The Shadow Factory by James Bamford, published by Doubleday

Following is a book review whose subject deserves attention.

The Shadow Factory by James Bamford, published by Doubleday

2.5 of 5 stars

If you didn't know the United States Government is listening to all you voice communications and reading all your emails and monitoring all the web sites you visit, then shame on you. Do you think the government didn't watch Arron Burr and other long before and after? Governments have always watched their own. Back in the day they use to go to the library and see what you were reading now it is easier to pull that information off the fiber optics the telecommunications industry charges you to use.

The Shadow Factory delineates the external and internal monitoring changes made post 9/11 by the various US alphabet agencies at the behest of the Bush administration. It has often been said by supporters of this type of broad reach surveillance that "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about." This is a book review so I won't argue that point but here is a link that will http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/government-might-know-youre-reading.

In the early parts of The Shadow Factory Bamford succeeds in presenting a story line that stands on solid ground and feels like fact. As the book progresses though the factual feel begins to slip away and we're left with what seems to be “water cooler talk.” I wish he had been able to maintain that earlier story strength.

For me the real success Bamford has is in portraying the poor management and often mismanagement of these various spy projects/systems. The incestuous moneyed relationships between government agencies and their contractors that he presents are enough to make Monsanto and the Department of Agriculture blush.

I recommend that you read the early sections of The Shadow Factory.

George W. Parker

Something Happened

No, this is not about the Joseph Heller novel. Although I did read it once upon a time, I don't remember anything about it. Which, in and of itself, is my review of it.

This is about yesterday. Yesterday was a Thursday which I believe is the worst day of the week. But something good happened which proves the vagaries of life. I used aplomb in a sentence for the first time ever.

Now that may not seem like much of anything special to you. And maybe it just doesn't take much for me to have a good Thursday. But it was exciting for me.

Everyone has multiple vocabularies. We have our reading vocabularies, writing vocabularies, speaking vocabularies, and subsets like work vocabularies and children's vocabularies. Yesterday's use of aplomb was exciting as I took it from my reading vocabulary, added it to my writing vocabulary, and then added it my speaking vocabulary. Kind of a triple play.

Now that may not still seem like much of anything special to you. But you need to know that I am a poor speller, poorest of the poor. Yesterday as I'm writing I snatch aplomb (It's meaning) out of my reading vocabulary deck and try to slam it down into my writing list. I couldn't spell it. In place of the pl I kept trying a b. It wasn't in my speaking vocabulary so I wasn't pronouncing it out correctly. I probably spent a half hour searching out that correct spelling before putting aplomb on hold and moving on with the story.

Last night I was talking with my middle daughter, who can spell, and asked her how to spell the word. Well, as I wasn't pronouncing it correctly, she couldn't spell it correctly. But that conversation put me back in the hunt.

I skimmed through synonyms looking for it. Words like witty, pithy, reassured, and smooth. Finally I looked at savoir-faire which led me to poised and then, eureka, aplomb.

All told I spent at least an hour actively chasing that word. And when I wasn't chasing it I was thinking about chasing it.

So I learned two things yesterday: how to spell aplomb and that I liked http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ the best of all the online dictionaries.

George W. Parker

The Pipe

“Read The Pipe.”

I don't remember what I was doing the other day (not uncommon) but “Read The Pipe.” was my response to it.

The Pipe is Chapter XXX from Herman Melville's Moby Dick. It took me a few days to get around to pulling out my copy of Moby Dick and re-reading that section. But the need to do so was never out of my mind that entire time.

I was surprised to find it located in the first quarter of the book as I think of the last quarter as holding all the best parts of the story. It is a short section of about 275 words. I'll quote part of it here to help pad out my word count.

“Some moments passed, during which the thick vapor came from his mouth in quick and constant puffs, which blew back again into his face. "How now," he soliloquized at last, withdrawing the tube, "this smoking no longer soothes. Oh, my pipe! hard must it go with me if thy charm be gone! Here have I been unconsciously toiling, not pleasuring- aye, and ignorantly smoking to windward all the while; to windward, and with such nervous whiffs, as if, like the dying whale, my final jets were the strongest and fullest of trouble. What business have I with this pipe? This thing that is meant for sereneness, to send up mild white vapors among mild white hairs, not among torn iron-grey locks like mine. I'll smoke no more-"

He tossed the still lighted pipe into the sea. The fire hissed in the waves; the same instant the ship shot by the bubble the sinking pipe made. With slouched hat, Ahab lurchingly paced the planks.”

Ahab had sought and received solace from his pipe for probably his entire life. Now he discovered it had merely become a habit, not a movement of his own volition. Only conscience Ahab decides what Ahab does. He does not admit to or submit to any other orders.

