIES 'The Boys in the Boat' Movie Debuts Christmas Day and It's the Story America Needs Right Now West Coast, Messed Coast™ The Last Vestige of the 'Summer of Love' Is Flattened ***** MORE INFO ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠VictoriaTaft.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Victoria Taft @ PJ Media --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/victoria-taft/support

Summary Barry Zulauf (Twitter; LinkedIn) joins Andrew (Twitter; LinkedIn) to discuss his extensive experience working across the American intelligence community. Barry is the President of the International Association for Intelligence Education.  What You'll Learn Intelligence What is the “Intelligence Community?” The organizational structure of American intelligence The establishment of the ODNI The intelligence components of the DEA  Reflections A life of service Passion to serve the people  And much, much more … Quotes of the Week “[Fentanyl] is an enormous, enormous problem and no single organization, even as big as the Defense Intelligence enterprise, can deal with it alone. So, it's going to be a lot of diplomacy and a lot of building bridges, convincing people to do the right thing.”  – Barry Zulauf. Resources  SURFACE SKIM *SpyCasts* First of Many…America's First Female Intelligence Agency Chief with former NGA Director Letitia “Tish” Long (2023) Espionage and the Two Queens with Kent Tiernan (2023) Irregular Warfare & Intelligence with IWC Director Dennis Walters (2023) El Chapo, the Sinaloa Cartel & Intelligence with Trial Reporter Noah Hurowitz (2022) *Beginner Resources* America's intelligence community, explained, The Washington Post, YouTube (2014) [2 min. video] Members of the IC, Office of the Director of National Intelligence (n.d.) [Brief summaries of the 18 agencies]  Who We Are, United States Drug Enforcement Administration (n.d) [Short article] DEEPER DIVE Primary Sources  The WMD Commission Report (2005) The 9/11 Commission Report (2004)  The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (2004) The Clark Report (1955) The Doolittle Report (1955) National Security Act (1947) CIA Review of the World Situation (1947)  *Wildcard Resource* Barry mentioned early in the episode that he actually rowed into town the morning we recorded this episode – Barry shares this hobby with Teddy Roosevelt, an avid rower and the president that was instrumental in the creation of the FBI. Check out this Letter from Charles J. Bonaparte to Theodore Roosevelt that catapulted the FBI into existence. 

World War I was a seminal event for American national security and foreign policy, as the United States deployed nearly two million soldiers and sailors to Europe and engaged in the most intense overseas combat in its history up to that point. Yet the development of modern American intelligence just before and during the war, and even the magnitude of the war itself, have been largely forgotten by the US public.David Priess spoke with historian and former intelligence officer Mark Stout, author of the new book World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence, about early steps toward peacetime US military intelligence in the 1880s and 1890s, the importance of Arthur Wagner and his late 19th century textbook about information collection, the intelligence impact on and from the Spanish-American War and the Philippine insurgency, how the war in Europe spurred intelligence advances in the mid-1910s, German sabotage in the United States, how General John Pershing and the American Expeditionary Forces used intelligence in combat, the growth of domestic intelligence during the war, the scholarly group gathered by President Woodrow Wilson called "The Inquiry," and why World War I generally fails to resonate with Amercians today.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence by Mark StoutThe book Classified: Secrecy and the State in Modern Britain by Christopher MoranThe movie Gone with the Wind (1939)The book Wasteland: The Great War and the Origins of Modern Horror by W. Scott PooleThe Chatter podcast episode The JFK Assassination and Conspiracy Culture with Gerald PosnerThe book Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy by John le CarréThe movie Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (2011)Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Megan Nadolski and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

World War I was a seminal event for American national security and foreign policy, as the United States deployed nearly two million soldiers and sailors to Europe and engaged in the most intense overseas combat in its history up to that point. Yet the development of modern American intelligence just before and during the war, and even the magnitude of the war itself, have been largely forgotten by the US public.David Priess spoke with historian and former intelligence officer Mark Stout, author of the new book World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence, about early steps toward peacetime US military intelligence in the 1880s and 1890s, the importance of Arthur Wagner and his late 19th century textbook about information collection, the intelligence impact on and from the Spanish-American War and the Philippine insurgency, how the war in Europe spurred intelligence advances in the mid-1910s, German sabotage in the United States, how General John Pershing and the American Expeditionary Forces used intelligence in combat, the growth of domestic intelligence during the war, the scholarly group gathered by President Woodrow Wilson called "The Inquiry," and why World War I generally fails to resonate with Amercians today.Among the works mentioned in this episode:The book World War I and the Foundations of American Intelligence by Mark StoutThe book Classified: Secrecy and the State in Modern Britain by Christopher MoranThe movie Gone with the Wind (1939)The book Wasteland: The Great War and the Origins of Modern Horror by W. Scott Poole The Chatter podcast episode The JFK Assassination and Conspiracy Culture with Gerald PosnerThe book Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy by John le CarréThe movie Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (2011)Chatter is a production of Lawfare and Goat Rodeo. This episode was produced and edited by Megan Nadolski and Cara Shillenn of Goat Rodeo. Podcast theme by David Priess, featuring music created using Groovepad. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week, Justin has a conversation with Nicholas Reynolds. After graduating from Oxford University in the 1970s, he served in the US Marine Corps as an infantry officer, and later as a historian. Nick retired from the Reserves as a colonel and the officer in charge of field history. He also served with the Central Intelligence Agency, including as the historian for the Agency's museum at their headquarters in Langley. Today, Nick dives into the origins of the modern intelligence community in the months leading up to, and then during American's involvement in WWII He gives an overview of the key decisions made along the way and the key personalities that would shape the intelligence community for decades to come.Connect with Nick:nicholasreynoldsauthor.comCheck out Nick's book, Need to Know, here.https://www.amazon.com/Need-Know-World-American-Intelligence/dp/0062967479Connect with Spycraft 101:Check out Justin's latest release, Covert Arms, here.spycraft101.comIG: @spycraft101Shop: spycraft-101.myshopify.comPatreon: Spycraft 101Find Justin's first book, Spyshots: Volume One, here.Download the free eBook, The Clandestine Operative's Sidearm of Choice, here.SLNT Protect your data and devices. Use code SPYCRAFT101 to save 10% off your order.Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the show

