I'm co-author of a
What do you think?
Monday, March 24, 2014
The Snowden Effect: A Web of Conflict
March 24, 2014
I'm co-author of a@HuffingtonPost article, today, with Brandi Andres: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brandi-andres/privacy-matters-edward-snowden_b_5009738.html about how our intelligence services violate our privacy. It's time our country's elected officials had a public conversation about whether these activities should be deemed unconstitutional and the lawbreakers (the US Senate, the CIA, the NSA, or,the whistleblowers) punished or whether this is okay and we want it. Either way, it's better for us if we know and agree to the policies in effect.
What do you think?
I'm co-author of a
What do you think?
Wednesday, March 12, 2014
Senator Feinstein versus the CIA
March 12, 2014
Yesterday, the breaking headline was a very public argument between CIA Director John Brennan and Senator Diane Feinstein, Chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, each one claiming the other’s organization had infiltrated their computers in an attempt to steal information regarding investigations each was pursuing with the other.
It sounds, on the face of it, like a snake swallowing its head. To me, the biggest question is, which end is the head? To whom does the CIA report? To whom does the Senate report? Who runs whom? The constitution created the Senate, but laws the Senate was a party to passing created the CIA. So, is the CIA subservient to the Senate? My belief is that this is so, but lately I’ve come to have my doubts. In the wake of the Edward Snowden affair, intelligence services in the United States seem to report to no one these days. And, of course, as I’m very fond of saying, the key mission of any intelligence service is disinformation, or lies.
The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 forbids the use of the military of the United States for law enforcement purposes, with the exception of the National Guard. Coupled with the Insurrection Act of 1807, we have a set of laws that governed the President of the United States of America’s ability to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion. “Posse comitatus” means “an armed body of men at the disposal of the King for the purposes of keeping the peace.”
One of the implications of the Posse Comitatus Act was that the CIA was also forbidden to operate on US soil.
The Posse Comitatus was repealed, replaced by The “National Defense Authorization Act” (NDAA), H.R. 1540. This legislation was signed into law by President Barack Obama in Hawaii on December 31, 2011. The new law codifies indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history.
Had Posse Comitatus been in effect, the CIA would have very clearly broken the law, if they have hacked the Senate’s computers. But with that law repealed, it’s hard for someone who isn’t a constitutional lawyer to determine if the CIA’s actions were illegal. If indeed, the CIA hacked the Senate.
Obama justified the NDAA as a means to combating terrorism, as part of a “counter-terrorism” agenda. But in substance, any American opposed to the policies of the US government can – under the provisions of the NDAA – be labelled a “suspected terrorist” and arrested under military detention.
We now know – courtesy of Edward Snowden – that hacking into government computers is an act of terrorism.
Is the CIA subject to the laws of the United States? Are they subject to this law? If they have hacked the Senate’s computers, is that an act of terrorism?
Is the Senate subject to this law? If they hacked the CIA’s computers, is that an act of terrorism?
Shades of Edward Snowden! Seems to me, someone needs to redefine what the NDAA implies, since its violators now include our elected and employed government officials.
Yesterday, the breaking headline was a very public argument between CIA Director John Brennan and Senator Diane Feinstein, Chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, each one claiming the other’s organization had infiltrated their computers in an attempt to steal information regarding investigations each was pursuing with the other.
It sounds, on the face of it, like a snake swallowing its head. To me, the biggest question is, which end is the head? To whom does the CIA report? To whom does the Senate report? Who runs whom? The constitution created the Senate, but laws the Senate was a party to passing created the CIA. So, is the CIA subservient to the Senate? My belief is that this is so, but lately I’ve come to have my doubts. In the wake of the Edward Snowden affair, intelligence services in the United States seem to report to no one these days. And, of course, as I’m very fond of saying, the key mission of any intelligence service is disinformation, or lies.
The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 forbids the use of the military of the United States for law enforcement purposes, with the exception of the National Guard. Coupled with the Insurrection Act of 1807, we have a set of laws that governed the President of the United States of America’s ability to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion. “Posse comitatus” means “an armed body of men at the disposal of the King for the purposes of keeping the peace.”
