Involuntary Addiction Treatment Works

carlyle poindexter charitable foundation, constantin poindexter, masters thesis, rehabilitation, addiction;

The article in the Sunday edition, “Addiction Treatment Can Work Even When It’s Not Voluntary”, provides a well-supported argument for mandatory addiction treatment. To date, the sparse peer-reviewed work conducted on compulsory treatment has been antagonistic to the idea. “Given the potential for human rights abuses within compulsory treatment settings, non-compulsory treatment modalities should be prioritized by policymakers seeking to reduce drug-related harms.” (“The Effectiveness of Compulsory Drug Treatment”, A Kamarulzaman, et al., Dec. 2015) Newer evidence shared by Satel and Sabet in their article contradicts the cited work. Further, it fails to contemplate nearly a century of history of involuntary commitments for a multitude of reasons. The theory that drug addiction is a disease and that those who suffer from addiction should not face the danger of “consequences” has unfortunately taken hold. As a community we began to accept responsibility for the negative personal choices of our fellow Americans, viewing challenges such as the drug scourge as our failure as a society rather than bad personal choices. Decriminalization of very dangerous narcotics is the most recent manifestation of this. Addiction researchers should broaden their focus to include case studies of mental health wholly unrelated to drugs. Severe mental illness, referred to before it became an insensitive and politically incorrect term (“crazy”), would be a good start. There is a corollary, an issue which forms part of our public discourse on almost a daily basis, . . . gun violence.

Before the notorious mafia murders during prohibition and post-prohibition, any adult citizen could walk into a gun store and legally purchase any type of firearm available. It was very rare to hear of a mass shooting, children murdered by their classmates or any other horrific act with a firearm outside of the criminal underworld. Passage of the NFA in 1938, the GCA in 1968, and various state gun control regimes emerged however the increase in gun violence continued to grow. The commonsense observation, immediately applicable to the compulsory treatment question, is that we used to “lock up crazy.” Simplistically, an individual walking down the street arguing with an imaginary person in the 1940s or 1950s would likely have found him or herself the guest of a psychiatric institution. Within the context of the gun violence question, the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter Adam Lanza may have been deprived of the opportunity to commit his heinous act.

Before the 1960s cultural revolution and posterior changes in public opinion about personal responsibility for one’s behavior, involuntary commitment was prevalent. Advances in pharmaceutical science from the 1950s forward supported the theory that a “pill” was the magical bullet, further eroding the view that involuntary commitment was a necessary evil. The courts likewise offered little help to the supporters of commitment. The 1975 case of O’Connor v. Donaldson is instructive. It represented a change in the justifying criteria for commitment from a broader test to that of almost exclusively one of the dangers that an individual presents to society. Writing for Psychiatry (Edgemont Journal), Doctors Megan Testa and Sara West wrote, “Through interviews of mothers of individuals with mental illness, Copeland learned that current civil commitment criteria force relatives to watch their loved ones go through progressive stages of psychiatric decompensation before they can get them any help at all.” (“Civil Commitment in the United States”, Megan Testa, MD and Sara G. West, MD, Oct 2010, Psychiatry) The court-imposed restrictions on involuntary commitment exacerbated the problem.

The curtailment of involuntary treatments, whether it be for drug addiction or mental illness, has impaired our ability as a society to address some of the gravest challenges to our safety as well as the happiness and well-being of those addicts and mentally ill. Authors Sally Satel and Kevin Sabet’s article on mandated treatment is prescient and the involuntary commitment question merits renewed attention.

The Challenge of Spying on China

spy, spies, espionage, counterespionage, intelligence, counterintelligence,carlyle poindexter, constantin poindexter

The WSJ article on Wednesday (Challenge of Spying on China) is a sad reminder of the United States Intelligence Community’s apparent failure to accomplish any broad covert or clandestine penetration of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in recent history. The lack of HUMINT human intelligence sources (HUMINT) with meaningful access and placement deprives us of insight into Chinese decision making, immediate strategic threat intelligence and perhaps more importantly, gravely impairs U.S. offensive counterintelligence operations.

