Slashdot Mirror
CIA Manual Thought Lost In 1973 Available On Amazon
An anonymous reader writes "At the height of the Cold War, the Central Intelligence Agency paid renowned magician John Mulholland $3,000 to write a manual on misdirection, concealment, and stagecraft. All known copies of the document were believed to be destroyed in 1973. Turns out one survived — and is now available on Amazon."
'Turns out one survived -- and is now available on Amazon'
Or at least, that's what they want you to think...
This is not the book you are looking for.....move along.....
A republic cannot succeed till it contains a certain body of men imbued with the principles of justice and honour.
PS is a street magician an actual CIA employee with a security clearance?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
No, no, it seems they've actually started printing the book.
Amazon's selling the newly published copies, not auctioning the original.
I wonder how long until it gets globally deleted via the wireless updates.
This isn't the manual you're looking for.
</handwave>
Er... parent not insightful, unless one believes the summary implicitly. At the cost of $10.99 (plus shipping), I'm pretty sure they've mass produced this sucker, or else the info is absolutely worthless (*stage whisper* DO NOT SEEK THE TREASURE!).
One of the questions raised on the Amazon page is: shouldn't this material be public domain? It is owned by the US Government and any copyright would seem to have expired at this point, and moreover it seems like we should be able to get a copy for free under the FOIA.
Why do I M2 everything negatively?
The manual is of some historic value as a relic of the 1950s, when we were actually trying to murder Castro with exploding cigars, but John Mulholland's actual manuals seem of little practical use, even then. Oh, I suppose there's some value in learning how to drop Roofies in your date's drink while lighting her cigarette, but the techniques developed by Mulholland wouldn't have passed muster at "The Man from Uncle." It was more "Get Smart" stuff.
Review here...
So, it's not all that.
There's a Kindel version so, I guess there will be a torrent?
It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
So the Slashdot summary links to an article in the Huffington Post. And the HuffPo article links to an article in Wired. And the Wired article links to the actual story in the Boston Globe.
Genius idea: have the Slashdot summary link to the actual story. YES!!!
It’s not particularly hard to find. Amongst the things that I found on eDonkey, some old anarchy sites, etc, are tons of CIA and army manuals about questionable topics. The one I found particularly nice was a guide that explained to you how to get a major or other politician off his post, or even killed, trough small nudges here and there in the town. Talk to someone here, do this there, and let the event cascade roll into a avalanche that breaks his neck. ;)
Then of course torture and interrogation manuals, building bombs and healing yourself in emergency situations or covert operations, etc. etc. etc. Everything from TNT over Napalm, termite, picking locks, spying on people, spy protection, and ten years ago I found a complete technical description of how to build a nuclear bomb. With a text file attached, saying to ask there and there when you’d find yourself in need for the “materials” to build it. ^^
Luckily I was only angry at my dad, and not at any country, back then. ^^
Hmm... I wonder if I still have them somewhere... probably locked away in a archive with military-grade encryption that I forgot the password to.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
So, it looks like it worked, then...
This message has been ROT-13 encrypted twice for higher security.
I much prefer a link to the book on amazon than a write up about how it exists there. Given that the book is "In Stock" for $15, I'm guessing this isn't the one remaining copy for sale :)
Remind me not to get on your bad side. If I had any mod points, I'd give them to you, my friend. In fact, I'd give you all of them...really.
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
Albert Einstein
The whole manuscript was published in a magicians' monthly magazine called "Genii" several years ago. Granted, it is a fascinating read, but it was not "just discovered".
Most of those files were work of BBS users and can range anywhere from complete bullshit all the way to actually working stuff.
I guess you know this, but rest of slashdot could take a peek at those manuals here: http://textfiles.com/
-- Technology for the sake of technology is as pathetic as eschewing technology because it's technology.
Chapter One: Misdirection
Let me preface this with a few words WHOA LOOK BEHIND YOU MAN! Did you look? I knew it! There you go. Misdirection.
Chapter 2: Concealment:
Watch Pulp Fiction. Captain Koons talking to Butch about his grandpa's wristwatch is all you need know.
Chapter 3: Stagecraft.