In this episode, we discuss: -What drew Col Reynolds to studying history    -The value of history for the military professional   -Avoiding traps and pitfalls in studying and using history   -Studying at Oxford   -German General Ludwig Beck   -Doctrine in the German army (1914-1945)   -How the Marine Corps used history while Col Reynolds was a company-grade officer   -His time as a student at The Basic School (TBS)   -The state of the Marine Corps in the mid to late 1970s   -The decision to leave the Marine Corps and transitioning   -Col Reynold's time in the Central Intelligence Agency   -His experiences at TBS as an individual mobilization augmentee   -How TBS had changed since his time as a student   -Tactical decision games (TDGs) and sand table exercises as intellectual revelations   -Writing good TDGs   -Col Reynold's contest-winning article, “Turn on Your Lights!”   -Criticisms of studying and drawing from the 20th-century German military tradition -Researching and writing Just Cause and A Skillful Show of Strength   -Serving as the officer-in-charge of Marine Corps Field History in Operation Iraqi Freedom-I   -Interviewing Marine and Coalition leaders in Iraq   -Writing Basrah, Baghdad, and Beyond   -Areas where Marine forces in Iraq could have improved   -The relief of Colonel Joe Dowdy, the commander of Regimental Combat Team-1   -The turnover of Tikrit from Task Force Tripoli to the US Army's 4th Infantry Division   -The U.S. failure to adequately prepare for Phase IV (stability) operations   -How Marine Corps historians seem less critical of Marine leaders compared to Army historians writing about Army generals   -The controversy and conversation surrounding Force Design 2030  Links Colonel Reynold's website: https://www.nicholasreynoldsauthor.com   "Turn on Your Lights!" by Major Nicholas E. Reynolds, USMCR, Proceedings, November 1991 Fighting Power: German and U.S. Army Performance, 1939-1945 by Martin van Creveld   Just Cause: Marine Operations in Panama, 1988-1990 by Lieutenant Colonel Nicholas E. Reynolds, USMCR A Skillful Show of Strength: US Marines in the Caribbean, 1991-1996 by Colonel Nicholas E. Reynolds, USMCR   U.S. Marines in Iraq, 2003: Basrah, Baghdad, and Beyond by Colonel Nicholas E. Reynolds, USMCR (Rett)   Writer, Sailor, Soldier, Spy: Ernest Hemingway's Secret Adventures, 1935-1961 by Nicholas Reynolds Need to Know: World War II and the Rise of American Intelligence by Nicholas Reynolds --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/damien-oconnell/support