Moving beyond the obvious difficulties with HUMINT operations within the PRC, reminiscent of the Cold War hostile operational environments, the Intelligence Community is overdue for a paradigm shift in human asset recruitment methodology. For the better part of the last century, the United States Intelligence Community relied on a steady flow of “walk-ins”, volunteers from opposing foreign intelligence services or governments that offered their countries’ secrets. Intelligence officers enjoyed a large degree of success based on a fairly global perception that Americans were the “good guys”, representatives of the land of fairness, equality and justice, qualities that stood in stark contrast to the ruthless and despotic republics from whence they came. Unfortunately, the mystique has faded leaving outsiders to wonder if the values that we promote to the world are nothing more than a hypocritical farce. Mass diffusion of the “Big Lie” throwing fair elections into question, an attempted coup d’etat by an outgoing president, and military involvement under highly questionable intelligence assessments erode the view once held that the United States is the “shining beacon to the oppressed”.

Chinese citizens enjoy a better standard of living than at any time in China’s history. China can rightfully boast that it is a world power and its population can justifiably be proud of its progress. Personal financial success and pride in country promote loyalty. That there is no broad internal rejection of onerous mass surveillance, social credit controls and ethnic cleansing as is the case with the Uyghurs, is a testament to the PRC’s ability to deny facts, deceive its population and prevent the import of non-PRC approved “truths” about freedom and justice within China. The Chinese cultural tendency to identify with the collective rather than the individual is likewise amplified by the PRC’s massive social control machine, with opposing or antagonistic perspectives effectively blocked by the Great Firewall or simply drowned out of public discourse by the volumes of Party-approved propaganda. The PRC’s strategy has created an environment that is more resistant to traditional intelligence recruitment techniques such as economic coercion, ideology exploitation and ego-stroking. Chinese intelligence service recruiters lean on the cultural affinity of ethnically Chinese living in the United States to turn them into spies, coerce them by alluding to what might become of their families living in China or deploy the time-tested technique of guanxi to achieve intelligence asset recruitments. United States intelligence officers do not enjoy a parallel or equivalent.

FBI Director Wray stated, “We’ve now reached the point where the FBI is opening a new China-related counterintelligence case about every 10 hours.” The threat is grave and our twentieth-century countermeasures, techniques and tradecraft are not appropriate for what many in the Intelligence Community deem the greatest threat to United States national security. Retooling, reimagining the intelligence recruitment cycle and modernizing the way that we approach the recruitment of sources is imperative.

Iran Cyber Operations Target Utility Infrastructure

cyber, cyber operations, espionage, counterespionage, counterintelligence, cyber defense, CISA, countermeasures, constantin poindexter

Per the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), “Since at least November 22, 2023, these IRGC-affiliated cyber actors have continued to compromise default credentials in Unitronics devices. The IRGC-affiliated cyber actors left a defacement image stating, “You have been hacked, down with Israel. Every piece of equipment ‘made in Israel’ is CyberAv3ngers legal target.” The victims span multiple U.S. states. The authoring agencies urge all organizations, especially critical infrastructure organizations, to apply the recommendations listed in the Mitigations section of this advisory to mitigate the risk of compromise from these IRGC-affiliated cyber actors.” (CISA, 12/01/2023)

The penetrations were aimed at critical utilities, in the extant case of U.S. water and water waste treatment infrastructure. Per CISA, “Beginning on November 22, 2023, IRGC cyber actors accessed multiple U.S.-based WWS facilities that operate Unitronics Vision Series PLCs with an HMI likely by compromising internet-accessible devices with default passwords. The targeted PLCs displayed the defacement message, “You have been hacked, down with Israel. Every equipment ‘made in Israel’ is Cyberav3ngers legal target.” The Water and Wastewater Systems Sector (Water Sector) underpins the health, safety, economy, and security of the nation. It is vulnerable to both cyber and physical threats.” The warning is instructive. The fallout from a successful compromise of public water systems can be severe. Andrew Farr warns, “The imagination can run wild with worst-case scenarios about what a threat actor could do to a water system, but Arceneaux explains that sophisticated actors could hack a system and manipulate pumps or chemical feeds without the utility even knowing they were in the system. They could also create a water hammer that could lead to cracked pipes or release untreated wastewater back into a source water body. What if that happens [to a water system] in a medium or a big city? Maybe it’s only for a few hours, but it could go on for a few days or weeks, depending on how extensive the damage is.” (Farr, WF&M, 04/11/2022) Darktrace reports the very real consequence of a successful water system compromise. “Earlier this month, cyber-criminals broke into the systems of a water treatment facility in Florida and altered the chemical levels of the water supply.” (Matthew Wainwright, Darktrace) If potable water delivered to consumers contains dangerous contaminants or improper balances of the “good” chemicals blended to the product (fluoride, chlorine, chloramine, etc.), it can cause negative health effects. Gastrointestinal illness, nervous system damage, reproductive system damage, and chronic diseases such as cancer are very real risks associated with the same.