One of the implications of the Posse Comitatus Act was that the CIA was also forbidden to operate on US soil.
The Posse Comitatus was repealed, replaced by The “National Defense Authorization Act” (NDAA), H.R. 1540. This legislation was signed into law by President Barack Obama in Hawaii on December 31, 2011. The new law codifies indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history.
Had Posse Comitatus been in effect, the CIA would have very clearly broken the law, if they have hacked the Senate’s computers. But with that law repealed, it’s hard for someone who isn’t a constitutional lawyer to determine if the CIA’s actions were illegal. If indeed, the CIA hacked the Senate.
Obama justified the NDAA as a means to combating terrorism, as part of a “counter-terrorism” agenda. But in substance, any American opposed to the policies of the US government can – under the provisions of the NDAA – be labelled a “suspected terrorist” and arrested under military detention.
We now know – courtesy of Edward Snowden – that hacking into government computers is an act of terrorism.
Is the CIA subject to the laws of the United States? Are they subject to this law? If they have hacked the Senate’s computers, is that an act of terrorism?
Is the Senate subject to this law? If they hacked the CIA’s computers, is that an act of terrorism?
Shades of Edward Snowden! Seems to me, someone needs to redefine what the NDAA implies, since its violators now include our elected and employed government officials.
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
The Changing Role of Literary Agents
February 26, 2014
Full disclosure first: I’ve been married to a very successful literary agent for decades, and I’ve seen her operate and grow a company, so I am burdened with insider knowledge and opinions.
One of the things her company has is a dictum that they will not represent friends or family. So I wasn’t going to get represented by her company and had to fight – just like anyone else – to find representation. Which I did. I have both a literary agent and a film agent.
But, in light of the massive changes to hit the publishing industry, my lit agent couldn’t sell my technothrillers to a NY publisher. My choice was to DIY or give up, and since I’d come so close to a deal so many times, I was sure there was the quality in my work that might yield me success in self-publishing.
Now, I decided to self-publish at the turn of this year and set myself a goal of publishing three of my works in series sequence this coming summer. I’d need a whole new set of skills. I know things regarding how publishing works, so crafting a budget and a schedule were easy. But, the rest – cover design, web site redesign, copyediting, publicity, social media – these were things writers tend to ignore until it’s too late. I’d have to learn them in a hurry.
My suggestion here is that if you are looking for a literary agent – regardless of whether you want a Trad Deal (contract with a large NYC publisher) or want to go Indie - you should find one who is an expert in the three four disciplines I mentioned in the previous paragraph.
In the distant past, literary agents were likely to have been editors at publishing house. They acted as guides for your manuscript, touring them through the editors working where they’d worked, hoping to find a home for our work. Since the really good ones had a wealth of experience at those publishing houses, they knew the publication process and could guide a writer from submission through book release. Today, unless you want a Trad Deal, this experience is worthless.
But, the new breed of literary agent still needs to know the publication process, even though it has assumed a totally new form. Self-published authors still need a guide. My advice to authors is, if you’re going to self-publish and you haven’t worked in Silicon Valley, you’ll need a literary agent who understands social media, so you can develop a willing audience desiring your content. Your agent should understand what makes a web site sticky, so you can treat Internet visitors to your blog entries and keep them happy. A good agent will understand that the book cover for both ebooks and print books is responsible for around 60% of the sales decision, and should have a cadre of cover design graphic designers who have been successful with your genre of book. Your agent should have worked with publicists who can offer their experience with publishing campaigns. With all this, your agent can be an effective guide through the new publishing process.
Oh, and one more. Know that you won’t receive an advance against revenues if you self-publish. It’ll all come out of your pocket. So you’d better have saved the cashish from your day job before you start. The good news is that you’ll gross 70% of the sales price (and on a $2.99 ebook that’s $2.21 per ebook) if you self-publish. With a Trad Deal, you’d net about 10% of net revenue (about $0.35 per ebook selling at $7.99)
In the past, literary agents earned 15% of your earnings. I believe your agent should still receive 15%. Some are charging a lot more. Caveat emptor!
So, remember, the opinions in this blog entry are mine alone. Stay safe if you can. No matter what you decide, happy writing!
