Your First Name:


Email: ( Optional )


Location: ( *Required )


Please enter the word you see in the image below:

Post Your Comment

Follow Entry's Comments Via RSS

Do you want to know when a comment is added to this entry? Stay up-to-date:
Subscribe to this entry's comments via RSS.



Comments

Dollie in California writes:

I agree with the color complaints.

Posted on Thu Nov 15, 2007

Ronald in New York writes:

Dear Mr. McCormack:

Good morning!...I agree with all bloggers who request changing to black ink on a white background....this white on black is killer on the eyes....also, please bring back the USIA.

Thank you.

Posted on Tue Nov 13, 2007

Steve in Peru writes:

I agree that reading on black background is very tiresome. Please find more user friendly color. Thanks.

Posted on Tue Nov 13, 2007

Rex in Dominican Republic writes:

I'm eager to read your blog, but for the life of me, I can't seem to separate the tiny white letters from their inky black matrix. The "comments" against a charcoal background are more legible, but just barely. I suggest a larger or bolder font if you intend the text to emerge from darkness.

Posted on Tue Nov 13, 2007

Alma in Illinois writes:

Can you do something about the white print on black background? I run out of "eyes" trying to read this blog, and I would like to read it.

Thanks.

Posted on Sun Nov 11, 2007

Peter in Washington, DC writes:

I've been bidding on Iraq positions for over a year. I'm also the only bidder for the past six months on my old position, but the only thing I get from HR is silence. Go figure. If I was fluent in Arabic or Chinese I would probably be assigned to Greenland, but that's another story. I'll gladly do an out of cone excursion tour and take the slot of anyone that is directed to go and doesn't want to.

BTW - Duty on a PRT or at a REO may be somewhat austere, but life at The Palace in Baghdad is pretty good for a "War Zone". 4 Hots-and-a-Cot; living in an air-conditioned trailer with Internet and cable TV; access to a huge swimming pool and a great gym; a movie theatre and a PX, etc. OK, OK. I know, it's not perfect. They closed down the Lock & Load; KBR overcooks the crab legs and burns the steaks on Sunday (no I'm not joking), and the Baskin & Robbins ice cream is too soft in the DFAC, but tell that to a Marine or Soldier eating MREs everyday. Your odds of getting hit by a runaway truck coming down the hill in Rosslyn are better than being hit by a rocket or mortar in the Green Zone. It's not the military. Quit whining ... or quit.

Posted on Sun Nov 11, 2007

Michael in West Virginia writes:

@ Robert in Washington, DC -- I certainly appreciate your response and I value the opinion of any learned, experienced student of history. And you, too, are entitled to your opinion, although lacking broad historical foundation. I have always placed a high value on the truth, regardless of the smell, especially about the truly significant matters. And hard, verifiable results of U.S. government actions thoroughly trump the glorious hype and fluff carefully crafted for an apathetic, gullible, uninformed U.S. public, further poisoning cultural mythology. In the complex arena of relations between nations, a sanitized, redacted version of events and carefully manufactured motives are always portrayed by the victorious, for consumption of the masses. The complacent U.S. media has been, is, and will continue to be a particularly powerful tool in any well-planned, bait-and-switch venture by key, powerful U.S. officials with a desire to exert U.S. military power. Hidden, often dark agendas at the forefront are always revealed, but only after time, e.g.: the Spanish American War, WWI, WWII, the Korean "military action", and the Vietnam "conflict".

The "Pentagon Papers" reveal the level of deceit employed in order to militarily involve the U.S. in Vietnam. The "Downing Street Papers" give compelling insight into the grand agenda shared by Britain and the United States in their designs for the Middle East in its entirety, beginning with Iraq.

If you are of the impression that Saddam Hussein blatantly and suddenly invaded Kuwait in 1990, against the objections of the US, and that no broader, secretive U.S. agenda was being fulfilled, I'm sorry, but you would be mistaken.
Likewise, if you are of the impression that post 911, key U.S. officials did not carefully contrive a campaign of fraudulent allegations based largely on fear and vengeance, and repeatedly assault the American mind in order to occupy Iraq in furtherance of empire and oil, you would also be mistaken. Of particular interest is that the key "benchmark" that is required by the U.S. from Iraq, is that the Iraqi nation sign over the rights to eighty seven percent of it's oil capacity for 30 years, largely to the U.S. oil giants.