​​Li Sumpter:So welcome back to another episode of Future Memory. My guest today is Jesse Hagopian. He is a Seattle-based educator and the author of the upcoming Teach Truth: The Attack on Critical Race Theory and the Struggle for Antiracist Education. Hagopian is an organizer with the Zinn Education Project and co-editor of the books Black Lives Matter at School: An Uprising for Educational Justice and Teaching for Black Lives. Welcome, Jesse.Jesse Hagopian:Oh, thanks so much for having me. Good to be with you. Li:Thank you for joining us. Well, I want to get started with some questions about your own education and how you got started. I was curious about what your own early education and high school experiences were like. As a youth, what ways did you relate to or even resist to your own classroom curricula? Jesse:I was very alienated from school growing up. I felt like it didn't really speak to me. I didn't feel like I was intelligent. I can remember very clearly a parent-teacher conference in third grade where the teacher brought us out into the hallway with me and my mom, and she took out my standardized testing scores and there was a blue line that ran through the middle that was the average, and then there was the dot far below that line that represented my reading scores.And I knew from that day forward until about halfway through college, I knew that I was not smart, and I had the test scores to prove it to you. And school just felt like a place that reinforced over and over again that I was not worthy, that I was not intelligent. And there was very little that we studied that was about helping me understand myself, my identity, my place in the world as a Black, mixed-race kid.And really, it was just a fraught experience, and I took quite a bit to get over that. I was sure I was going to fail out of college, that I wasn't smart enough to go to college. And I think that it was finally the experience of a couple of professors in college that showed that education could be more than just eliminating wrong answer choices at faster rates than other children, that it could be about understanding the problems in our world and how we can collectively solve those problems.And then I realized I did have something to contribute. Then I realized that I did have some perspectives on what oppression looks like and how it feels and what we might need to do to get out of it, and I was hungry to learn about the systems that are set up in our society to reproduce inequality. And that was a real change for me. But growing up, my mom would tell me, "You're good with kids. I think you're going to be a teacher." And I said, "That's the last thing I'm going to be."Li:Oh, really?Jesse:School is just so arduous, and why would I want to come back? And then she was right. I came back to my own high school. I came back to Garfield High School, where I graduated, and I taught there for over a decade now. Li:I think that's an amazing story, coming full circle to teach back where you got your first experiences in the classroom. And going back to that, I was wondering if you had any standout memories, like I did, with the actual content. You were saying you didn't relate to it so much, but I remember very clearly a moment with my mother coming to the school when I had a moment in the classroom around Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn, things like that. Do you have any standout memories of content that really either made you feel excluded or exploited or any of these things that really stuck with you? Jesse:For sure. I mean, there are many experiences that I think shaped my approach to education throughout the years. I mean, one of my firsts is from kindergarten. I remember very clearly one of the boys called me the N-word. And I didn't really know what it meant, but I knew it was directed at me and not the other kids. So I went and told the teacher, but there was parent-teacher conferences going on and parents were coming through, prospective parents, to look at the school, and the teacher got just beet red in front of the parents and was very embarrassed that I had said this, and said, "Oh, yeah. We'll deal with that," and just sort of pushed it aside and never came back to it.And the message that I got was that I had done something wrong, like I had disrupted the education process and that it was wrong for me to have done that because nothing was taken care of. And that's something that still sits with me and I think guides a lot of my approach to how to handle situations in the classroom. And I can remember the first time I had a Black teacher and that I began to learn about Black history in sixth grade, an incredible educator named Faith Davis, taught us about ancient Egypt. And it was the first thing I really got excited about learning, and I was amazed by all these accomplishments that Black people had done.And then after that class, it just sort of disappeared for a long time, and I never learned about anything else that Black people had done, and it made me wonder, "Is that why I score so poorly on these tests? Because I'm Black? Because I don't see other people like me in the advanced classes? And maybe those aren't for us. Maybe it has something to do innately with my race." And that's such a disempowering feeling, and I wanted to ensure that no other kids had to go through that kind of humiliation. Li:No, that's a great point that you bring up because I think we had similar experiences. I was actually recently going through some old photos at my mom's house, and I came across my elementary school class photo, the classic one, everyone's lined up, shortest to tallest kind of thing. And there I was, the only Black child in a class of 25 white students. And I think at that young, innocent age, I didn't really understand what I was up against, and today's youth and teachers are facing so many challenges in the classroom today, things that I don't think either of us could have really imagined.And so, as I was exploring the amazing tools and campaigns that you've been authoring and spearheading, like Teaching for Black Lives, Black Lives Matter at School, and the Zinn Education platform of so many resources, I think, "What would my early school experience have been like if these tools were available?" Right?And I'm wondering, would you have thought the same thing? Because when I think about these amazing tools that are being offered, I just imagine, and we're not even talking about the digital stuff. I'm just talking about the things around critical race theory, these ideas, just about things that are showing a representation of Black folks. Like you said, even just having a Black teacher and what that meant for you. So even thinking about, what if the tools that you are all creating today were actually in your classroom back at Garfield when you were youth? Jesse:Oh, wow. That would've been incredible. I mean, at the Zinn Education Project, we have scores of free downloadable people's history lessons that center Black history and struggles against structural racism. And these lessons tell history from the perspective of people who have been marginalized, who have been pushed out of the centers of power. We look at the founding of America from the perspective of those who have been enslaved, not those who were doing the enslaving. We look at American history through the eyes of those who are organizing multiracial struggles for racial and social justice, not the ones that are trying to maintain segregation and hoarding wealth in the hands of the few.And I would've just lit up to be able to have a teacher say that your family's history matters, that struggles that your family went through shaped this country, and whatever semblance of democracy that we're able to hold onto in this country is the result of the Black freedom struggle and the result of multiracial struggles for social justice. Instead, we got the message in American government class that democracy is something that's handed down from those in power and those on high.I can remember, at Garfield High School, my American government teacher assigned a research project, and I did a project about J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI director. And it was the only paper I think I ever really tried on in high school. I was very disengaged from school and didn't see any point in it, but this research project captured my imagination because I learned about some really despicable things that someone in power had done.I couldn't believe that J. Edgar Hoover had led a campaign against the Black freedom movement, had targeted Martin Luther King, someone who we're all supposed to revere, and yet our government was wiretapping and even trying to get him to commit suicide and some pretty despicable things. And I poured myself into the research and I wrote the best paper I had done up until that point, and she gave me a C with the notes that the claims I was making were unsubstantiated. Li:Wow. Jesse:And it's clear that she just didn't agree, that she didn't want to hear that a white man in power had misused it. And that was a strong message I got that some ideas are off-limits, and it doesn't matter how hard you work. If you go against what makes a white teacher comfortable, then there are consequences for that.And after that, I really didn't want to try anymore. I didn't feel like my opinions mattered, and I would've loved to have a teacher help me understand how we can live in a society that calls itself the freest nation on earth, and yet was based on enslavement of Black people and genocide of Native people, continued with Jim Crow segregation to where up through my dad's generation couldn't vote if you were Black.And then in our own generation, we have mass incarceration. And how is it that racism continues to change in focus and character, but is a constant in American society? And I wasn't able to learn that until much later, and I would've loved to have some of the resources that the Zinn Education Project provides today. Li:Yes, you and me both. Jesse:Yeah. Li:And that brings me to my next question about one of your ongoing campaigns is Black Lives Matter at School. And this year, the 2023 Creative Writing Challenge prompt was, "How can a school community support you in being unapologetically Black?" How might the young Jesse have answered that same question? Jesse:Wow. Well, the young Jesse would've been scared to answer that question. Li:Really? Say more. Jesse:I think that because I was so worried about what it meant to be Black and what that meant about my intelligence, that being unapologetically Black was very foreign for me for far too long. It was hard to come to loving my blackness, and it was a long road to get there. And I'm just so glad that the Black Lives Matter at School movement exists, because so many children like me who are scared to embrace their blackness because they're afraid that it could make them labeled as lesser, not as beautiful, not as deserving of love, not as deserving of care, and everything that all of our kids deserve.Now, these students are celebrated in our Week of Action that happens the first week of February every year, and also on our Year of Purpose. So every month, we're revisiting the principles of the Black Lives Matter Global Network and we're highlighting different aspects of the Black freedom struggle. And this would've been transformative in my life, helped me come to love my blackness much earlier. And I hope that for many thousands of kids across this country, they are having that experience. Li:I love that answer. Thank you. So Garfield High School in Seattle is where you actually attended school as a youth and were also a teacher for over a decade. It's the place where your role as an activist also took root. So history was made here, not just for you as an individual, but really locally and then nationally. So why do you think this was happening at Garfield? Why Garfield High School? And what's the culture and social climate of this school that made it such fertile ground to spark local protests and now national change? Jesse:Yeah. I love that question because I bleed purple and I'm a Bulldog to the core. Garfield is a special place to me, and I think the history of the school is a lot of the reason why it was a fertile ground recently for social change. Garfield High School is the school that the founder of the Seattle chapter of the Black Panther Party graduated from in 1968, Aaron Dixon. Li:Wow. Jesse:It's the site where Stokely Carmichael came to speak as the Black Power movement was rising. And before that, Martin Luther King came and spoke at Garfield High School in his only visit to Seattle. It's the heart of the Central District, which was the Black neighborhood in Seattle that was redlined so that Black people could only live in that area. And for that reason, it developed a culture of resistance, and it's an important part of the Black freedom struggle throughout Seattle's history.And I think that in recent years, we've been able to revive some of that legacy in some of the struggles we've participated in. In 2013, we had a historic