CISA cyber defense model of the “brute force” methodology deployed by IRGC operatives may be viewed at MITRE.

Strategic-Level Management, Smaller is Better

constantin poindexter, carlyle poindexter, research, Operation Bayonet, covert action, covert operation

I read an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal today, a book review of “Emperor of Rome”, by Mary Beard. While the piece focused on the untimely demise of many of the caesars, there was a short but instructive comment. “Emporer of Rome is spiced with striking comparisons. The Roman Empire functioned with about 95% fewer senior personnel than the Han Dynasty that ruled at the same time in China.” (Kyle Harper, WSJ, 10/22/2023) This small anecdote reads as if it had been a surprise finding, that a small Roman leadership circle was a Black Swan and that it bends preconceived notions about the necessity of large networks of government instrumentalities to manage an empire as large as Rome’s. It is a fallacy that large enterprises require the support of large bureaucracies. Quite to the contrary. In strategic-level management, smaller is better.

Organizational dynamics and bureaucracy are Geoffrey M. Bellman’s forté. In his work, The Consultant’s Calling, “he explains why an organization is only capable of performing to a certain level of mediocrity. Organizational structure is essential to conducting business in a modern complex society. Bellman relates that organizations are: large, awkward, and unwieldy. Usually, organizations don’t work very well because they don’t fit the human creatures who work in them. Organizations as we have built them are more mechanical than ‘organical’… we have built awkward hierarchical structures with boxes and lines connecting them. We have created structures modeled after machines–mechanistic, sharply defined, and inflexible–that force their moving human parts to act like machines too. Such organizations do not work very well … even when everything is finely in tune … there are significant difficulties.” (Bellman, 2001) The author’s commentary is prescient and instructive.

There is a ‘real world’ case study that illustrates well the concept of “smaller is better”. A master’s thesis authored by Alexander B. Calahan, COUNTERING TERRORISM: THE ISRAELI RESPONSE TO THE 1972 MUNICH OLYMPIC MASSACRE AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDEPENDENT COVERT ACTION TEAMS (Calahan, 1995) provides an excellent argument. “The important aspect of operating within organizations and systems is that by its very nature, it incorporates a predetermined limitation of success. As long as the mission operates under the constraints dictated by the organization’s structure, policies, regulations and management philosophies, it will only obtain a finite predetermined level of success. Bureaucratic processes are rigid and restrict decentralized authority and the ability to work at a continued fast and fluid pace. Government agencies must live within regulations that do not allow interpretation or flexibility for unique circumstances. Bellman related that organizations are sharply defined and do not allow flexibility. Philip K. Howard, The Death of Common Sense (1995), further demonstrates how this is magnified in government agencies: Government acts like some extraterrestrial power, not an institution that exists to serve us….It almost never deals with real-life problems in a way that reflects an understanding of the situation….Our regulatory system has become an instruction manual. It tells us and the bureaucrats exactly what to do and how to do it. Detailed rule after detailed rule addresses every eventuality, or at least every situation lawmakers and bureaucrats can think of. Is it a coincidence that almost every encounter with government is an exercise in frustration? In the decades since World War II, we have constructed a system of regulatory law that basically outlaws common sense. Modern law, in an effort to be self-executing, has shut out our humanity….The motives were logical enough: Specific legal mandates would keep government in close check and provide crisp guidelines for private citizens. But it doesn’t work. Human activity can’t be regulated without judgment by humans. Government cannot accomplish anything when multiple procedures are required for almost every decision. Process is a defensive device; the more procedures, the less government can do. Which is more important: the process or the result?” The author and his cited references are correct. Large bureaucratic organizations cannot support a dynamic operation that must think and act “on the fly”.