To echo the central point that I made in my last posting, any debate of "U.S. foreign policy" or "U.S. diplomacy", sans the recognition of powerful, well hidden and very effective U.S. black-ops that actually achieve the results and fulfill U.S. objectives, often with stunning intimidation, violence and brutality, is to engage in merely a polite discussion. But a discussion framed in utter banality. And under the often vague, all encompassing umbrella of "strategic interests" the CIA and with its various, well funded and extensive black-ops tentacles at it's disposal have accomplished in secret, what the U.S. Diplomatic Corps can not.

The fact remains, the crux of my assertions dealt with the extensive body of evidence by which the U.S. government asserts it's will on those nations not able to defend against such influence, in the quest of U.S. interests. Your seeming defense of these U.S. actions was your assertion that the U.S. displays benevolence and compassion in the event of natural disasters. As a nation, we have. And do. Yet by comparison, these U.S. aide programs are superficial by any sensible comparison to the underhanded, and are largely intended for public consumption and for PR purposes on the world stage.

And to claim a U.S. desire to promote freedom and democracy worldwide, implying a desire to support independence is clearly contradicted by a myriad of practical results. "Baby Doc" Duvalier in Haiti, Batista in Cuba, Branco in Brazil, Botha in South Africa, Ngo Dihn Diem in Vietnam, Marcos in the Philippines, Martinez in El Salvador, Papadopoulos in Greece, The Shah of Iran, Pinochet in Chile and Franco in Spain are but several examples of dictators, all openly supported and often equipped by the United States government.

And if you choose to label my post as "blame America first" in nature, could it be that the myriad of examples that I cite are founded on sound, un sanitized reality?
In closing, it might be very telling, in that the U.S. congress took it upon itself in 1976, to legally forbid the CIA, in particular, to 'cease and desist in the assassinations of foreign leaders and officials in pursuit of political or military agendas'.
Interestingly, and noticeably absent from the directive, were terms and actions to include, subterfuge, sabotage, kidnapping, torture, use of propaganda, political destabilization, assembling, training, arming and motivating rebel forces, various support mechanisms for recognized dictators and political overthrow on foreign soil.

We Americans have quite a way with words.


Posted on Sat Nov 10, 2007

Jose in Florida writes:

Not only the United Nations, but all of us on earth are responsible for overpopulating the planet and as we do it, destroying fauna and flora, exhausting all the mineral resources, polluting the seas and rivers and risking the death of millions by hunger and disease.

Of course we have to take care of the sick, shelter the homeless and feed the hungry, but that is only trying to cure a sickness by taking care of the symptoms and totally forgetting the root, the cause of what is causing every problem we have, including of course, violence, crime and ignorance.

The United Nations must lead, before it is too late, a world wide campaign to control the overpopulation of the globe, creating in first place a conscience of what we are all doing to the planet by overpopulating it.

The remedy is not through legislation and law enforcement like it was tried in China: this has to be voluntary and free, it has to come from the realization that we are destroying our planet earth.

Please understand this before it is too late, the food and energy supplies in every area of the world will last only for hours if any disaster, natural or man made, strikes. And then what millions or billions of hungry and desperate people do? Kill each other? Eat each other?

We must understand that the main and only problem that we really have in the world is overpopulation.

The main direction of all UN efforts must be directed to control it or... else.


Posted on Sat Nov 10, 2007

Ronald in New York writes:

Dear Mr. McCormack:

Pakistan? Let's admit we have spent billions in a failed effort to buy Osama's capture. Let's admit that we have failed to engineer a behind-the-scenes coalition Musharraf-Bhutto government. Let's admit that President Bush, the self-proclaimed "War President", will fail to convince Musharraf to take off his military uniform. Let's admit that we have failed to take advantage of the counter-narcotics and AIDS opportunities and challenges facing the people of .

Afghanistan? Why do we accept narco-traffickers in theKabul parliament. How do we support Taliban warlords in the Karzai government? Why are we pushing for chemical spraying of the opium crops in Helmand; when we know the enviro-health crisis this will cause?