boycott of the MAP test, the Measures of Academic Progress test. And this was one of the myriad of high-stakes standardized tests that the kids had to take, and studies show that the average student in K-12 education now take 113 standardized tests. We used to take one in elementary, one in middle school, maybe a couple in high school, and now they're taking standardized tests just constantly.And this was a particularly egregious test that wasn't aligned to our standards. And finally, one educator at Garfield, Mallory Clarke, said she wasn't going to administer this test anymore, and she contacted me and wanted to know if I could help, and we began organizing the entire faculty at Garfield. And we called a meeting in the library and we asked everybody, "Is anybody getting useful information out of this test that's helping them with creating their curriculum?" And nobody found this test useful.And then Mallory said she wasn't going to give the test anymore, and who would join her? And we took a vote, and it was unanimous. Everybody said they were going to refuse to administer the test. And so, we organized a press conference in Mr. Gish's room, and we invited the media to come learn why we were going to refuse to give the standardized test, and one of the reasons is because of the legacy of standardized testing based in eugenics. Right? Li:Mm-hmm. Jesse:Standardized testing was created by open white supremacists. A man named Carl Brigham created the SAT exam out of Princeton University, and he was also the author of a book called The Study in American Intelligence, which was one of the Bibles of the eugenics movement. And the book concludes by lamenting that American intelligence is on the decline because we have more Black people than Europe does, and he fears that intermixing of the races will degrade the intelligence of Americans. And so, he created the SAT exam as a gatekeeper.And lo and behold, these tests prove that white native-born men were smarter than everybody else. Right? Well, they designed the test to show that, and then they get the feedback that they were looking for, and that's why people like W.E.B. Du Bois, Horace Mann Bond were some of the first opponents of these bogus IQ standardized testings that started to be grafted onto the public schools at the behest of the eugenics movement.And we knew this history. I'd read Wayne Au's book, Unequal By Design, that explained the racist history of standardized testing, and then we saw it playing out in our own school. We saw how English language learners would get low scores and it would make them feel deficient and unintelligent. But it wasn't measuring their intelligence. It was just measuring their proximity to white dominant culture, the English language, and not their intelligence. And we had so many examples of the way these tests were abusing kids, and we refused to do it. And the school district threatened the faculty of Garfield High School with a 10-day suspension without pay for the tested subject teachers in reading and math, and even our testing coordinator refused to administer the test. Jesse:Kris McBride was an amazing advocate for the MAP test boycott. And even the first-year teachers, who didn't have any tenure protections, none of them backed down. And at the end of the school year, not only did they not suspend any of the teachers because of the overwhelming solidarity we received from thousands of educators and parents and students, not only around the country but around the world, who had heard about our boycott, at the end of the year, they actually suspended the test instead and got rid of the MAP test for all of Seattle's high schools, and it was just a resounding victory. Li:Yeah. That's a triumph. That's a triumph for sure. Jesse:Yeah. Right? Li:And I was watching some of the news coverage, and it was just, like you said, quite a victory to have that test obliterated, really, just removed completely from the system, and also then making way for this idea of multiple literacies and ways of learning that are more just and equitable for all students. And I love to see that, like you said, it begins just with one person. Shout out to Mallory and everyone who followed that one teacher. And like you said, that's all it takes, but then just to see the students really take lead in their own way was a beautiful thing. Jesse:Yeah. Yeah. It was cool that the students, when they knew we weren't going to administer the test, they sent administrators in to try to get the students to march them off to the computer labs to take the test, and some of them just staged to sit in in their own classroom, refused to get up and leave, and then the ones that went just clicked the button on the computer through very quickly so the score was invalidated.So the BSU supported us and the student government supported us, and it was an incredible solidarity that emerged in this struggle. And it wasn't about not wanting assessment. I think as you said, we wanted more authentic forms of assessment, ones that could actually help us understand what our students knew. And we started doing much more performance-based assessments. Li:Right. Jesse:When you get your PhD, they don't want you to eliminate wrong answer choices at faster rates. They want to know, can you think? Can you create? Li:Right. Are you a critical thinker? Jesse:Right. Yeah. Can you critically think? Can you make a thesis and back it up with evidence? And so, that's what we began doing. We wanted to have kids develop a thesis. And it might not be at the PhD level, but it'll be at a developmentally appropriate level for them, and then back it up with evidence and then present that evidence to the class or to other teachers and administrators and defend their position, and that, I think, was a real victory for all of our students for authentic assessment. Li:And went down at Garfield. Jesse:Yeah. No doubt. No doubt. Li:So another question I got for you. Part of the work of Monument Lab is to engage community in the current state of monuments and public memory in this country and beyond. Have you made any connections to this parallel movement to take down monuments that stand as symbols that continue to uphold oppressive systems and then honor the same false histories that you and your comrades are fighting in the classroom? Jesse:Yeah. Definitely. I think one of my favorite assignments I ever gave my students at Garfield was to research the debate over monuments around the country and think about, "How do we decide as a society who to honor, and who should be honored, and who shouldn't be?" And all the students got a big chunk of clay and they created their own monument to replace one that they thought was inappropriate. And so, many chose Confederate monuments or monuments to any slaveholders, including the hallowed Founding Fathers, that many of my students didn't hold in reverence given that they could have been owned by George Washington.And so, at the University of Washington, we have that statue of George Washington. Some people wanted to replace that with a statue of Aaron Dixon, who graduated from Garfield High School, founded the Black Panther Party, went to the University of Washington, and they felt far better represented our community as somebody who started the Free Breakfast Program in Seattle and who founded a free medical clinic that's still open to this day, just a few blocks away from Garfield High School, where many of our students receive free medical care to this day. Li:Oh, that's amazing. Jesse:So creating themselves some beautiful monuments to really honor the people that have made their lives better rather than just powerful people who imposed their will on our society. And I just think it was such an incredible moment in the 2020 uprising when all across the country, people said, "We are no longer going to honor slaveholders and perpetrators of genocide." It was incredible to see them dump the statue of Columbus into the Bay in Baltimore and teach the whole country a lesson, a history lesson about the genocidal attack of Columbus on Native people and how we need to find better heroes. Li:I like that. Find better heroes. You've dedicated a bunch of your recent efforts to resisting House Bills 1807 and 1886 introduced by state Republican Representative Jim Walsh. As you put it in your article that I read, these bills are designed to mandate educators lie to Washington students about structural racism and sexism, essentially forcing educators to teach a false, alternative history of the United States. Can you break down the basic proposals of these bills and their connection to, say, recent book bans, critical race theory, and resources like The 1619 Project? Jesse:For sure. Many people imagine that the attack on critical race theory is mostly in red states or it's just a product of the South. But instead, people should know that actually the attack on critical race theory originated from Christopher Rufo, who ran for city council in Seattle, and he is still a resident in Washington state, and that every state in the nation, except for California, has had a proposed bill that would require educators to lie to students about structural racism or sexism or heterosexism.And even in California, the one state that hasn't had a proposed bill, they have many local school districts that have one of these educational gag order policies in place that seek to coerce educators to lie to students about American history, about Black history, about queer history. And Washington state is one of the many states that has had proposed bills by Republican legislators that are trying to deceive students. They were so frightened of the 2020 uprising and all the questions that young people were asking about our deeply unequitable society that instead of working to try to eliminate that inequality, they just want to ban people from understanding where it comes from.So in my state, last year, they proposed House Bill 1886 that would make it illegal to teach about structural racism. And I found it deeply ironic that the House bill was numbered 1886, because that was the same year as a mob of white people in Seattle rounded up hundreds of Chinese people and forced them into wagons and hauled them to Seattle docks where they were placed on ships and illegally deported. And the chief of police helped this riotous white mob illegally, Police Chief William Murphy, and he never had faced any penalty for it. He was acquitted, even though this racist attack on Chinese people was carried out. Right?And our students have the right to learn about this. They should know that this happened in our city, and too many don't grow up learning the reality of that anti-Chinese attack. And then when hate crimes skyrocketed in our own era in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, you saw hate crimes increase by several hundred percent against Asian Americans, and people wonder why. There's a long history of this Yellow Peril narrative in American society that has labeled Asian Americans and Chinese Americans as the other, as dangerous, as dirty, and our students need to learn about that if they're going to overcome those racial divisions today. Li:And what would the passing of these bills mean for the next generation of youth and their futures, and their education? What's the status of these bills now? Jesse:Well, thankfully, the bill in Washington state did not pass, but they are proliferating around the country. 