14 August 2008
when Spies talk
The democratic membership meeting at door county in Wisconsin meet to discuss on issues and learn on issues of common interest by guest speakers. At this meeting the guest speaker were ex- CIA analysts .
These analysts, a husband and wife team went on to explain that as CIA agents they conducted covert operations in over 30 countries. They worked as undercover reporters bonding with the local community and key personnel in their governments and businesses and bought home information that would help to understand the motivations and the thought process of the people of foreign countries their local and national leaders, and drafted reports that would help the American government to draft foreign policy and create strategy for defense, economics et.al.
One of the analysts who worked as an inspector in the UN party in the investigation of Iraq said that the present government had turned a deaf ear to the information provided by them that Iraq had no nuclear weapons. A role reversal had taken place where in the present vice president had ordered for certain information, which is not how the CIA usually functions where their task is to supply information. A very unhappy analysts mentioned the bureaucracy, high handedness, shortage of staff, contracting work to private contractors, and low wages characterized the current CIA. Normal friendships and family is not part of working at the CIA.
With election at hand, the electorates present raised questions of how best they can understand the contesting candidates view on foreign policy, defense though it does not make a direct impact on residents of a local town where school reforms, infrastructure, local economy are of most important issues as a community. They questioned the paradoxical candidature of the electoral candidates that they were casting their vote for.
ON a personal note my thought processes ran as follows..
Several political leaders have been categorized and analyzed. business leaders churn economies and create new markets and politically powerful leaders walk the red carpets of many national functions, I leaned to think why do we accept them as leaders ? Why do we elect these men and women as leaders when we do not know what kind of perspectives they have on bigger issues that affects a country or an image of a country. And they would reevaluate them again and change them once elected !
Though contesting candidates have their website and a podcast and have debates and come for town hall and have written documents on health care and foreign policy on their web site, aren’t we giving them the benefit of doubt and human hope that they will do good for the country but would let us down when they have received the title as senator or vice president or president.
Don’t we make impressions on the widely cast public image of the candidates who are mentored by political image consultants who are paid an enormous sum to propagate an image ?
Don’t we depend on the cameramen that depict our leaders as they show them in different angles on different channels ?
We hear them amidst crowds giving speeches written by a speech writer and advisors who brief them about community issues and strong advise of how it will ultimately impact the vote bank and their legacy.
So Isn’t a gut feeling or charismatic image of the contesting candidate score a great deal in the deciding factor in casting them as the future elected leader of the country. Aren’t human emotions a dominating factor of the masses with little facts (!) throw in between, a deciding factor in creating his-story?
That is history. It is. what do you think?
The twenty second line blogspot by http://thetwentysecondline.blogspot.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.