Myanmar? Why do we still call it Burma?

North Korea? Why do we release seized bank funds?

Saudi Arabia? Why do we ignore their role in 9/11?

Iran? Why didn't we help with their drug problems in the

1990's? Why are we targeting Natanz?

Russia? Why did we punish them post-cold-war?

Iraq?:Why did we attack the country and not the leader?

China? Why do we allow dangerous products into U.S?

Please respond.


Posted on Fri Nov 09, 2007

Robert in Washington, DC writes:

@ Michael in West Virginia -- Michael, you are entitled to your point of view, but should understand that it is offensive and insulting to most of us in the Foreign Service who have seen first-hand how the day-to-day practice of U.S. foreign policy acts in defense of freedom around the world. Sometimes defending freedom requires force, in either the Cold-War historical context of some of the examples you cited, or in the current context where we are facing terrorist organizations whose members would not think twice before committing acts of mass murder in our or our allies' cities.

So, you can "blame America first" or come to understand that the United States has world-wide responsibilities and does not shy away from facing up to those responsibilities. One under-publicized example is that we contribute half, yes half, of the worldwide amount of funding to AIDS prevention and treatment. But to test my assertion in a more general sense, ask almost any leader in the civilized world who they would call first in a crisis, and in almost every case it would be the USA--our President, our Secretary of State, or our Embassy in their country. A good recent example was the Asian Tsunami a few years ago. The fastest and most effective delivery of aid was by the U.S. (and Australian) military. I could go on and on, but the basic point is that the view of the world from a U.S. diplomat’s point of view is usually one of shouldering responsibility--preferably with allies, but sometimes doing what's necessary first and waiting for allies to catch up. I don't think you'd find much disagreement from among my colleagues no matter what their political leaning.

Posted on Fri Nov 09, 2007

Sarah in Washington, DC writes:

I am a Foreign Service officer. I work hard. I have served in hardship assignments. I love my country. I don't think I am elitist or whiny. I believe that most people in the U.S. do not really know what the Foreign Service does or how. Their ideas regarding the work and makeup of our small service come mainly from media: movies, television series and occasional news coverage. I have never seen in the media (think The Game, JAG, etc.) a realistic portrayal of an Embassy or of the Foreign Service. We are a mixed bag like any other organization.

I fundamentally disagree with U.S. policy in Iraq. Despite that disagreement, I volunteered two years ago for TDY in Baghdad and was there for slightly over two months. I left the Green Zone when doing my job required it and did what I thought was needed as long as I was there. I would have stayed longer if needed.

I am on the list to go to Iraq now. I continue to disagree with U.S. policy, but if chosen, I will go.

That said, it is clear to me that an officer who disagrees fundamentally with a policy he/she is required to support professionally will experience a higher level of stress and will be more likely to suffer PTSD than others around them. I recognize that not all of the people who refuse to go to Iraq are whining cowards or effete elitists. Some of them have honest disagreements with our policies and goals there. I believe they deserve respect for taking a stand against assignment to Iraq. I don't know if there are complaining shirkers among the group, but I know from communicating with many other prime candidates that many have sincere doubts about the value and ultimate chances of success of American policy in Iraq.


Posted on Fri Nov 09, 2007

Michael writes:

Any sensible discussion of U.S. diplomacy, of the type presented for public consumption, without acknowledging countless U.S. actions well hidden from the American people, worldwide and for decades, would be tantamount to playing a child's game of hide and seek. In reality, this myriad of actions, with verifiable results, by a secret, well funded U.S. army of specialists, are always committed against and within nations unable to defend against U.S. influence in their internal affairs and self determination. And the American public and taxpayers have not only consistently been the unwitting financier, but the portion of Earth's population least aware, of often protracted, brutal campaigns through a combination of apathy and the culture of compliance by the mainstream U.S. media.