18 states have already passed bills that seek to coerce educators into lying about structural racism, denying the fact that our country was built on structural racism, of enslavement of Black people, and genocide of Native people, and the exploitation of labor of immigrants, hyper-exploitation of Chinese labor on the railroads and Latinx labor in farms, and they want to hide this history.And you saw it in Florida when they banned the AP African American Studies course. In Virginia, they're trying to rework the state standards to hide the legacy of structural racism and the contributions of Black people, and they are trying to send us back to the era of the 1940s and '50s during the second Red Scare known as the McCarthy era. In the McCarthy era, hundreds of teachers, thousands of teachers around the country were fired after having been labeled communist.And then the Red Scare had the overlapping Lavender Scare, which was the attack on LGBTQ people, and that was especially intense against educators, and Florida had a particularly pernicious attack on queer educators. They had the Johns Committee there that would interrogate teachers about their sex lives and then fire them, remove their teaching certificate so they could never teach again. And this is what people like Governor Ron DeSantis in Florida are trying to revive with the Don't Say Gay bill that has outlawed any discussions of LGBTQ people for the younger grades, and also his so-called Stop W.O.K.E. Act that imposes anti-truth laws on Black history.And in Florida now, it is a third-degree felony for an educator to be caught with the wrong book about Black people or about queer people in their classroom. You can get five years in jail and a $5,000 fine for having the wrong book. Thousands of books are being banned all over the country, and they are rapidly trying to bring us back to that Red Scare, Lavender Scare era where they could just label you a communist or today label you a critical race theorist and push you out of the classroom.So we're at a crossroads right now, where everybody has to decide, "Are we going to build a multiracial struggle to create a true democracy? Or are we going to submit to this fearmongering and this racial hatred and allow them to turn back the clock?" And I hope that people will value social justice enough to join our struggle. Li:I'm just blown away by all the things you're saying, and it's really powerful because I come from a family of educators. Both my father and my mother are educators. My brother and myself are both educators. So I see it not as a job, but like a vocation. And it really sounds like you and the folks that you're in community with, in solidarity with in Seattle and beyond are really making amazing strides and asking such critical questions that could determine the future of our country. Jesse:No doubt. Li:For me and so many other educators, Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed and bell hooks' Teaching to Transgress were defining transformative works that greatly impacted my trajectory in the world. And I wanted to know, can you share what books or even creative works that inspired the path that got you where you are today? Jesse:Yeah. I love that question. Definitely those two books are at the top. Li:Oh, you like those books? Aren't they at the top? Jesse:I love those books. Yes. Li:I love them. Jesse:Yes. Li:I mean, and I'm sure you reread them because I'm always rereading those books. Jesse:Sure. Yes. I'm quoting them in the book I'm writing right now. So much of what I'm doing would not be possible without the theoretical framework that bell hooks gave us and that Paulo Freire gave us to understand how to use dialogic pedagogy to engage your students in a conversation, and educating isn't about filling their heads with what you know, the banking model of education, as Paulo Freire put it, right? Li:Right. Jesse:It's about learning from your students. Li:Right. That relationship between this... I learned so much from my students, especially now that I'm getting older. Jesse:Yeah. No doubt. Li:You got to stay in the know with the youth. Jesse:Hey, the students created the greatest lesson plan of my lifetime when they organized the uprising of 2020. That was mostly young BIPOC folks that organized that uprising and taught the nation what structural racism is and taught many of their teachers that they needed to learn something about it and they needed to begin teaching about it. Right? That's where this whole backlash to critical race theory started.And I think that all of us in the struggle would do well to join in study groups around books that can help deepen our understanding of history and theory that will help us in these struggles to come. There are so many books that I could cite that have been pivotal to my understanding of the struggle. I mean, working at the Zinn Education Project, Howard Zinn's People's History of the United States has been really important. Li:Yes. Jesse:So I think reframing who the subjects of history are and... Li:And the authors of history, right? Jesse:Yeah. Exactly. Exactly. I think that Jarvis Givens book, Fugitive Pedagogy, should be read by all educators. Li:Yes. I'm familiar, very familiar with that project, and it is super inspiring. Yes. Jesse:Yeah. I mean, that book is just a key that unlocks the truth about why we're in the situation we're in right now, where they're trying to outlaw education. Li:And all the overlapping systems, because you talked about that, like these intersecting oppressions and overlapping systems of oppression that are really creating something that it feels like it's impenetrable, but people are making strides. Jesse:Yeah. No doubt. And I would just say that the book, Fugitive Pedagogy, just gives you that history of how Black education has always been a fugitive project. It's always been a challenge to the power structure. It's always been verboten. And starting in 1740 were the first anti-literacy laws in South Carolina banning Black people from learning to read and write.Li:How about that? Right. Jesse:Why was that? Because in 1739, the Stono Rebellion happened. A man named Jemmy helped lead an uprising of enslaved people, and he marched with a banner that read "Liberty" as they collected more enslaved people along the way during their uprising, and this terrified the enslavers. And they not only wanted to kill all the people that were trying to get their freedom, they wanted to kill the idea of freedom. They wanted to kill the ability of Black people to ever write the word liberty again.And so, they imposed these laws to ban Black people from learning to read and write. And today's racists aren't so bold as to ban the ability for people to learn to read and write, but they do want to ban the ability to read the world, as Paulo Freire put it. They don't want us to be racially literate. They don't want us to understand how systems of power and oppression are maintained. And so, they're banning ideas now in the classroom. And once you understand the long history of the attacks on Black education, you can understand why it's happening again today. Li:And even through the digital divide, right? This idea of being disconnected from these resources that are so much a part of education today that Black and brown communities don't always have really makes a difference in the education that they receive and how they learn as well. Jesse:No doubt. I mean, that was emphasized during the pandemic, right?Li:Exactly. So much was amplified during the pandemic, especially that digital divide. Jesse:No doubt. No doubt. Li:So, Jesse, I want to think about the future and speculate. In the best-case scenario, maybe a utopian future for education in the United States. Teachers often have to draft a wish list for what they want, the resources, the needs they have for their classrooms as the academic year comes around. So thinking about what you would want, the three essentials that would be on your wish list for the classroom of the future.Jesse:Yeah. I love this question, because too often, images of the future are all about dystopias. Those are the movies and books we get, and there's not enough freedom dreaming about what's possible. Li:I love that. Shout out to Robin D. Kelley. Jesse:No doubt. Another essential book to read. Li:Yes. Jesse:So I think in the classroom of the future that provides a liberatory education for our youth, the first thing I think we might see is the breakdown of subjects and getting rid of these artificial divisions between the different academic disciplines. And so, school would look very different. Instead of going to math class in the first period and then language arts and then social studies, you might have a class called Should Coal Trains be Used in Seattle? Right? They were just debating whether we should allow coal trains to come through our city.So it would be based on a real problem that exists in your society, and then you would use math and science and language arts and social studies to attack this problem. You would want to learn about the science of climate change and the math that helps you understand the changing climate. Right? We would want to learn the history of coal extraction in this country, the toll it's taken on working people who are minors and the toll it's taken on the environment.We would want to use language arts to write speeches, to deliver your opinion to the city council about this. So we would have problem-posing pedagogy, as Paulo Freire put it, where the courses would be organized around things that the kids care about that impact their lives, and then we would use the academic disciplines in service of that.I think in addition to that, my second requirement for this liberatory classroom would be about wraparound services, so that when kids come to school, they also get healthcare. They also get tutoring services, dental care, mental health care, food for their families. And schools could be really the hubs of community where people have their needs taken care of and are invested in to support not just the students, but their families as well.And lastly, I think schools would be flooded with resources, so that instead of wasting trillions of dollars on the Pentagon so that the United States can go bomb countries all over the world and kill children and their families, we would take that money and flood it into the school system so that kids have all the state-of-the-art resources they need, from the digital equipment, recording equipment, music, art supplies, to funding the school nurse, to the auditoriums, and the music halls. I mean, you can imagine that the richest country on earth could have incredible resources for their kids if we valued education, if we valued our young people.Instead, so many schools in America today are falling apart. The first school I ever taught in in Washington, D.C., an elementary school, I had a hole in the ceiling of my classroom, and it just rained into my classroom and destroyed the first project that I ever assigned the students, their research project, and they never even got to present the projects. Li:No way. Jesse:And our kids deserve better than that. Li:Oh, they definitely deserve better than that. Right? Oh my gosh. Jesse:We're in a society where 81 billionaires have the same amount of wealth as the bottom half of humanity, and that wealth divide means that our kids go to schools that are falling apart, and we would transform that in a future society that's worthy of our kids. Li:Most definitely. And if I can, I wanted to add a fourth thing, because I remember something you said about performance-based assessment. Jesse:Oh, yeah. Li:And I think that would- Jesse:I should put that in. Li:... definitely be essential, right? Make sure you get that one in. But last but not least, my final question to you is, what's next for Zinn Education? And more specifically, what is next for Jesse Hagopian? Jesse:Oh, thank you. Well, I'm really excited about the June 10th National Day of Action. The Zinn Education Project has partnered with Black Lives Matter at School and the African American Policy Forum to organize the Teach Truth Day of Action on June 10th, and I hope everybody will join us on that day of action in organizing an event in your community. This is the third annual Teach Truth Day of Action, and the past ones have been incredible.People have organized historical walking tours in their community to highlight examples of the Black freedom struggle and sites that were important in the Black freedom struggle in their own communities or sites of oppression and racial injustice that students have the right to learn about in their own communities. Some people went to sites where Japanese people were rounded up and incarcerated during World War II. Some people in Memphis, Tennessee went to a site right on their school grounds where there was a race riot and many Black people were killed.In Seattle, we went by the clinic that the Black Panther Party started and gave that history and highlighted how, if the bill passed to deny teachers the right to teach about structural racism, we couldn't even teach about the origins of the health clinic in our own community. And so, there'll be many creative protests that happen on June 10th, 2023, and I'm excited to say we have more cosponsors than ever before.The National Education Association is supporting now, and many other grassroots organizations from across the country. So I expect hundreds of teachers and educators will turn out to protest these anti-truth laws, and I'll be right there with them all helping to organize it and learning from the educators and organizers, who are putting these events on, and hopefully helping to tell their story in the new book that I hope to be finishing very soon about this- Li:You're going to finish it. You're going to finish. This month, man. Jesse:Thank you. Li:This is your month. Jesse:I need that encouragement. Li:You got this. Jesse:I hope I finish it on this month. Li:Believe me. When I was so close to finishing my dissertation, everyone kept asking me, "Are you done yet? Are you done yet?" So I know, because I could see you cringe when I asked you that in the beginning. All I can say is, look, I mean, I'm just so grateful to have this conversation with you today. Thank you for joining me. And I also got to say, I'm sorry to say, Jesse, your mother was right. I think this was your calling. I think this might have been what you were set on this planet to do. Jesse:It feels that way now. Thank you so much. Li:Yes, indeed. So this is Monument Lab, Future Memory. Thank you to my guest, Jesse Hagopian. Jesse:Hey, I really appreciate you having me on. I just felt your warm spirit come across and brighten my day. Really great to be with you. Li:My pleasure. 