I doubt that anything as powerful as that was going through my mind when the need to re-read The Pipe jumped into my head. If anything I was probably wishing I had something to smoke. But I did find it interesting that the need didn't go away until the deed was done.

George W. Parker

Texas Secession

Two things you need to know about Texans:

1. Most of us subscribe to the “I wasn't born in Texas, but I got here as fast as I could,” dictum.
2. “You can always tell a Texan, but you can't tell him much.”

The 2012 U.S. Census projection, aka “the Texas count,” is 25,145,561 citizens in the Lone Star State (Republic). The current count on the secession petition located at https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petitions (You have to click through a few screens.) is 116,181 names. By my math (Let me get the calculator out. Sorry, I was educated before no child was left behind.) that is 0.46 hundredths of 1 percent of the “states'” population.

Of those 0.46% names on the petition I wonder how many voted in the November 2012 election? I wonder how many of those names would have been allowed to vote under the new Texas voter fraud guidelines that the U.S. Supreme Court put on hold. (My guess is 102% of them.)

Please do not misunderstand me, I am proud to live in Texas. I am proud that my children are natural born citizens of Texas, none were delivered by Cesarean. But if Texas should secede from the Union I am moving to Austin. Their petition to secede from the secession is currently at a 0.45 hundredths of 1 percent count.

George W. Parker

Flaubert vs. Chandler

Fundamentally a car is a means of transportation. A motor and seats on wheels you use to get yourself around town. Ultimately it is judged by its ability to fulfill that function. If your Lamborghini has starter problems, or a grind in the gear box as you shift into third, maybe even a rattle in the door at 180 mph, you may not find it a satisfying ride despite all its style.

A novel is in a similar situation. It should tell a story and tell it well. Regardless of the first person-third person structure, or its stream of consciousness, or its exotic locale, a novel without the foundation of a solid story will leave you dissatisfied.

Often in “literature” it is okay to have style but no substance. I tried to read Flaubert's Bouvard and Pecuchet last month. Maybe I stopped too soon but after a while I got tired of the title characters. They stopped being funny and Flaubert started looking mean to me.

On the opposite side I reread Raymond Chandler's Lady in the Lake this week. Although Chandler ties the story together all too neatly and in too short a time frame I still found the story and characters interesting, although I've read it multiple times.

I'll give you that the two stories are not on the same plane. And that they have different artistic goals. But if you don't finish reading a book did the author do a good job of writing? If the goal was a Lamborghini or a Chevy does it matter if the car won't start or if you can't make it to the grocery store?

A broken Lamborghini is still, after all, just a broken car.

The Second Half of Infinity

∞

That is the symbol for infinity (Alt+236 on my Windows 7 system.) Besides the counter clockwise rotation is there any difference between it and an 8? They are both like a Hot Wheels over and under race track aren't they? And that over and under race track is my point.

I am sure that what happened to me is nothing new in the world. But when something new happens to you personally, it is new. My epiphany was simple. It was a remembrance of my walking along a tree lined street in Fayetteville, Arkansas.

The importance of that moment was that I then and there decided not to attend college. That day led directly to this day. (I understand that everyday leads to the next day but you know what I mean.) That was the proverbial first step in the thousand mile journey. (According to auto odometers its been more than a thousand miles.)

So where am I now? That's where the over and under race track comes in. The epiphany was that my current spot was directly above that previous spot. One and the same place put spatially separate. From those spots I can view that section of the journey. That is the spot where what went around came around.

What does all that mean. Who knows? But it was weird. Now to take a look at the other loop.

Next Stop : The Fiscal Cliff

With the election over it's finally time to talk about the 800 lb gorilla in the room. The gorilla that both candidates and parties refused to acknowledge during the recent campaign, the fiscal cliff.

With the makeup of the House and Senate fundamentally unchanged can we really expect any different behavior from them in the next six weeks or the next two years? What political incentive does the Republican Party have for compromise? Why would the Democrats compromise in the wake of their win?

Mitt Romney was considered a “moderate” Republican. The young and upcoming Republican leaders, the potential 2016 presidential candidates, are all farther to the right than Romney. Aren't they better served by holding their current fiscal positions, not compromising an inch, and using the cliff as a threat?

I think the Republican Party has more to gain if the political situation plays out along the worst case scenario. The nation falls off the fiscal cliff. The economy pulls back into recession. Congress remains at loggerheads for the next two years. Then the Republicans will blame the Democrats for a lack of leadership and direction.

In 2014 the Republicans will take control of the Senate while retaining the House. The Democrat White House will use it's veto powers repeatedly during the final years of its term and the US voter will get angrier and angrier at the political stalemate. This allows the Republicans to capture the Presidency in 2016.

It is a terrible scenario for the American public. But what incentive does either party have for compromise? Are you ready to compromise?

George W Parker