See Chapter One. Do something while they're not looking. If someone looks while you're doing whatever it is you're doing, kill them. Claim they were terrorists.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
I was under the impression that this book was mandatory reading for all U.S. politicians.
Read a book called: The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli. It is about this exact topic. It is in the public domain and you can find linked copies from that page. The point of this is that believe it or not, every single president in the US or leader elsewhere has read that book. It details how to establish, consolidate, defend, and extend power. The tools it employs include primarily manipulation in various forms. As they are tools they can be used for both Good and Evil purposes. It is up to you to add them to your own repertoire so you can then use them to fight for what you think is right. If you don't you will be out maneuvered by those who have.
Shh.
Shouldn't one be able to believe the story summary? If not, why even bother having them?
And yes, unless its classified, it is in the American pubic domain on day one since it was paid for by US citizens. However that doesn't mean you cant sell a copy for the cost of 'printing', sort of like the GPL. Even the government often charges a 'reproduction fee' when you order documents directly.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
The book is "in stock" in Amazon, and Invisible Hand showed me links to at least 4 other sites where they're selling it... So WTF?
I don't have a sig.
> One of the questions raised on the Amazon page is: shouldn't this material
> be public domain? It is owned by the US Government...
If the author wrote thing as a US Government employee then the goverment is the author and is not permitted to enforce its copyright. If he was acting as a contractor he is the author in which case he may still own the copyright.
> ...and any copyright would seem to have expired at this point...
Not yet.
> ...it seems like we should be able to get a copy for free under the FOIA.
The FOIA does not work the way you think it does.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Could I get a zip file of all that? please?
Oh Crap, I'm an optimist.....
> And yes, unless its classified, it is in the American pubic domain on day
> one since it was paid for by US citizens.
Not true. The government cannot enforce its copyright on "works for hire" where the government is the employer but it can enforce copyrights it acquires. Contractors also often retain copyright is works produced while performing a contract (the government usually acquires a nonexclusive license). The mere fact that a work was paid for by tax money does not put it in the public domain.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
And every nation has one. Some are like the CIA suppose to spy on other nations. For the smaller nations, they spy on their own citizens.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Point?
If you want to effectively fight fire employ fire. The world is full of complex issues and the better the guides you comprehend to navigate through those issues the more effective you will be. Whatever your purpose, it's raising the bar. That's progress.
Shh.
Every nation has a CIA equivalence. They have to. They have to know what others are doing and if there is a real threat. For example MI6 comes to mind.
Now, if you are calling them criminal because of Iraq/Afghanistan, then nope. The real problem was not CIA. These were simply foot soldiers doing what they were ordered to by the highest level of the gov.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Did you ever read the prince? It's the K+R C Programming Language for politics. The book in TFA is about being a spy. I wouldn't say the topics are unrelated but one is a practical handbook and the other is on concepts.
I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)
Sure. Install eMule, configure it, and enter “cia” or “army” and you got half of it. The other half is found by searching for “bbs anarchy” on Google. Don’t expect me to send it to you directly though, for obvious reasons. :)
Oh, and of course I forgot, that the “illegal” cookbook (yes, THE cookbook) is also easily available.
My father, being a bit of a collector, also once acquired the original 70s paper version of that book. Even back then you could go straight to jail for “terrorism” just for owning it. It was an interesting read for someone going to 4rth class. ^^
I don’t know if he still has it though. Haven’t seen him for 10 years now.
He also told me, that back then, a “cookbook” often just was a book with a grenade in it. ^^
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
It is in the public domain and you can find linked copies from that page. The point of this is that believe it or not, every single president in the US or leader elsewhere has read that book.
"Machiavelli stands strongly against the use of mercenaries. He believes them useless to a ruler because they are undisciplined, cowardly, and without any loyalty, being motivated only by money."
Even if every single US president read the book, it appears some didn't do so thoroughly enough.
Hmm... Now I really wonder where the “flamebait” part of my comment is supposed to be. :) ;P
Or is this some special agent? If so: Hello there. I can see you.