Created in 1947, largely as a result of the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, the CIA was to be the central clearing house to analyze information from all U.S. intelligence agencies, to be presented in a workable form to the political and military leadership to predict and prevent any future threat to national security. Also "endowed" with the vaguely worded mission statement "to carry out any other actions as deemed fit by the president of the United States", born was the CIA, the epitome of powerful, motivated and secretive government power, with little effective congressional oversight, far from public knowledge, and easily cloaked under the umbrella of "national security interests". "Battling and deterring the spread of communism" was the oft applied justification until recent years, but subservience to U.S. economic interests was the primary impetus, without fail. And dictators are far easier to control and preferable to a democracy, as long as the dictator remains cooperative.

In pursuit of mission and specializing in everything from propaganda campaigns, arming, training and equipping local forces, crushing labor unions and independent news media, training secret police forces in population control and overthrowing duly elected leaders was considered business as usual and a job well done. Failure in the mention of kidnapping, torture and murder/assassination would be, again, engaging in a child's game; see, hear and speak no evil.

But the very real consequence of these U.S. government sanctioned actions is no game, whatsoever. The entirety of the current fanatical Islamic disdain for the U.S. can be traced directly back to U.S. actions in the Middle East, almost exclusively by the CIA. The overthrow of president Mossedeq in Iran in 1953, while installing and supporting the Shah for 26 years in his place, supporting, arming and training an immense army in Afghanistan against the invading Soviets throughout the 80's, and actively supporting Saddam Hussein, (for the duration of his usefulness), are prime examples, yet far from a complete picture. Significant U.S. financial support and seemingly blind endorsement of Israeli policies and actions against its Arab neighbors will continue to be a major factor in any relations between the U.S. and the Muslim world, forever.

Beginning with the seizure of American hostages, (now admitted to have been CIA operatives for the U.S. embassy), in Iran in 1979 to the U.S. embassy bombings in Tanzania and Zaire, the bombing of the USS Cole and right up to the attacks of 911, to those unable, (or unwilling), to connect the dots, U.S. actions will continue to confound the hopeful and inflame hatreds on all sides.

Posted on Fri Nov 09, 2007

Ronald in New York writes:

Dear Mr. McCormack:

I am writing to suggest a moratorium on foreign policy statements which are critical of other nations; and rather focus on positive and pro-active statements regarding U.S. activities around the world. On 11/1/07, President Bush said, "...on every front, we are on the offensive." This approach is at the root of many of our nation's difficulties with the rest of the world. Don't we need a break from this antagonistic posture?

Posted on Thu Nov 08, 2007

George in Georgia writes:

Gentlemen,

So far you have verified everything most working people think about diplomats and talk about among ourselves. You seem to be elitist individuals who think you have to think for us!

Wrong, gentlemen! We know what we have to do to support you. We pay incredible taxes for very little return on investment from you. How could you possibly think you would never be asked to do what was necessary to support the United States? That is your job! Every job has things about it that people don't like to do. The choice then is either do the job or quit!

If you can't do the job, get off the pot!

Posted on Wed Nov 07, 2007

Annie in Texas writes:

Diplomats go where needed in war or in peace.

Posted on Wed Nov 07, 2007

Kevin in Missouri writes:

Pathetic to see the recent complaints and whinings by the foreign service folks in the State Department. Welcome to the real world that the DOD has operated in for several years now.

Posted on Wed Nov 07, 2007

Greg in Iowa writes:

Pakistan. We should not impose Democracy on a friendly government; or any other politically correct affirmation. It is questionable whether Pakistan is actually friendly however. If we go to war with Pakistan and win; then Democracy could be an answer. Otherwise Pakistan has to work this out themselves.

Iraq postings. I understand the apprehension. My son wants to fight there, and even I feel that is the right thing to do. But actually sending him is another matter. No matter how "safe" his posting might be there is always the chance of death. That is the nature of Iraq today. God help you in your call to duty. We do care about every diplomat and soldier there. To be a civilian and be thrown into this; especially if you are not politically motivated, is a pinch. Stiff upper lip guys and gals! Your efforts do not go unnoticed.

Posted on Wed Nov 07, 2007

Steve in Czech Republic writes:

To all FSOs:

I am not part of the diplomatic corps but have served a large part of my life within the Army and have lived abroad for many years .I have observed the news these past two weeks and read many articles on the row over should FSOs be ordered to serve in Iraq.

