Over at the always-worth-reading Liberals Against Terrorism my colleague Praktike notes Zarqawi's message to bin Laden in which he states that his injuries are minor and that he's still in control of the situation.
Praktike then comments:
I was somewhat bemused by all of the very serious commentary on the righty blogs about this whole injury thing, as if any of these folks had any special info or insight into whether the dude was going to die, where he was hiding, or who his successors might be. Nothing more than amateur guesswork, frankly.
Probably, but I'd like to use this as the launching point to make the observation of, "How would that be different from any other day?"
One of the criticisms that has often been made of the blogosphere in general and of myself in particular (prior to my "outing" in Frontpage Magazine) have been that I shouldn't be commenting on this stuff because I'm not a professional analyst. I am still not a "credentialed" analyst in any sense of the term. As a result, pretty much everything I write online can be (and has ) dismissed as "amateur guesswork." Hell, a lot of spooks are exceedingly contemptuous of anything that isn't classified, even though a lot of the "insider information" that these people have access to seems to read an awful lot like the stuff you find in al-Watan, al-Quds al-Arabi, al-Hayat, al-Sharq al-Awsat, etc.
Moreover, my respect for "experts" as a class of people has declined considerably over the last several years, in large part because I (and I don't think I'm alone in this) have had enough wool lifted from my eyes to learn that many of these people, in addition to being hip-deep in their own agendas and their own rivalries, are every bit as subject to repeating bad arguments (especially if they're trendy), incomplete information, etc. as any guy on the internet. Maybe can explain to me what exactly the difference is between me or Bill or Joe or any other blogger reasonably knowledgeable about terrorism commenting on Zarqawi's injuries versus some talking head on TV (answer: salary)? Neither of us have any first-hand knowledge of the situation (hell, nobody outside of Zarqawi's inner circle has any first-hand knowledge of his situation!), but I don't think that this is in and of itself a bad thing as far as providing first-hand knowledge of the situation.
As one who has seen the various ebbs and flows of blogosphere opinion on terrorism over the last several years and been of the minority view among warbloggers on a number of different occasions (such as my opinion that bin Laden was alive circa 2002-2004), I'll be more than happy to admit that there's a lot of bad, erroneous, or otherwise unhelpful information that exists online. On the other hand, I think there's also a lot of good information on the subject, certainly more than enough to involve the continuing my own armchair punditry on these issues.
Two quick points I want understood by all readers is that this isn't intended as a swipe at Praktike (whom I make it a point read every day) or established terrorism experts, such as the excellent (and serious) folks over at the Counterterrorism Blog. I just don't think the mirror fact we're "amateurs" or that we don't have first-hand knowledge of Zarqawi's status necessarily invalidates our ability to comment on this stuff. Good commentary is good commentary, whether it's made by a credentialed expert or some guy who works in a mailroom (and how the hell do we know the difference online anyway?), with the reverse also being true.
I am still not a "credentialed" analyst in any sense of the term.
Credentialed analysts never speculate? Apparently there are no credentialed analysts at al-Hayat, because they were guessing successors faster than a psychic on amphetamines. They have no righty blog to put their guesses on, or they could have cranked them out even faster.
Distinguished Professor Juan Cole, while analyzing the contents of his lunchbox, wrote "Al-Zarqawi's group may be trying to throw the United States off his trail. Or the report could be a black psy-ops operation of Donald Rumsfeld."
Now if you develop those kind of mental reflexes, you'll never have to guess again.
You fool! Didn't you read that report the CIA brought down from Sinai in November 2003, stating that Iraqis were going to join the terrorists en masse over the next few months?
How dare you share an opinion without a license.
Attacking a persons argument based on authority is the weakest form of argument. If a thought is well supported, it should be respected no matter who its from. God knows the boobs at the CIA could use an infusion of out of the box thinking.
Anyway, my main concern in intellegence analysis isnt who is doing the speculating, it is the danger of groupthink that sets in. We see this increasingly and i would argue the blogosphere actually feeds it. Humility is the rarest of traits (and i surely dont claim to posess it in large amounts) but it is perhaps the key to good analysis. A good intelligence officer doesnt believe his mirror in the morning without further verification. Sure, hunches have their place and that is what ultimately makes for success, but taking things for granted is absolutely fatal. When it comes to the crumbs we get filtered through the media, I am beyond skeptical of being able to spin a remotely accurate model for whats going on, particularly with something so illusive as a single terrorist. If Zarqawi showed up in Des Moines tomorrow in perfect health I wouldnt be entirely shocked. Between the smokescreens, disinformation campaigns, and outright lies inherint in the blackest of worlds, it can be dangerous for 'everybody to know' X is wounded, or Y is hiding in Iran, or Z is the leader of such and such. Its a nugget of information, not something to diagnose policy with.
I suppose I could have added "television experts" to the people who had no idea one way or the other what his status was. But I read blogs, and don't watch TV. So I wasn't trying to say anything about "blogs" vs. "experts," I guess. And actually, I did link to your commentary in particular as a good example of the "let's wait and see because we really don't have enough info to know anything" genre. I also think that Zarqawi gets too much publicity already, and it serves his purposes, but I suppose there's nothing I can do about that.
Your ability to stay away from the idiot box is one of the things I admire about your coverage, actually ;)
As for Zarqawi's publicity, I think it's an inevitable side effect of the carnage he purports to orchestrate. Just be glad it's him and not someone far more articulate like al-Zawahiri who gets the celebrity soapbox among international jihadis.
I think if one looks at the blogosphere as containing diamonds in the rough, it has great value. And the occasional fine-cut diamond certainly pokes through.
For me, the blogosphere, en masse, reveals how people are thinking, are where many intellectual trends are headed. There is a flow and direction to how our society thinks on the whole -- blogs are a great way to see where the waters head, how fast, and what the eddies are, sprinkled with irresistible insights and details.
The MSM, from a media standpoint, generally produces cut gems -- finely-honed media experiences with high production and editing values. But sometimes, all too often, the gems are cut well, but are actually paste, not diamonds. I really don't think the MSM is beneath the Blogosphere at all; it just isn't above it.
And yes, get thee to Liberals Against Terrorism and become addicted, such as I have become.
Marcus,
In linux development they talked about signal to noise, and yes, out in the open, there is certainly noise increased by orders of magnatude.
But you also get a lot more signal.
They deal will all this stuff being thrown over the transom, and they sort it out.
In radio, we cant have the freedom we should have, because the resource is limited, not as limited as it used to be, there is as much room from 1 gig, to 2 gigs, as there is from 1 gig on down to AM radio, so we have much more room today. and there is spread spectrum, so a band for free for all has a chance of opening up, but still.
The internet is not so restricted, the cheap cost to share a large pipe means a single person can reach millions for pennies, this is new, this is really new, this really bypasses the last of the gate keepers.
Ive had my domain and a 24/7 since 1993 when my connection was a 9600 baud modem. im still in awe.
Dan, I know I am jumping in late here, but this post is spot on. Perhaps praktike would be interested to know the folks at the Counterterrorism Blog are quite interested in our work. I have a good relationship with two of the writers there, and they have been very kind and helpful to me. I am very up front that I am a rank amatuer at this, and all of my information is open source.
No doubt praktike is referring to me as one of the "amatuer speculators", even though I am clear when I am speculating. So be it. I believe there is value in trying to look closely at what is happening, and occasionally taking a stab at a prediction. The 'professionals' are wrong all the time, so why can I be as well? Perhaps he would rather we not voice our opinions from time to time and cede to the MSM?
Dave, Aquinas says that argument from authority is the weakest form of argument, for as Boethius says ....
Heh.