Disclaimer: I am not pro- or contra- anything. I just think that some idiot should stop beating their heads (and especially those of others) in over pointless shit. :) If that means you hate me, then I’m proud of it. ^^
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
I know what you mean, but that's the wrong terminology to be using when discussing Machiavelli and the school of realism (which is essentially what you're describing). It's nothing to do with "good" and "evil". It's only about power, and continuing the existence of the state by whatever means necessary. This tradition goes all the way back to Thucydides, who basically recorded that the “the strong do what they have the power to do and the weak accept what they have to accept [and] by conquering you we shall increase not only the size but the security of our empire – it is a general and necessary law of nature to rule whatever one can". Rousseau, Niebuhr, Edward Bernays, and various others all expound the same principles.
The only usage of the term "good" that you can probably use in this scenario is that the actions taken continue the existence of the state. Machiavelli even notes that "it is necessary for a prince wishing to hold his own to know how to do wrong, and to make use of it or not according to necessity – it will be found that something which looks like virtue, if followed, would be his ruin; whilst something else, which looks like vice, yet followed brings him security and prosperity.” "Good" and "evil" simply do not apply as most people would understand them; that's a moral code used for propaganda i.e. whatever we do is "good", while whatever they do is "evil". Lying, deception, torture, wars of aggression, ignoring human rights issues, etc. are not things that most people would endorse as being "good" in any shape or form, but in the realm of realism they are all legitimate means towards the one goal i.e. continuing the existence of the state.
This is one of the prime reasons that there exists a core contradiction in states: internally, its citizens are meant to uphold a strict moral code. Externally, as a collective, they engage in activities that very rarely, if ever, coincide with this moral code.
'If Christ had tweeted the sermon on the mount, it might have lasted until nightfall.' - John Perry Barlow
every single president in the US or leader elsewhere has read that book.
I bet half the college students in the U.S. have read it, too. What's your point?
Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
You coward !
The point of this is that believe it or not, every single president in the US or leader elsewhere has read that book.
Without mentioning names I will say that I refuse to believe that "every single president in the US or leader elsewhere has read that book". Some of their advisor(s) maybe.
Frankly I also find it hard to believe that the Prince and the CIA manual are covering the exact same concepts in the exact same way. At best I would perhaps say that someone interested in this sort of literature could, or would, read both, as well as the Art of War.
At the height of the Cold War, the Central Intelligence Agency paid $3,000 to renowned magician John Mulholland to write a manual on misdirection, concealment, and stagecraft.
I have yet to read The Prince's chapter on sleight of hand.
The Long Now Foundation
I can assure you that Machiavelli's Discourses on Levi's History of Ancient Rome are a far better account of how to run a republic. All of Obama's actions so far indicate that he's taking his advice from the Discourses, not the Prince.
If you want to effectively fight fire employ fire.
Depends entirely on the fire, counter-fire does have it uses; but for most fires I would recommend water or perhaps anti-fire foam.
The Long Now Foundation
So what? "The Prince" is overrated as a manual for ruling people. It's real charm is simply that it doesn't cater to the more common hypocrisies. But the advice just isn't that useful IMHO. My view is that the book was intended as a rationalization of contemporary power gathering and leadership approaches than a "how to" book. "The Art of War" would be more effective a tool since among things, that book gives actual examples of how to lead and it presents a number of useful insights into conflict and strategy.
Hey, let's stop making fun of Bush Jr. :-P
-- SouNerd.com
problem is: this fire (the cia) is a little too big to kill off, or "extinguish". so instead, you make sure it can't do any more harm by letting others know what the cia knows. that's like counter-fire, i guess.
Stripped of his position, and having been barred from holding any political office by the de' Medici, after a lifetime of public service, embittered, Machiavelli wrote "The Prince" basically saying: "if you want to grab, hold, and expand your political power," (adding under his breath, "like those de' Medici bastards,") he continued, "this is what you do..." (He could not insult them openly, he had already been imprisoned and tortured by them once, and I guess he wasn't "feeling strong" anymore.)
It was not meant literally! I guess the De Medici had the last laugh though, whether by their actions or not, Machiavelli's name is associated NOT with his own good and noble life's work, but with the behaviours and beliefs of those he most loathed and despised. For a better idea of what this great Renaissance figure really thought, try instead his "Discorsi sulla prima deca di Tito Livio", or "Discourses on the first ten books of Livy", (Titus Livius, Roman historian)
~ Hallux
The chapters on mercenaries refer to Italian conditierri and are regarded as obsolete, of historical interest only. You might consider that the disuse of mercenaries led to the draft, a great evil. The other chapters on human nature are as valid as they've ever been.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
The root problem is that situations have a flow to them so you must continually adapt. Everything is out of date the instant it is uttered. Therefore, you need strategy, wisdom, values, and motivation. Then you play the cards you are dealt.