Calahan’s case study is an analysis of Operation Bayonet, an assassination mission in response to the massacre of Israeli Olympians and their coaches. The Mossad fielded two teams to accomplish the operation, one under strict headquarters control (“Lillehammer”) and the other (“Avner”) under none. The former was a disaster and the latter and ALMOST perfect success. The failed operation had many flaws but the most salient argument is the “micromanagement” one. Per Calahan, “However, the failure is more attributable to attempting to conduct an operation beyond the capabilities of the political bureaucracy. The officers in Lillehammer had more than adequate training and skills; however, the organization forced them to abandon proven tradecraft procedures to accomplish the assassination of Salameh under unreasonable tactical conditions. X allowed political pressure to dictate the pace of the operation beyond what he knew was reasonably necessary for success within the bureaucracy.” (Calahan, 1995)

The successful operation enjoyed an autonomy that ultimately achieved the operation’s objective. ” . . . Avner’s team was designed outside the political realm of the Mossad. Avner’s team would not institute shortcuts bowing to political influences that might jeopardize the success of the mission. Quality operations demand quality people involved and quality planning from the outset. The Mossad team members understood that they would operate in a covert capacity until the successful completion of the mission or the team was no longer able to operate intact due to injuries or deaths. They were to remain a cohesive unit. The unit learned and understood each others’ skill, abilities, and limitations, planning and operating accordingly.” (Calahan, 1995) Small, tight and capable teams with more “hands off” oversight was key.

“Walmart CEO Doug McMillon calls it “a villain.” Berkshire Hathaway vice chair Charlie Munger says its tentacles should be treated like “the cancers they so much resemble.” Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, agrees that bureaucracy is “a disease.” These leaders understand that bureaucracy saps initiative, inhibits risk taking, and crushes creativity. It’s a tax on human achievement.” (Hammel and Zanini, HBR, 2018) In the covert operation subject of Calahan’s case study, as in the private corporate sector, smaller is better. So did the Roman caesars manage the empire with a small leadership cadre by design, eschewing the idea that large bureaucracies were necessary to the state, or was their design utilitarian, i.e., keep your enemies close? Either way, the Emperor of Rome has apparently stumbled on one of the most important observations on successful management of a team, . . . a lesson for leadership when strategic planning.

The Problem of Truth Decay

disinformation, truth, decay of truth, constantin poindexter, carlyle poindexter research masters

In a particularly timely and instructive work, Doug Irving of the RAND Corporation offers insight on how pernicious the “decay of truth” is to our security, and more to the point our adhesion to one another as Americans with common goals, hopes and dreams.

Writes Irving, “You could walk up to most Americans and ask them, ‘What are our national interests?’ and there would actually be a lot of agreement,” said Williams, the associate director of the International Security and Defense Policy Program at RAND. “Now, how do we achieve those national interests? There are lots of legitimate views about that—but Truth Decay makes it harder for people to have a reasoned debate. Partisanship and political self-interest get pushed to such an extreme that there is no middle ground where compromises, let alone consensus, can be achieved.” (RAND, 2023). The “middle ground” to which Irving refers is the foundation of a fair democratic system. Our democracy works when parties are able to share, discuss and at times fiercely debate differences of policy opinion. I stress here the word, “opinion”, because we observe currently a broad coalition of citizens that accept unqualified and un-vetted opinions as truths. “A new NPR/Ipsos poll finds that 64% of Americans believe, . . . that “voter fraud helped Joe Biden win the 2020 election” — a key pillar of the “Big Lie” that the election was stolen from former President Donald Trump. (NPR, 2022). It is a FACT that voter fraud is almost non-existent, and that the few cases of voter fraud are so insignificant that they cannot affect the outcome of a national election. Voter fraud is a myth.