Full disclosure first: I’ve been married to a very successful literary agent for decades, and I’ve seen her operate and grow a company, so I am burdened with insider knowledge and opinions.
One of the things her company has is a dictum that they will not represent friends or family. So I wasn’t going to get represented by her company and had to fight – just like anyone else – to find representation. Which I did. I have both a literary agent and a film agent.
But, in light of the massive changes to hit the publishing industry, my lit agent couldn’t sell my technothrillers to a NY publisher. My choice was to DIY or give up, and since I’d come so close to a deal so many times, I was sure there was the quality in my work that might yield me success in self-publishing.
Now, I decided to self-publish at the turn of this year and set myself a goal of publishing three of my works in series sequence this coming summer. I’d need a whole new set of skills. I know things regarding how publishing works, so crafting a budget and a schedule were easy. But, the rest – cover design, web site redesign, copyediting, publicity, social media – these were things writers tend to ignore until it’s too late. I’d have to learn them in a hurry.
My suggestion here is that if you are looking for a literary agent – regardless of whether you want a Trad Deal (contract with a large NYC publisher) or want to go Indie - you should find one who is an expert in the three four disciplines I mentioned in the previous paragraph.
In the distant past, literary agents were likely to have been editors at publishing house. They acted as guides for your manuscript, touring them through the editors working where they’d worked, hoping to find a home for our work. Since the really good ones had a wealth of experience at those publishing houses, they knew the publication process and could guide a writer from submission through book release. Today, unless you want a Trad Deal, this experience is worthless.
But, the new breed of literary agent still needs to know the publication process, even though it has assumed a totally new form. Self-published authors still need a guide. My advice to authors is, if you’re going to self-publish and you haven’t worked in Silicon Valley, you’ll need a literary agent who understands social media, so you can develop a willing audience desiring your content. Your agent should understand what makes a web site sticky, so you can treat Internet visitors to your blog entries and keep them happy. A good agent will understand that the book cover for both ebooks and print books is responsible for around 60% of the sales decision, and should have a cadre of cover design graphic designers who have been successful with your genre of book. Your agent should have worked with publicists who can offer their experience with publishing campaigns. With all this, your agent can be an effective guide through the new publishing process.
Oh, and one more. Know that you won’t receive an advance against revenues if you self-publish. It’ll all come out of your pocket. So you’d better have saved the cashish from your day job before you start. The good news is that you’ll gross 70% of the sales price (and on a $2.99 ebook that’s $2.21 per ebook) if you self-publish. With a Trad Deal, you’d net about 10% of net revenue (about $0.35 per ebook selling at $7.99)
In the past, literary agents earned 15% of your earnings. I believe your agent should still receive 15%. Some are charging a lot more. Caveat emptor!
So, remember, the opinions in this blog entry are mine alone. Stay safe if you can. No matter what you decide, happy writing!
Monday, February 24, 2014
An Adventure in Self-Publishing - POST #3
February 24, 2014
I just received the proposal from the last publicist. Way too expensive. So now, I'm pretty sure I'll hirethe one I was leaning toward. As for the web site, Xuni.com looks reasonable. I have some concerns, but I'm running short of time.
When I've cast these last two decisions into stone, the only thing left will be to run the plan I've made.
Since there's lots at stake here, I'll hold off one more day so I can spend an hour talking with my wife, Andrea, She always gives good advice.
What I'll then have is:
It's everything a publisher would need. And that's what I'll be.
I just received the proposal from the last publicist. Way too expensive. So now, I'm pretty sure I'll hirethe one I was leaning toward. As for the web site, Xuni.com looks reasonable. I have some concerns, but I'm running short of time.
When I've cast these last two decisions into stone, the only thing left will be to run the plan I've made.
Since there's lots at stake here, I'll hold off one more day so I can spend an hour talking with my wife, Andrea, She always gives good advice.
What I'll then have is:
- a copyeditor
- a cover designer
- a publicist
- a web site designer
- and, a corporation for the endeavor.
It's everything a publisher would need. And that's what I'll be.