Shh.
I rather believe current presidents became what they are because they have the skills as Machiavelli explained. Only geeks like us would read a book like that.
The cake is a lie! What better way to boost sales than by suggesting you shouldn't or oughtn't or flat-out can't have/read this book?
I read "The Prince", but it's not very useful for manipulation. It's more focused on diplomacy.
IMHO, the best one is "How to Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie.
Much more practical than "The Prince", and it works !
I've seen a few in the last few days. Since Slashdot doesn't delete any posts (yet), it's a golden place for them to be. Those of us reading at -1 see them, but obviously we won't buy from them. It'll should (I believe) help their pagerank though, which hurts everyone else.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
wikileaks has a lot of it, up to date versions too.
I would give everything i own for a little bit more.
Sun Tzu's Art of War talks about spies and double spies. This is all older than dirt.
You make some excellent points. To clarify my personal understanding of Machiavelli is that it is all about methods. He espoused them to be used in the physical world. I like to twist words. I manipulate purposefully discussion to my own ends. Sometimes, morally, I do it for noble ends and sometimes petty ones. Machiavelli's world is ages removed from ours but I fully believe that as its own work it is still relevant today as something to prod yourself into growing as a person. What you do with that depends on your morals.
Shh.
Everyone comprehends it to their personal degree.
Shh.
Subterfuge. Men ought to be either well treated or crushed. The CIA is in the crushing business.
Shh.
There's a great book called the 48 laws of power which uses exampled from all of the above and more to illustrate various concepts related to getting, keeping and using power and position of influence.
Just FYI to anyone interested in such things.
A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
It is not of some limited historical interest. Foreign mercenaries have been considered an issue not just in Renaissance Italy, but are considered a leading cause of the downfall of Carthage, and the Roman Empire. If you want more recent examples, you can find some here. PMCs are just the latest facade of the same thing.
I don't think that any leader really needs to read a book to learn to "establish, consolidate, defend, and extend power". The fact that they attain leadership means that they've been selected for having those abilities.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
Reading comprehension fail.
I said "believe the story summary implicitly", meaning that "[t]urns out one survived" would be exactly that -- one single solitary copy.
It's not quite clear as to who owns the work, so the word "declassified" might be a marketing ploy. In fact, I'm fairly certain that this particular work is not owned by the government, but instead has incorporated from a work owned by the government within, and added some stuff to make it original -- much like the GPL.
Getting the material itself may be free, but you may have to to pay an administrative fee, sure ok I'll split hairs too. The thing is, books are cheap to print. The list price on this is $25. If this is owned by the government, then that's a pretty darn good profit to turn for a printing fee.
Why do I M2 everything negatively?
Almost sounds like the guy read Sun Tzu art of war and translated it for himself in italian or latin and then ended up having his own book.
any copyright would seem to have expired at this point,
There's shit from the 30s still under copyright. No way in hell is a book from the 70s going to be out of copyright yet...as retarded as that is...
Perhaps not every single one. About ten years ago I borrowed The Prince from a girlfriend who was studying politics; half the book is devoted to warnings against relying on mercenaries in foreign wars, and I remember asking myself, "What contemporary leader would be stupid enough to do that?"
Now I know.
As long as I'm dealing the cards...
rewriting history since 2109
"Machiavelli stands strongly against the use of mercenaries. He believes them useless to a ruler because they are undisciplined, cowardly, and without any loyalty, being motivated only by money."
That's what he wants you to think. That way, their price when he hires them is lower because of lower demand.
rewriting history since 2109
Are you sure Machiavelli's concerns about mercenaries are obsolete?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_Worldwide
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DynCorp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Professional_Resources_Inc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northbridge_Services_Group
No sig for the moment.
BAH! Everyone heard/read of it, very few actually reads it.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
Blackwater security are the equivalent of Renaissance mercenaries, and see what their use has resulted in. I think Machiavelli's points are still valid today if you update the setting.