Per Irving, “The poll found that support for false claims about election fraud and the January 6th attack have been remarkably stable over time. For example, one-third of Trump voters say the attack on the Capitol was actually carried out by “opponents of Donald Trump, including antifa and government agents” — a baseless conspiracy theory that has been promoted by conservative media since the attack, even though it has been debunked.” (RAND, 2023) The lie continues to be frighteningly persistent, only on the right. I am not shooting down some of the very important (and valid) policy positions that the Republican coalition hold. In fact, I do agree with some of them. My problem is with the lies, the disinformation propagated by the right and their engagement in disinformation activities that would make Goebbels blush. The problem here is compounded by the observation of disinformation effectiveness among our adversaries. “China, Russia, and other adversaries already know this. They have weaponized disinformation—seeding the internet with rumors and conspiracy theories in the panicked early days of COVID-19, for example. That helped slow the response and almost certainly cost lives. But it also makes it harder to hold up American democracy as a model for the world.” (RAND, 2023)

Circling back to my point about vigorous debate, how an argument over policy points improves the health of our democracy, the debate must be based on a shared set of objective facts. One CANNOT engage in legitimate debate when one side lies, and lies almost all of the time. Further, the lies are reinforced by a group of conservative media that keep otherwise well-intentioned citizens inside of an information bubble that repeats falsehoods ad infinitum. Fox, OAN, Breitbart, the Daily News and others are the chief offenders, Fox, was most recently ordered to pay nearly $800 million for, . . . lying. What is the solution? How do we get back to caring about one another, or more to the point, caring about the health of our democracy? Irving offers some prescient advice.

“The U.S. Intelligence Community, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and other government agencies are already investing in efforts to swat down misinformation and disinformation before they take hold. Efforts to strengthen media literacy and civics education in school could also help strengthen the public against Truth Decay, especially on questions of national security.” (RAND, 2023) Irving and others are not the first to offer this partial solution. I would humbly add here that our youth, grade schoolers would be well-served by the inclusion of coursework on disinformation and its nefarious effects on all of us. The technique is called “inoculation”, work that much like a vaccine provides our kids with some basic defense mechanisms to internal and external attempts to subvert our system. Estonia includes media literacy work in their grade school curriculums, thus there is precedence. Further work on the RAND strategy might include the same.

I recommend a full read of Irving’s piece on RAND’s blog.

Cannabis Approval is Compassionate

cannabis, cannabinoid, marijuana, surety one, suretyone.com, constantin poindexter, carlyle poindexter

My professional life is largely spent in the insurance and financial services sector as CEO of Surety One, Inc., a national surety bond general agency. One of the classes of bond business that we write is for cannabis enterprises. While I tend to leave each individual’s particulars to him or herself, I have spent some not-insignificant time thinking about the availability of cannabis and whether that access is a social ill or a social good. Like any reasonable person, I would rather that the driver of my children’s school bus, my airline pilot, my brain surgeon, etc., not smoke pot, I am overwhelmingly convinced that legalization and de-scheduling of cannabis is the “right thing to do”. I’m not advocating for the use, misuse or abuse of any substance however there is a group of people that most certainly benefit from our compassionate approval of marijuana products for them.

The debate over the legalization of medical cannabis has gained significant momentum, not only in the U.S. but across the globe. Advocates argue that allowing medical cannabis is not just a matter of legality but also a question of compassion. One of the most compelling arguments for legalizing cannabis is its ability to alleviate pain and suffering in patients with chronic and debilitating illnesses. For individuals battling conditions such as cancer, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, and chronic pain, conventional treatments might not always be effective or come with severe side effects. Medical cannabis, with its natural pain-relieving properties, can offer a ray of hope and relief, giving these patients a chance to improve their quality of life.

Medical cannabis, particularly cannabidiol (CBD), has shown promise in reducing the frequency and severity of epileptic seizures. For children and adults suffering from severe forms of epilepsy, such as Dravet syndrome or Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, medical cannabis can be a lifeline. By allowing access to this alternative treatment, governments can demonstrate compassion for those living with these debilitating conditions.

Mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression, and PTSD, affect millions of people. Traditional pharmaceutical interventions do not work for everyone and may lead to dependency and/or adverse side effects. Medical cannabis, especially strains with higher CBD content has been shown to have anxiolytic and mood-stabilizing effects. Legalizing medical cannabis provides patients with another option in their pursuit of mental well-being, promoting a compassionate approach to mental health care. This point alone is particularly prescient given the number of psychiatric professionals that have been sounding the alarm about emotional stress and its manifestations, especially among our military veterans.

For patients facing terminal illnesses or end-of-life care, medical cannabis can provide a comforting and compassionate touch. It can alleviate pain, improve appetite, and offer a sense of peace, allowing these individuals to spend their remaining days with greater comfort and dignity.