To listen to the full episode, go to http://patreon.com/muckrakepodcast and become a patron. This gets you an additional episode every week, but also supports the show, keeping it commercial free and editorially independent. Co-hosts Jared Yates Sexton and Nick Hauselman discuss the recent leaks of top secret classified documents on a discord server and how such a person of low rank was able to get their hands on them. They had to talk about this ridiculous boycott of Bud Light by the right before pivoting to the possibility of a long and painful recession. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Squiz is your shortcut to the news. More details and links to further reading for all of today's news can be found in The Squiz Today email. Click here to get it in your inbox each weekday morning. Other things we do: Squiz Shortcuts - a weekly explainer on big news topics Squiz Kids - a news podcast for curious kids. Age-appropriate news without the nasties!

On Deep Dish, we're revisiting our conversation about the world of espionage and the secrets of intelligence gathering with Amy Zegart, author of Spies, Lies, and Algorithms. As new technology continues to disrupt all aspects of our lives, Zegart explains how these innovations are changing espionage and why spy myths perpetuated by Hollywood often get in the way of understanding threats. [This episode originally aired: March 24, 2022] Related Content:   Spies, Lies, and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence, Amy Zegart, Princeton University Press, February 1, 2022  Senate Intelligence Hearing on Worldwide Threats, PBS NewsHour, March 8, 2023  National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, Final Report, March 19, 2021