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
FYI "Il Principe" doesn't mean "the Prince", but "the boss", or perhaps more precisely "number one".
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
But perhaps the conflict can be resolved with sufficiently good public relations machinery.
I have. It's mostly common sense these days. Like heliocentrism, formally-argued ruthlessness has moved from heretical idea, to a mathematically-supported prescription for running the world. The historical details are interesting, and it's never a bad idea to read a classic, but I don't think any reasonably aware person is going to have their mind blown by Macchiavelli.
"They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
The US doesn't rely on mercenaries to fight the wars. They are used as defense after the "war" was won.
The US military literally rolled over the Iraqi army twice. 1991's Desert Storm crushed the air and tank defenses of iraq. Something Iran spent 8 years trying to do, the armed forces of the USA did in weeks. So if oyu want something crushed, destroyed or captured the USA army is great. If you want a police force the USA is like using a nuclear warhead to take demo a single building. There are hundreds of examples in both wars plus Afghanistan of 12-20 us soldiers fending off 100+ attackers with minimal losses of their own.
In reality what the USA needs to develop is a heavily armed (preferably international) police force. People who are better at keeping the peace, while still strong enough to defend againist such attackers. Leave the military to attack installations, and large groups and the police force to defend the people.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Jesus, you just fired Echelon with all those words !!! ... :D
Hopefully you didn't used Semtex or Javelin
In reality what the USA needs to develop is a heavily armed (preferably international) police force.
Hmmm. A US International police force? To enforce US law against the world? I could say "good luck with that", but it wouldn't be good luck for anyone. Sovereign states are just that, and it is sheer arrogance to assume that the US has any form of moral or other high ground from which any kind of aggressive action might be justified.
The Prince is not a manual for how to run a government. It is meant as satire, a warning perhaps, to the people, about how sociopaths run a government. If you want something closer to a manual, read Machiavelli's Discourses on Livy , a book about how to run a Republic rather than a Tyranny.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
How exactly is formally argued ruthlessness a mathematically supported prescription for running the world?
You do know The Prince was meant as satire, right?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I can see you've never read The Prince, you just heard the keyword "mercenary" and clicked into slashbot mode. Sigh. It's not me that says this about the condottieri, it's pretty much every book reviewer everywhere from the 16th century on. Please, for the love of all that is holy, read the God-damned book and get an education. Thanks.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Great. Now Google has to change their slogan to "Do no Microsofty things"
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
You don't even know (of course, never having read the book) that Machiavelli, in his book The Prince which we are talking about now, STRONGLY RECOMMENDS AGAINST HIRING MERCENARIES. Machiavelli hated mercenaries, considered them a scourge, and advocated armies of citizens instead. Does "the draft" ring a bell?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
... and since the government is "Of the people, by the people, and for the people" that copyright is held by the US citizens, lest you forget 4th grade civics.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
WMD etc...
I think they had a copy.
Not sure about that. Most of the available evidence suggests that the last president of the US couldn't read at all.
Sure. That's exactly what he ("they") wanted you and Joe Blow to believe, and he met that goal with resounding success. In public and especially on television he was a dufus, but many journalists remarked they were surprised that his apparent witlessness evaporated when in private. I for one believe he was a much better actor than Regan could have ever hoped to be. Sure, he was no engineer, and didn't translate Latin texts, and didn't do us a world of good...
Speaking of which, I think it's positively a crime that most presidents have been lawyers in their pre-presidential lives. Other professions are sorely unrepresented. As if a lawyer ever did anything constructive.
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
Well, I think it's a bit simplistic to say that good and evil don't come into it. Clearly Machiavelli thinks of stability as "good", in fact a higher good than conventional rules of morality. If the stability of the state requires that some individual be wronged, then that is preferable to anarchy where all suffer.
I don't think Old Nick is as amoral as he is considered to be by many. He simply does not proceed from the axiom that doing the most right overall comes from doing the most right for each individual the state's actions affect.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
You do know The Prince was meant as satire, right?
That's very much a minority view, and certainly not as obvious as your sarcastic tone implies. Most people do not subscribe to that view at all, and reading the book shows exactly why: it doesn't come across as a satire at all. The satirical interpretation is based largely on extrapolating from biographical details and making a lot of tenuous assumptions.