The compassionate aspect of legalizing medical cannabis extends beyond the realms of law and policy. It’s about recognizing the suffering of patients battling various medical conditions and providing them with access to a potential source of relief and hope. By embracing the legalization of medical cannabis, governments can show empathy, understanding, and a commitment to the well-being of their citizens. Moreover, it sends a powerful message that compassion and evidence-based care should guide our approach to healthcare, ultimately fostering a more inclusive and empathetic society. I stand by my decision to have my business enterprise support my view on this, as likewise I stand by the millions of my fellow human beings suffering from debilitating, painful infirmities.

Teaching, a Wonderful Opportunity for Personal Growth

teaching, teacher, instructor, constantin poindexter, carlyle poindexter

This was an awesome training program. Teaching is a most noble form of “paying it forward”. Pre-K through high school level, the impact that a mentor, a kind and patient guide, is immeasurable. “Teachers are the agents of the future. Will our world be populated by people ready and able to meet that future as creative and critical thinkers; as wise, compassionate and knowledgeable citizens; as skilled and motivated solutionaries within their professions? The answer to this question lies with teachers. More than any other profession, teaching has the power to create a healthy, just, and peaceful world (or not). It has the ability to seed our society with informed, caring and engaged citizens (or not). It has the capacity to inspire lifelong learning and a passion for knowledge, understanding, and innovation (or not). Is there anything more important than this?” (Zoe Weil, Common Dreams, 2011) With Zoe, I must concur.

You might choose to teach part-time, substitute or full-time, for pay or not as your conscience and need may be. Regardless, I recommend this or similar series to anyone with interest.

“Society grows when men plant trees, the shade of which they know that they will never live to enjoy.”

Save Ukraine

The unprovoked aggression in Ukraine has created a humanitarian crisis in the heart of eastern Europe. The Ukrainian people are in need of food, medical and support services from everyone that is able to contribute. I urge you to give if you are able to one or more of the reputable agencies and foundations that are answering this pressing issue. The International Medical Corps the CARE Network, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), and UNICEF are a few.

#stopwar #saveukraine #ukraine

What is OSINT all about?

OSINT, IMINT, constantin poindexter, carlyle poindexter, masters in intelligence studies, counterintelligence

OSINT is as ancient as written word. I suppose that there were cuniform tablets that were exchanged between Phoenician government functionaries, both public and sensitive that adversaries coveted. The Greeks were particularly good at intelligence. There is a really good book about it written by Frank Santi Russell. It’s super interesting to see what value a first-generation democracy put on information gathering. What is without question is that OSINT is valuable. Wild Bill Donovan said, “Even a regimented press will, again and again, betray their nation’s best interests to a painstaking observer.”

Like the other INTs, there are some definitions that most practitioners have settled on to describe OSINT. Information collected from the “wherever” is generally not intelligence. It is data or simply information. Intelligence is generally an analyzed and polished product that CONTAINS information. The Department of Defense defines OSINT under ¨§931 of Title Nine, “Open-source intelligence (OSINT) is intelligence that is produced from publicly available information and is collected, exploited, and disseminated in a timely manner to an appropriate audience for the purpose of addressing a specific intelligence requirement.” (50 U.S.C.) The Hassan and Hjazi publication which offered this statutory definition verbatim HOWEVER they added what I think are some really important distinctions of what composes OSINT (“components” as Dr. Saar has highlighted.), as follows, “, . . .

*Open-source data
*Open-source information
*Open-source intelligence
*Validated open-source intelligence”

These components are important not only for context and precedence, adhering to the currently accepted intelligence cycle, etc., but also to offer a framework for practitioners of other INTs to identify where to offer input, and from whence to retrieve reliable and timely data, information and/or intelligence for their own purposes.

OSINT has progressed over time, but not in its essential nature. OSINT has essentially existed since cavemen roamed the earth. Ug of the ooga booga tribe probably eavesdropped on conversation between the huti huchi tribesemen to discover where the best mastodon hunting ground was. Obviously, this oversimplifies something that is actually quite sophisticated now, . . . or is it? We now have written word and motions images á la the ubiquitous YouTube, but is observation and pondering (analysis) of those observations really an innovation? My position is that OSINT really hasn’t changed at all. The medium for presentation (or mass dissemination) of information, the sophistication of the sensors that we use to collect information, the volume of collection and the high-speed computer-driven analysis of the information have changed, NOT OSINT.