Let me just say that our diplomatic corps enjoys a very privileged lifestyle that would raise the ire of all Americans if they new the extent of the pay and privileges provided to those serving in our Embassies around the world. It is a disgrace for these elitist individuals that took an oath to serve their country to pick and choose when and where they will serve. Many have allowed their political feelings to get in the way of their service to country.

I would like to say to those individuals that want to cry and complain to get out of the diplomatic corps and get a real job !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Regards.

Posted on Wed Nov 07, 2007

Nick in Virginia writes:

First time here, testing

Posted on Tue Nov 06, 2007

Martha in New Jersey writes:

Good morning Mr. McCormack,
The statement by Secretary Rice boggles my mind. President Musharrraf is obviously dealing with our mutual enemies in the way we would to protect our country. The consequences if he fails are dire for the world. Why are we not supporting him? How dare we react to our friends in the way the State Department is to Musharraf? What happens if he is killed or overthrown? There was a time that I had great faith in Ms. Rice - no more! A setback for
Pakistan is a setback for the U.S.

Posted on Sun Nov 04, 2007

Michael in West Virginia writes:

Let's be realistic, and apply a clear, unbiased grasp of un sanitized U.S. history. The term "U.S. Diplomacy", without fail, is the euphemism for the public's perception that the U.S. is a civilized country, valuing human rights, self determinism and democracy. The reality is, and history clearly and repeatedly reveals, that the U.S. values none of these in actual practice. The true way that the U.S. exerts its influence on other nations is through the well funded, covert efforts of our CIA and the various black-ops tentacles at its disposal. Thwarting any seeds of democratic reform, (1) carrying out vigorous. propaganda campaigns,(2) the crushing of labor unions,(3) and overthrowing legitimate governments, (4), the CIA is the epitome of secretive, under-handed government power, applied often with stunning brutality, free of effective oversight and far from the knowledge of the U.S. public. In pursuit of U.S. economic and strategic interests for 60 years, worldwide, (once the hype, hyperbole and propaganda is stripped away), the U.S. is clearly and demonstrably the leading terrorist nation in the world. Patriotism is a grand tool protecting a house of cards based on a grand lie. Indifference, ignorance, media control and false pride protect the perpetrators.
And most importantly, if you don't, (or refuse to), connect the myriad of past U.S. covert actions, particularly in the Middle East, directly with the attacks of 911, you are among the immense population of 'ideal Americans' carefully groomed and most prized by your government.

1) See Guatemala, El Salvador
2) See Nicaragua, Vietnam, Cambodia
3) See Chile, Haiti, Italy, Indonesia
4) See Greece, Australia, Chile, Iran

News flash: An central component of the so called 'benchmarks' that the Iraqi government is expected to adopt by the U.S., well hidden from the U.S. public and ignored by the mainstream media, is the requirement that the Iraqi population surrender 87.5%, (eighty-seven and a half percent), of their oil wealth for the next thirty years, almost entirely to U.S. oil giants. http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_richard__071023_bU.S. hco_s_covert_atte.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_state_terrorism_by_United_States_of_America#_note-barsamian
http://truthemergency.U.S. /
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_allen_l__070622_america_s_most_dange.htm

Posted on Sat Nov 03, 2007

Ralph in Maryland writes:

United Nations to the Rescue

Some would say better late than never that the UN Security Council voted unanimously August 10 to broaden the role of the United Nations in seeking an end to sectarian violence in Iraq and to promote peace talks on national, regional, and international levels. US efforts to rebuild infrastructure damaged by the Iraq War has been hampered by insurgent attacks both upon the US military and Iraqi civilians. According to recent news reports, Zalmay Khalilzad, the US ambassador to the UN, sought to allay concerns that the Bush administration was seeking to saddle the UN with responsibility for Iraq. He assured the UN that the US will do its part.

Others would say, however, that it is already too late to reverse the destruction, deaths, and resentments that were incurred, following the US military invasion of Iraq. Present day military actions involve shock and awe bombing, search and destroy intrusions, torture of suspected insurgents, and their detention without criminal charges. The United States has occupied Iraq now over 4 years, and has built a multitude of military bases and airfields throughout Iraq. Many Iraqi citizens view this perhaps as putting the fox in charge of the raided chicken coup. Was it a mistake to use military force? How do we honor what was asked of the military to resolve what was really a political issue?