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
An Adventure in Self-Publishing - POST #2
February 18, 2014
Okay, so now three weeks have passed since I posted on my great adventure. I now have a cover designer at work, and a copy editor fixing the first manuscript. My corporate attorney is forming a California "C" Corporation to handle revenues and expenses. And I'm about to select the publicist I need to help make my books a fungible commodity. I'll also need to revise my web site to make it look like that of an expert in the politics of the intelligence community; which I am.
Oh, and I'll need to revise my Excel spreadsheet with my budget and schedule in it. To download it for your own use, <click here: BLANK Publishing Schedule Events and Budget>.
Okay, so now three weeks have passed since I posted on my great adventure. I now have a cover designer at work, and a copy editor fixing the first manuscript. My corporate attorney is forming a California "C" Corporation to handle revenues and expenses. And I'm about to select the publicist I need to help make my books a fungible commodity. I'll also need to revise my web site to make it look like that of an expert in the politics of the intelligence community; which I am.
Oh, and I'll need to revise my Excel spreadsheet with my budget and schedule in it. To download it for your own use, <click here: BLANK Publishing Schedule Events and Budget>.
Tuesday, February 4, 2014
It Can’t Happen Here? Well, Maybe, But…
February 4, 2014
Anyone else see the economic, religious, political and cultural similarities between the United States today and Iran under the last days of the Shah?
In 1978, the Shah’s secret police, the Savak, had a death grip on the populations, fearing an uprising. They saw the uprising coming internally, but focused on military and political forces, and missed the entire cause of the unrest.
Iran in 1978 was emerging from a half-century of slow cultural diversification forced by the Shah. The country had a very small middle class. There was a growing religious right wing, whose power was deemed dangerous by the secret police. The military was clearly undecided regarding whose side they favored, and so were left out of the political equation.
The United States today is emerging from its most serious economic catastrophe in over seventy years. Our country’s middle class is swiftly growing smaller and more irrelevant as the gulf between rich and poor continues to leave the majority of Americans economically disenfranchised. The religious right wing is growing. The intelligence services – NSA, CIA, FBI, all see a growing threat within America from Americans. The political fringes – both right and left – are growing in power, leaving moderates and the military out of the “power” equation.
It’s a nightmare come true. And, we all remember how it ended up for Iran in 1979. As Frank Zappa sang with the Mothers of Invention so many decades ago, “It can’t happen here.” The song, by the way, was satire.
Was there anything that the Shah could have done to prevent his overthrow? What if he’d had a more open policy toward dissent? What if he’d gone even more the other way, and had the most repressive regime in human history? History seems to indicate that no given policy works forever, and many simply don’t work at all.
Is there a lesson here for us? Or has our regime begun to wind down? It’s an issue we should try to address, but I think it’s just too damn scary for anyone to ponder for very long, and no real answers are easy to come by.
Like global warming and the cigarettes-cause-cancer controversies, this one could play out for a long time. What comes to my mind is the old saw, ‘Nero fiddles while Rome burns.’
Anyone else see the economic, religious, political and cultural similarities between the United States today and Iran under the last days of the Shah?
In 1978, the Shah’s secret police, the Savak, had a death grip on the populations, fearing an uprising. They saw the uprising coming internally, but focused on military and political forces, and missed the entire cause of the unrest.
Iran in 1978 was emerging from a half-century of slow cultural diversification forced by the Shah. The country had a very small middle class. There was a growing religious right wing, whose power was deemed dangerous by the secret police. The military was clearly undecided regarding whose side they favored, and so were left out of the political equation.
The United States today is emerging from its most serious economic catastrophe in over seventy years. Our country’s middle class is swiftly growing smaller and more irrelevant as the gulf between rich and poor continues to leave the majority of Americans economically disenfranchised. The religious right wing is growing. The intelligence services – NSA, CIA, FBI, all see a growing threat within America from Americans. The political fringes – both right and left – are growing in power, leaving moderates and the military out of the “power” equation.
It’s a nightmare come true. And, we all remember how it ended up for Iran in 1979. As Frank Zappa sang with the Mothers of Invention so many decades ago, “It can’t happen here.” The song, by the way, was satire.