No. And do you know why they don't? Because the actual, non-mercenary army is going to kick their ass if they do (that is, if the police proves ineffective). And if you look at the price tag of their services, they don't need to resort to these measures just yet.
Does "the draft" ring a bell?
Does "volunteer army" ring a bell? Anyway, you find the draft evil and cruel, but Machiavelli argues that cruelty is necessary, especially when it comes to troops. "The Prince" isn't about being Mr. Nice Head Honcho, it's about getting power and keeping it. And having overpaid mercenaries in your service that don't fear or revere you doesn't help with that.
I cannot imagine to which presidents you are referring. Maybe Jimmy Carter didn't read it or Ronald Reagan. Maybe John Kennedy or Dwight Eisenhower did not. Maybe Bill Clinton or Barack Obama did not. Maybe George W. Bush did not (although, he is more likely to have read it because he reads so much): http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060817/17bushbooks.htm
and: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/29/AR2008122901896.html
and: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123025595706634689.html
Anyway, I've read portions of The Prince and was not impressed.
If you want to effectively fight fire employ fire... That's progress.
I'd recommend instead Aqueous Fire-Fighting Foam, Halon, water mists, Mars water bombers, and electronic-safe extinguishers, depending on the type, severity, and location of the fire.
Now THAT'S progress.
In terms of your analogy, which is what you really meant -- the people using fire can recognize fire and will take counter-measures. Come at them sideways, get them to fall into their own traps, and they won't see it coming.
---
ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
Others think it was his attempt to get into Medici service.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
One of the questions raised on the Amazon page is: shouldn't this material be public domain?
This is not the original manual. This is a book published by the people who found the manual. It includes the contents of the original manual, plus some additional commentary. It is, therefore, a new original work containing some possibly public domain material.
"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein
I knew those little buggers were organized, but not that they were for hire.
Hmmm.
The More You Know :)
Which is actually why I said, "The only usage of the term 'good' that you can probably use in this scenario is that the actions taken continue the existence of the state."
'If Christ had tweeted the sermon on the mount, it might have lasted until nightfall.' - John Perry Barlow
The mere fact that a work was paid for by tax money does not put it in the public domain.
Until we all decide it does. Treat it like it is and it will be.
What else could the phrase mean? If the public wills it...
So BBS users wrote CIA and army manuals? What? These aren't anarchy philes we're talking about here. They have and ordinary people are often shocked to find that Army manuals tell you how to kill people. "I read it, and those methods are so unfair! We are such horrible people!" I mean, you and I know that's a ridiculous attitude, but I'm not kidding when I tell you there are people out there who do have those reactions.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
the font on the picture reminds me of the TTC font, for some reason.
proud caffeine whore
>I>The point of this is that believe it or not, every single president in the US or leader elsewhere has read that book.
I choose not. As does any rational person. Go take your pills.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
I am confused as to how google and amazon got rights to all these books. Doesn't this violate copyright laws. If I create a book will google and amazon get it without my knowledge.
All your books are belong to Google!
Contrary to what the summary implies, it's a reprint based on a surviving copy. The actual original from the seventies is going to fetch more than $20, and will probably not be available at Amazon.
I know what you mean, but that's the wrong terminology to be using when discussing Machiavelli and the school of realism (which is essentially what you're describing). It's nothing to do with "good" and "evil". It's only about power, and continuing the existence of the state by whatever means necessary.
Well you've convinced me...
From now on I shall stop thinking about governments in terms of "good" vs"evil", instead I will think of government in terms of "doesn't exist" vs "exists". :-P
Where "doesn't exist" represents government that serves for the betterment of all humanity, and "exists" represents greedy, lying, murdering bastards.
It makes sense for the persons in power to look at things from the moral neutral; the perspective of 'What must I do to keep this power'.
As subjects of power, "good" vs "evil" are exactly the scales we should measure on. We MUST avoid moral neutrality, otherwise we become the tools of the government rather than government being a tool of the people.
The usage of the phrases good and evil have no value when coming from the top down, they should be very meaningful coming from the bottom up.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eootfzAhAoU
..Do they rampage across the United States.. they did after Katrina :) :)
Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney vs Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on DynCorp's "trade".