The US military invaded Iraq under the pretense that it harbored nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons of mass destruction. The Bush administration became impatient with the UN inspection for these weapons and saw fit, whether deviously or incompetently, to invade Iraq. Many believe this was in violation of international law, to which the US is bound under its Constitution. Later, it became evident that Iraq indeed did not have weapons of mass destruction. The invasion brought death and destruction throughout Iraq. Many places in Iraq are still without water, sewage, and electricity. Many Iraqi citizens have been disrupted from their neighborhoods and have sought refuge elsewhere. Who should be accountable for these assaults? How do they differ from crimes against humanity? Many of us have heretofore looked upon the United States as being a champion of human rights. Is the United States losing its esteem around the world?

The toppling of Saddam Hussein is said to be the reward for the US invasion of Iraq. He was generally accepted to have been a cruel despot that committed crimes against humanity. Surely most of the chaos, death, and destruction could have been avoided if the UN Security Council would have brought criminal charges against him in a special criminal court. Now the International Criminal Court exists to handle such cases, but the Bush Administration had rejected the US involvement in this institution. Submitting such cases to a court honors our sense of separation of powers. The US founding fathers believed that legislative, executive, and judicial duties could not be entrusted to the same body. Acts of war ignore the separation of powers because the enemy is often perceived without due process of law.

Posted on Fri Nov 02, 2007

John in Virginia writes:

I am writing to comment on an NPR news commentary this afternoon (11/1//07) about a State Dept staff meeting today in which several employees of the Department objected to being directed to staff the embassy in Baghdad as opposed to volunteering. This, even though (i) in their employment agreements they agreed to this, and (ii) State employees in Baghdad are protected by a private security contractor which has been in the news for using excessive force to protect them, which some in the Department have criticized, but which has protected the fannies of said State employees.

The State Dept employees' union shop steward objected to this decision by the top Decision Makers, according to the NPR commentary.

Some thoughts by a member of the private sector:

1. Like every other person who signs any employment agreement, you have to either live with it or resign. Deal with it: You can get yourself shot in any other country you are assigned to, i.e., Tanzania in the Clinton years. And the odds are higher in D.C. than in many other foreign capitals.

2. Some of the comments reported on NPR made the speakers appear to be really out of touch with (i) realities on the ground in Iraq, (ii) real life outside of the International Studies curricula at Yale and Stanford, and (iii) real life in the U.S. of A.

3. If the State Department really has to hire unionized employees, hire the Steel Workers and the Teamsters.

This is being sent to this site, because the State Department website does not invite citizen comment elsewhere, except to say, "Cool!" about Department employee commentaries.

Posted on Thu Nov 01, 2007

Darrin in Washington DC writes:

A good start on a blog. As for my feedback:

-The U.S. has a diversity of citizens. Foreign Service employees, who are very hardworking and motivated, do not necessarily reflect that diversity. Please do more to hire FS candidates with cross cultural communication skills and who have actually lived in those countries for some time. Focus on outreach to communities in the U.S. that have the background and the skills to articulate American ideals and perspectives.

-Work with the UN to ensure they have more accountability at all levels of their organization.

Good luck to Karen Hughes' replacement.

Posted on Thu Nov 01, 2007

Minna in New Jersey writes:

This web site seems interesting to me. thank you for providing information.

Posted on Thu Nov 01, 2007

Henry in Washington writes:

dipnote is a great idea...kill the black background...too hard to read...

Posted on Wed Oct 31, 2007

Ronald in New York writes:

Thanks for the Dipnote blog. Direct access to State is wonderfully refreshing, and I have already blogged on each of your topics. One area I feel strongly about
is U.S. support for UN, particularly the Conventions on Corruption and the provision for restoration of stolen assets. So many global problems are caused and fueled by corruption, and there is over 1 trillion being taken from the world's licit economy. Think of the possibilities if we take the lead.

Posted on Tue Oct 30, 2007

David in Florida writes:

Thanks for setting this up. I think its a great idea and its great that we have a place to interact with the government and each other.

Posted on Tue Oct 30, 2007

Zharkov writes:

Do you want public dialog? How about explaining this to the public?