Was there anything that the Shah could have done to prevent his overthrow? What if he’d had a more open policy toward dissent? What if he’d gone even more the other way, and had the most repressive regime in human history? History seems to indicate that no given policy works forever, and many simply don’t work at all.
Is there a lesson here for us? Or has our regime begun to wind down? It’s an issue we should try to address, but I think it’s just too damn scary for anyone to ponder for very long, and no real answers are easy to come by.
Like global warming and the cigarettes-cause-cancer controversies, this one could play out for a long time. What comes to my mind is the old saw, ‘Nero fiddles while Rome burns.’
It Can’t Happen Here? Well, Maybe, But…
March 3, 2014
Anyone else see the economic, religious, political and cultural similarities between the United States today and Iran under the last days of the Shah?
In 1978, the Shah’s secret police, the Savak, had a death grip on the populations, fearing an uprising. They saw the uprising coming internally, but focused on military and political forces, and missed the entire cause of the unrest.
Iran in 1978 was emerging from a half-century of slow cultural diversification forced by the Shah. The country had a very small middle class. There was a growing religious right wing, whose power was deemed dangerous by the secret police. The military was clearly undecided regarding whose side they favored, and so were left out of the political equation.
The United States today is emerging from its most serious economic catastrophe in over seventy years. Our country’s middle class is swiftly growing smaller and more irrelevant as the gulf between rich and poor continues to leave the majority of Americans economically disenfranchised. The religious right wing is growing. The intelligence services – NSA, CIA, FBI, all see a growing threat within America from Americans. The political fringes – both right and left – are growing in power, leaving moderates and the military out of the “power” equation.
It’s a nightmare come true. And, we all remember how it ended up for Iran in 1979. As Frank Zappa sang with the Mothers of Invention so many decades ago, “It can’t happen here.” The song, by the way, was satire.
Was there anything that the Shah could have done to prevent his overthrow? What if he’d had a more open policy toward dissent? What if he’d gone even more the other way, and had the most repressive regime in human history? History seems to indicate that no given policy works forever, and many simply don’t work at all.
Is there a lesson here for us? Or has our regime begun to wind down? It’s an issue we should try to address, but I think it’s just too damn scary for anyone to ponder for very long, and no real answers are easy to come by.
Like global warming and the cigarettes-cause-cancer controversies, this one could play out for a long time. What comes to my mind is the old saw, ‘Nero fiddles while Rome burns.’
Anyone else see the economic, religious, political and cultural similarities between the United States today and Iran under the last days of the Shah?
In 1978, the Shah’s secret police, the Savak, had a death grip on the populations, fearing an uprising. They saw the uprising coming internally, but focused on military and political forces, and missed the entire cause of the unrest.
Iran in 1978 was emerging from a half-century of slow cultural diversification forced by the Shah. The country had a very small middle class. There was a growing religious right wing, whose power was deemed dangerous by the secret police. The military was clearly undecided regarding whose side they favored, and so were left out of the political equation.
The United States today is emerging from its most serious economic catastrophe in over seventy years. Our country’s middle class is swiftly growing smaller and more irrelevant as the gulf between rich and poor continues to leave the majority of Americans economically disenfranchised. The religious right wing is growing. The intelligence services – NSA, CIA, FBI, all see a growing threat within America from Americans. The political fringes – both right and left – are growing in power, leaving moderates and the military out of the “power” equation.
It’s a nightmare come true. And, we all remember how it ended up for Iran in 1979. As Frank Zappa sang with the Mothers of Invention so many decades ago, “It can’t happen here.” The song, by the way, was satire.
Was there anything that the Shah could have done to prevent his overthrow? What if he’d had a more open policy toward dissent? What if he’d gone even more the other way, and had the most repressive regime in human history? History seems to indicate that no given policy works forever, and many simply don’t work at all.
Is there a lesson here for us? Or has our regime begun to wind down? It’s an issue we should try to address, but I think it’s just too damn scary for anyone to ponder for very long, and no real answers are easy to come by.
Like global warming and the cigarettes-cause-cancer controversies, this one could play out for a long time. What comes to my mind is the old saw, ‘Nero fiddles while Rome burns.’
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