Blackwater you should have read about.
Just waiting for the next one
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Remember that Machiavelli recommended not hiring mercenaries because their lack of loyalty and their tendency to turn against you when you need them most.
While it's true that they won't be rampaging and plundering US cities (because of the rather large conventional army, as stated by another poster), it wouldn't be surprising if they did that in some other places like a few african countries or war-torn Iraq. Prolonging a conflict wouldn't be a surprise, too, if it were economically beneficial to them.
I remember reading somewhere that one of the major complaints about blackwater in Iraq was that they would make a mess and then leave things to the US armed forces for them to fix.
In certain ways, Blackwater is equivalent to rennaissance mercenaries, and the sections about mercenaries are still valid today.
GPG 0x1B479C78
This is only meaningful when applied by people against their own government first and foremost. For me, the actual risk is not from avoiding moral neutrality, but in avoiding applying the same moral standards to ourselves as we do to others.
'If Christ had tweeted the sermon on the mount, it might have lasted until nightfall.' - John Perry Barlow
Hell, I'd be very surprised if any serious politician didn't have a passing acquaintance with The Prince - the same way I expect any Philosophy major to have read some Ayn Rand. You might not agree with the content, but you should know what is in it so you won't be laughed at.
.evom ton seod gis eht
I read the Goddamned book a few years ago, and I am fully aware that Machiavelli was talking about the mercenaries of his time...
STILL, since Machiavelli's advice on mercenaries and allied troops boils down to "do everything possible to avoid using them, since they don't have any true allegiance to you or your goals", I find it still valid now, considering the political costs of using Private Military Companies like Blackwater or DynCorp.
No sig for the moment.
To be fair, politics (at least in modern America) is primarily concerned with creating and manipulating law. It is objectively more useful to have a president with a keen understanding of arbitration than one with a keen understanding of string theory (assuming you think that string theory isn't completely bogus).
Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
You coward !
Ha ha!! That's pretty funny coming from a guy named "Anonymous Coward".
"Before God we are all equally wise - and equally foolish"
Albert Einstein
Some if not most of Mulholland's manual was published in Genii Magazine (a magic magazine) within the last couple of years. if you want you can find a back issue; start at geniimagazine.com.
If not, then I don't want it.
The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!
Yep. I seen quite a few 'Manuals' on the internet, never hurts to have a copy here & there. ;)
FragHARD or don't frag at all
Hell, I'd be very surprised if any serious politician didn't have a passing acquaintance with The Prince - the same way I expect any Philosophy major to have read some Ayn Rand. You might not agree with the content, but you should know what is in it so you won't be laughed at.
One name: Sarah Palin.
If she can't see it from her house she shouldn't comment on it.
And yeah you can call her "not a serious politician" till you go blue, but she was a contender in a presidential election.
Here in Australia we've had similar politicians. Competence is not a requirement on the paperwork.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
You know, the people running the show right now have also read The Prince and they are not repeat not relying on mercenaries. They are using the mercenaries for specific purposes to which they are ideally suited. If you think that the excesses of mercenaries have not been accounted for and specifically invited, you're not thinking hard enough.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You put the scare quotes round the wrong three-letter word - declaring Mission Accomplished allowed the profiteers to move in, but the war was far from "won" at that point.
As for using mercenaries as defense - Fallujah could be called defense only in the sense used in the name of the eponymous Department. It certainly wasn't a defensive action.
You're quite right to say that the US military is better at crushing things than policing them - and the same seems to be true of its contractors. I guess the question facing the US government is which of those actions constitutes victory in the modern world.
One vote for this because the Puffington Host is blocked at work but not the Boston Globe.
Errr, why?
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Bah. I'll bite.
I'm glad to know that we have one such as yourself that IS fluent in 16th century Italian. You can spread your wisdom on how to interpret a 450 year old document that was been alternatively been alternately described as a treatise on ruling, a satire, or the most extensive job application ever written. Clearly you know more about this document than the majority of Renaissance scholars who did not actually believe this to be a scholar.
Thanks for being here, friend, I have some essays on the Florentine Republic that that I may need help on in the future.
But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.