Potential prosecution of Blackwater guards allegedly involved in the shooting deaths of 17 Iraqi civilians last month may have been compromised because the guards received immunity for statements they made to State Department officials investigating the incident, federal law enforcement officials said yesterday.

FBI agents called in to take over the State Department's investigation two weeks after the Sept. 16 shootings CANNOT USE ANY INFORMATION gleaned during questioning of the guards by the department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, which is charged with supervising security contractors.

Diplomatic Security spokesman Brian Leventhal declined to comment on the situation, first reported yesterday by the Associated Press. Anne Tyrrell, a spokeswoman for North Carolina-based Blackwater Worldwide, also declined to comment.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack referred all questions to the Justice Department. "But if anyone has broken the rules or applicable laws, they should be held to account," McCormack said.

Several of the Blackwater personnel, however, asserted that they had already told their stories, under immunity grants from the State Department, and declined FBI interviews that could be used against them, law enforcement officials said.

Administration officials have said that the Christmas Eve case has languished because of the legal uncertainties.

But in congressional testimony last week, Rice said that the holdup was "not the absence of law . . . it's a question of evidence."


Posted on Tue Oct 30, 2007

Niya writes:

Can you please change the color of the background. Black is terribly depressing and those small white letters on this lavishly black background is extremely hard to read.

Posted on Tue Oct 30, 2007

Michael writes:

I must admit, my skepticism had the best of me and because my sharply worded post didn't appear for several hours, I was convinced that the new blog regarding the State Department was going to be highly filtered, mostly censored and mainly fluff.

And lo and behold, my post appeared. Complete with all the uncomfortable truths.

I commend you folks and hope that this new venue can lead to positive and compelling discussions about what is really going wrong.

Posted on Tue Oct 30, 2007

Janice in Arkansas writes:

I appreciate your giving this format a try. I hope the voices speaking to you through this blog will be read thoughtfully and considered of value. Meanwhile, I'd deeply appreciate a more readable screen--larger print, greater contrast. Alas, but not all of us have the strong, perfect eyesight of a twenty-year-old--and some never do/did have it!

Posted on Mon Oct 29, 2007

Michael writes:

Any attempt at meaningful discussion about the salient realities of so called, "US Foreign Policy", without a firm grasp of CIA and black-ops actions, (for 50 plus years, worldwide), would consist mostly of pretty concepts and euphemisms galore. Oh, and boatloads of denial.

What the State Department is unable to achieve for U.S. business interests in the public arena, the thugs from the CIA have done far from public scrutiny or effective oversight for well over 50 years.
Michael writes:

And the suddenly, the nearly unrecognizable country, (and world), in which we now live has been directly shaped by these events.

In what is largely recognized as the seminal event in current US/middle eastern relations, (i.e. the 911 attacks then the massive, well planned conspiracy of lies leading to Iraq, soon to extend, (by the same incredible ineptitude and allegations by the same band of marauders)), into Iran, the United States CIA organized the toppling of Iran's democratically elected president, Mohammad Mosaddeq in 1953, when he revealed his intentions to share the country's oil wealth with common Iranian citizens. The US choice as his successor was Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who, with his "Savak", an immense state police force trained by the CIA, employed brutality, rape, kidnapping and murder to insure and maintain the Shah's dictatorship for the next 26 years. Upon his overthrow by Islamic fundamentalist's in 1979, the US Embassy in Tehran, (in fact, only now admitted to be the CIA overlords of the Shah), was stormed by college students, resulting in the 'Iran hostage crisis'.

If you are of the mindset that the militarily and economically superior United States has a right, moral or otherwise, to directly intervene in the internal affairs of nations not able to prevent it, staffing and funding a so called "State Department" or overly complicating a "foreign policy" above "The U.S. will get what it wants, or bad things will happen to you" seems, well, silly.

If you suspect exaggerations or hyperbole try:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=13372
And/or:
http://www.apfn.org/THEWINDS/arc_features/government/cia6-97.html

Google the CIA and Australia. The CIA and Greece, The CIA and El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Chile, Indonesia, Poland, Korea or Vietnam. Those would all be nice starting places if truth and national identity are important to you.