There are clear advantages to the development and deployment of a rigorous OSINT capability. First and foremost is risk. Passive OSINT presents almost no risk at to either the discovery of the inquiry and the fallout if collection is discovered. Done properly, OSINT projects are discovered by the betrayal of a practitioner. An intelligence manager must consider the likelihood of discovery and the severity of loss due to discovery. OSINT falls low on the risk index. It’s just smart business.

Another big benefit but as the same time, a serious challenge is the volume of data or information. The benefit of volume is generally an increased reliability of product. There are plenty of disinformation operations in the world’o’sphere but in a massive pool of data an enormous effort and resources are required to drown out factual information. Also, a really big pool offers the input of a broad variety of assets or sources. The diversity REALLY helps stabilize analyst’s effort to draw reliable conclusions. The negative of course is how to warehouse and process the huge, HUGE amount of data that an OSINT mission or tasking might produce. This is and will be solved by quantum computing but the OSINT discipline also benefits from the less rigorous processing that a technical INT might require. The Norton piece spoke specifically to the “volume” conundrum along with the vetting challenge. “OSINT is challenging because of its volume and because each piece of information must be verified or “vetted,” often in unique ways.” (Norton, 2011, p. 66)

Among the list of advantages, “shareability” is also important. Not only is dissemination of OSINT product helpful and perhaps imperative among members of the Intelligence Community. It can also be superlatively supportive our allies, the countries with whom we share special liaison or allied service relationships. There is little risk to “sources and methods” with regard to OSINT. The real risk of improper or over-dissemination of OSINT is tipping our hand as to what is important to us AND prejudicing the asset or source, ie., U.S. Adversary: “You are looking at “x”? Oh! You must have some strategic or tactical interest in “x”! We’d better look into shutting off that faucet and since it’s important to YOU, then we’d better figure out a countermeasure.” Russian FIS does this, . . . regularly.

There are some other positive qualities of OSINT, i.e., gives a baseline for understanding the results of more sensitive information collected clandestinely; timeliness, as open sources are often in open competition as to who can “break the story” first; a great enhancement to cultural and ethnic understanding, etc., however the three main attributes above I think are the most valuable and relevant.

I need to give a hat-tip to a crowdsourcing article. The author has offered a neat little diagram to identify it but the author’s statement, “Crowdsourced Intelligence is arguably a separate collection discipline from HUMINT or OSINT collection.” (Stottlemyre, 2015) I feel is prescient. I’m not sure that this fits neatly within the OSINT discipline, most especially if the source is a member of an adversarial government, military or FIS. There are also a lot of wildcards in here, i.e., crowd motivation, crowd identity, or whether it’s really a “crowd” or not. This one merits a deeper look.

Waters, Nick, “Google Maps Is a Better Spy Than James Bond”, Foreign Policy, September 25th, 2018. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/09/25/google-maps-is-a-better-spy-than-james-bond/#:~:text=In%20the%20words%20of%20William,interests%20to%20a%20painstaking%20observer.%E2%80%9D

Norton, Dr. R.A., “Guide to Open Source Intelligence: A Growing Window into the World”, Journal of Intelligence Studies”, vol. 18, no. 2, Winter/Spring 2011

Stottlemyre, Steven A., “HUMINT, OSINT, or Something New? Defining Crowdsourced Intelligence”, International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, vol. 28, iss. 3, 2015

Charitable Love on Thanksgiving

charity, caridad, constantin, constantin poindexter, carlyle poindexter, beneficencia, thanksgiving;

There is no better time than Thanksgiving to remember that reaching out to those less fortunate is a blessing, . . . a blessing to both the receiver and the giver for there is no more pure expression of love than beneficent giving. It doesn’t have to be monetary or tangible, of oneself can be the greatest gift. A wise man believes, “give and make haste of it because the last moment may be upon YOU without you knowing so. Those that give food to the hungry, clothing to the unclothed, mentorship teaching to the less informed are numbered among the blessed.”

As we enter the holiday season it is right and a duty to think of those less fortunate than oneself. Charitable acts live LONG after the giver of charity is gone from this world.