On this edition of the evening update, we hear from an ex American Intelligence officer who says that he remembers Prince Andrew never being able to sweat when they were hanging out together and that he is also willing to attest to this under oath.(Commercial at 17:49)To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10428733/Former-intelligence-officer-partied-Prince-Andrew-backs-claim-sweat.html

In 1962, the Cuban Missile Crisis brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Jo Fidgen spoke to American Intelligence officer Dino Brugioni who played a crucial role as the crisis unfolded. Dino was a CIA expert whose job was to interpret the photographs of missiles in Cuba. This programme was first broadcast in 2012. (Photo: Dino Brugioni. Credit: The Washington Post and Getty Images)

In the United States, a highly organized intelligence system did not exist before World War II.  Our geographic isolation meant spying on our enemies or our allies was a relatively rare, often haphazard undertaking.  But as Nicholas Reynolds details in his new book, “Need to Know: World War II and the Rise of American Intelligence”, that national restraint gave way during the war to an extraordinary intricate web of spying which, postwar, would grow into our modern intelligence machine. Newt's guest is Nicholas Reynolds.  He is The New York Times bestselling author of  “Writer, Sailor, Soldier, Spy” and has worked in the fields of modern intelligence and military history for 40 years. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Summary Bill Parquette (LinkedIn; Website) joins Andrew (Twitter; LinkedIn) to discuss Denial and Deception. They discuss examples such as D-Day, the Yom Kippur War, and the Persian Gulf War. What You'll Learn Intelligence Denial and deception – what it is and why it matters Key examples of denial and deception Detecting denial and deception operations How to avoid seeing monsters everywhere Reflections How to counter denial and deception in everyday life (children, salespeople, etc.)  Stumbling into new roles in new fields And much, much more… Episode Notes Sun Tzu said, “all warfare is based on deception” and so much of the natural world is also based on denial and deception: camouflage, feigning, mimicry, distraction. It is also a feature of our daily 21st century lives: spyware, trojan horses, catfishing, and spear phishing. With this week's guest we look at the Denial and Deception Committee, which aimed to discover and mitigate foreign denial and deception operations against the U.S. by coordinating efforts throughout the IC. Bill Parquette was a former Chair of the Committee. He joined the Committee in 2002 and left in 2015. He was formerly a Lt. Col. In the U.S. Army, starting his career with 10 years in the 82nd Airborne, and is currently Professor of Practice at Penn State University.  And… The episode looks at deceiving others but the human capacity for self-deception and denial is VAST – from head in the sand, plugging your ears, living in denial, willful ignorance, and cognitive dissonance through to doublethink.  Quote of the Week "If I have an audience of one or 100, I ask does anyone have children? And the hands get raised. And then I said, okay, did you teach your child deception or denial? And of course not. Do they conduct denial or deception? And they all said yeah, it's throughout nature, it's throughout society…it's a natural thing to deny. I didn't mom I didn't take that cookie." – Bill Parquette Resources Headline Resources “Countering Foreign Denial & Deception – Rise of Fall of a Discipline” – J. Bruce, Studies in Intelligence, 64/1 (2020)  “Denial & Deception Issue,” American Intelligence, 32/2 (2015) Andrew's Recommendation “D-Day Would be Nearly Impossible to Pull Off Today,” D. Lupton, WaPo (2019) *SpyCasts* “Deceiving the Iraqis in Operation Desert Storm” – with BGen Tom Draude (2013) “Agent Garbo” – with Stephan Talty (2012) “Identity, Espionage and Social Media” – with Thomas Ryan (2011) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Beginner Resources Deception at D-Day, Army Uni. Press (2022) [video] The True Story of the D-Day Spies, BBC (2014) [video] Operation Bodyguard Map, Eisenhower Foundation (n.d.) [map] Books History of the National Intelligence Council, Hutchings &. Treverton, eds. (OUP, 2019) Practice to Deceive, B. Whaley (NIP, 2016) The Watchman Fell Asleep, U. Bar-Joseph (SUNY, 2005) The Deceivers, T. Holt (Scribner, 2004) Deception 101, J. Caddell (Army War College, 2004) Strategic Denial and Deception, Godson & Wirtz eds. (Transaction, 2002) Deception in War, J. Latimer (Overlook, 2001) Videos The War in October, Al Jazeera (2013) Primary Sources  US-PLO Contacts During War, Oct 26, 1973 Secretary's Staff Meeting, Oct 23, 1973 Sadat - Speech Calling for Arab-Israeli Peace Conference, Oct 16, 1973 Arab-Israel Tensions – Quandt to Scowcroft, Oct 6, 1973 Ultra – Marshall to Eisenhower, Mar 15, 1944 Overall Deception Policy, Jan 22, 1944 Deception Operations Around England, Dec 18, 1943 Overlord Cover Operation, Nov 20, 1943 *Wildcard Resource* Movies to explore on deception include Deception (1946), The Sting (1973), The Usual Suspects (1995), Donnie Brasco (1997), Female Agents (2008) and Operation Mincemeat (2021), 

Note: This episode of Danger Close was originally released in October of 2021. Douglas London is a retired senior CIA operations officer and the author of the book The Recruiter: Spying and the Lost Art of American Intelligence.  Doug served as a U.S. Marine before joining the Central Intelligence Agency in 1984 where he worked for 34 years – 17 years on either side of 9/11.  His job was the clandestine collection of HUMINT: intelligence that comes from people who provide secrets valuable to the United States.  By virtue of recruiting spies for an equal number of years on either side of 11 September 2001, Doug offers a unique perspective on the Agency pre and post that seminal date in history.   He served in the Middle East, South and Central Asia, and Africa including three assignments as a chief of station, the president's senior advisor at post, and chief of base in a conflict zone.   Assignments at CIA Headquarters included executive positions at the Agency's Counterterrorism Center, Information Operations Center, and Near East and South Asia Division.  He is the recipient of the CIA's Career Intelligence Medal.   Today, Doug is an Adjunct Associate Professor at Georgetown University's Center for Security Studies, and a non-resident fellow at the Middle East Institute.   On this episode of Danger Close, Doug discusses the state of modern intelligence, failures of the intelligence community, a lack of accountability prevalent in the post-9/11 CIA, and a lot more.   You can follow him on Twitter @douglaslondon5 and you can follow Jack on social platforms  @jackcarrusa. Sponsors: Navy Federal Credit Union: Today's episode is presented by Navy Federal Credit Union. Learn more about them at navyfederal.org Black Rifle Coffee Company: Today's episode is also brought to you by Black Rifle Coffee Company. Check out the latest here.  SIG: This episode is sponsored by SIG Sauer. You can learn more about SIG here. Featured Gear Schnee's Boots: Today's featured gear segment is brought to you by Schnee's boots. When you shop at Schnees.com make sure you use promo code: JACK21. When you do, you'll save 10% off your pair of Schnee's boots and logo wear.   Featured Gear: Microsoft Surface  Premier Body Armor Bulletproof Laptop Case

In this "Best Of" episode of Intelligence Matters, host Michael Morell speaks with Amy Zegart, the Morris Arnold and Nona Jean Cox Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution and Professor of Political Science at Stanford University about her new book, "Spies, Lies and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence." Morell and Zegart discuss the impact of emerging technologies on intelligence collection and analysis, both of which, Zegart says, have been fundamentally changed by developments like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and commercial satellite imagery. Zegart also outlines the five "mores" - more threats, more speed, more data, more customers and more competitors - that she says have made the work of intelligence newly challenging. This episode was originally released in February 2022. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Assessment of German Military training tactics. 1942Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/jocko-podcast/exclusive-content

It's not unusual for the U.S. to lend intelligence to another country. It's a little more unusual for the U.S. to talk about it.  Why is the American military confirming reports that it's helping Ukraine vanquish Russian targets? Could that candidness lead to an expansion of the war? Or will it be the deciding factor in finishing the conflict? Guest: Shane Harris, reporter covering intelligence and national security for the Washington Post.  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

It's not unusual for the U.S. to lend intelligence to another country. It's a little more unusual for the U.S. to talk about it.  Why is the American military confirming reports that it's helping Ukraine vanquish Russian targets? Could that candidness lead to an expansion of the war? Or will it be the deciding factor in finishing the conflict? Guest: Shane Harris, reporter covering intelligence and national security for the Washington Post.  If you enjoy this show, please consider signing up for Slate Plus. Slate Plus members get benefits like zero ads on any Slate podcast, bonus episodes of shows like Slow Burn and Dear Prudence—and you'll be supporting the work we do here on What Next. Sign up now at slate.com/whatnextplus to help support our work. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Amy Zegart is a fellow at the Hoover Institution, a professor of political science at Stanford University, and the author of a new book, Spies, Lies, and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence. In this frank conversation, Zegart grades American intelligence-gathering operations, recent and historical, and compares them to their counterparts in China and Russia. Professor Zegart also discusses Silicon Valley's crucial role in these operations and how they often conflict with the politics of the people running tech companies. Finally, Zegart discusses the crucial ability of the intelligence community to recruit the next generation of spies and analysts, some of whom may be her own students. Recorded on March 17, 2022

Amy Zegart is a professor, former staff member of the National Security Council, and keen intelligence community watcher. Her latest book, "Spies, Lies, and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence" is a guide the history of the American intelligence enterprise from Washington to Biden. She also lays out how the intelligence community needs to evolve in the face of new threats and new technologies. How should the intelligence community work with the private sector? How had open-source intelligence changed the game? How should intelligence and defense officials think about risk? Find out by listening to this conversation and then buy the book to dive even deeper.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/deepstateradio. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

For Day 14 of The Realignment's daily Ukraine coverage, Marshall talks with Dr. Amy Zegart, author of Spies, Lies, and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence. Dr. Zegart discusses how the release of classified intelligence before Russia's invasion of Ukraine will reshape geopolitics, how to think about intelligence failures in Afghanistan and Iraq, and provides an overview of the structure and make-up of the U.S. intelligence community. SEND US A TIP: https://app.swapstack.co/tips/the-realignment REALIGNMENT NEWSLETTER: https://therealignment.substack.com/ BOOKSHOP: https://bookshop.org/shop/therealignment

We all have seen a dozen of Spies movies, movies about intelligence, we read books about it, we knew who is James Bond, Mission Impossible and all. But the question is still out there, what are spies? What are the intelligence agencies? What are the covert intelligence agencies?In this episode, I am joined by Amy Zegart, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, a professor of political science, past co-director of Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation, to talk about her new book, Spies, Lies, and Algorithms: The History and Future of American Intelligence.That book is like the textbook for spies and intelligence 101! Conversation with Amy was so fascinating as we touched upon the topics like, why do we need spies and intelligence, cyber security, cyber-warfare, which apparently we are at war all year round, and we even talked about how a commercial company like Google, Facebook, and others might have more data on us than the government agencies!Listen to the episode, and tweet at me @jaltucher if you like this episodes!My new book Skip The Line is out! Make sure you get a copy wherever you get your new book!Join You Should Run For President 2.0 Facebook Group, and we discuss why should run for president.I write about all my podcasts! Check out the full post and learn what I learned at jamesaltucher.com/podcast.Thanks so much for listening! If you like this episode, please subscribe to "The James Altucher Show" and rate and review wherever you get your podcasts:Apple PodcastsStitcheriHeart RadioSpotify Follow me on Social Media:YouTubeTwitterFacebook ------------What do YOU think of the show? Head to JamesAltucherShow.com/listeners and fill out a short survey that will help us better tailor the podcast to our audience!Are you interested in getting direct answers from James about your question on a podcast? Go to JamesAltucherShow.com/AskAltucher and send in your questions to be answered on the air!------------Visit Notepd.com to read our idea lists & sign up to create your own!My new book, Skip the Line, is out! Make sure you get a copy wherever books are sold!Join the You Should Run for President 2.0 Facebook Group, where we discuss why you should run for President.I write about all my podcasts! Check out the full post and learn what I learned at jamesaltuchershow.com------------Thank you so much for listening! If you like this episode, please rate, review, and subscribe to "The James Altucher Show" wherever you get your podcasts: Apple PodcastsiHeart RadioSpotifyFollow me on social media:YouTubeTwitterFacebookLinkedIn