I refuse to live a lie. My loyalty and patriotism are not unconditional. And what now resembles a dictatorship, my love of country has become a genuine fear of my government.

If you somehow doubt that the horrible attacks of 911 weren't a result and retaliation to past atrocities of the CIA and their black-ops, a blind, unquestioning U.S. support of Israeli and a massive campaign of deception and manufactured consent for military actions in the middle east, you are just not paying attention.

Posted on Mon Oct 29, 2007

Victor in Michigan writes:

Thank you.

Posted on Mon Oct 29, 2007

Richard in Nevada writes:

The U.S.A. has just sanctioned nuclear power in Egypt.

Why, when they have proximity to ocean tides on their coastline which would allow non-polluting, non-threatening energy. Nuclear power creates nuclear waste. Ocean enrgy does not create nuclear waste nor the basic materials for weapons. why don't we pursue and help our allies to pursue tidal and wave energy?

Posted on Mon Oct 29, 2007

Randy in U.S.A. writes:

Given; All wars throughout history have been about the  aquisition of real estate or resources.   Question; How many of our youngest and finest does it take to equal a barrel of oil?

Posted on Mon Oct 29, 2007

John in Oklahoma writes:

With all of the problems with Mattel and other recalls from China has everyone forgotten the fact that we are still at war with China (since there has never been a formal end to the Korean war) and companies that are doing business in China are consorting with and are providing aid and comfort to the enemy! I would like to know why thay have not been charged with treason? Instead they are allowed to pad their profits by moving their companies and labor there? I heard a Quote today "China is the Dragon that America keeps feeding that will one day come around and bite Us" and with over 1 trillion U.S. dollars in its banks their army and navy is only going to get bigger China is the 800lbs Gorilla in the room that no body want to talk about.

Posted on Mon Oct 29, 2007

Benjamin in South Carolina writes:

Well, this has been a long time coming. I would like to commend the State Dept for embracing public diplomacy. This is the first time that I know of that State has facilitated not just a Government-to-public exchange but also a public-to-public exchange that will be (and all ready has been) created out of this forum.

There is much more that could be done! Where is your prominent link exchange with Global Voices Online? (It should be on your front page!) Where are your guest bloggers from areas of interest? I understand that this is a new process. I understand that there is a learning curve (i.e. the snafu with the name), but there is also much catching up to do.

First we have to change the State Department definition of "Public Diplomacy" to something more like the USC Center for PD. This includes both active and passive exchanges. It includes public-to-public dialog. State sadly only works from the government-to-public side when it could play a facilitating role for public-to-public by using this as a forum for dissidents and bloggers in censor and harassment prone areas. Perhaps this will be a natural progression!

Once again, congrats on this step towards fuller engagement in true PUBLIC Diplomacy.

Benjamin Cook

http://arenablog.blogspot.com
http://arenablog.blogspot.com/2007/09/something-to-say-and-somewhere-to-say.html

Posted on Fri Oct 26, 2007

Vaughn in California writes:

Regarding THE HILL interview of U.S. Assistant Secretary for International Organization Affairs Kristen Silverberg, by spokesman Sean McCormack on 5/14/07 Policy Podcast: U.S.- UN Relations, the interview portion referring to PEPFAR wasn't an interview at all, but Kristen's PR/misinformation campaign for the Whitehouse to mislead skeptics and to boast with her policy input niceties, misstate the program's horrid fraud failure with incorrect praise of success.

Wouldn't addressing the Randall Tobias 10.7M USD grant to CEO Ron Sugar/Northrop be also the logical next step; see: Bruenn v. Northrop Grumman - Corruption Gone Wild?

Great success, at the time of mentioned misinformation interview, Tobias was being fired, DC madam scandal and fraud cover-up, what makes PEPFAR a success (where's the support data) when Tobias/Sugar swindled massive AIDS set-aside funds via numerous USAID fraudulent contract awards and grants, violating agency?s own mission statement, all the while the OIG casting a blind eye. Associated fraud totaled in the billions of USD, why not a word mentioned regarding?

Why has USAID not awarded any additional PEPFAR supply chain contracts or grants to CEO Ron Sugar/Northrop since the abrupt May '07 Tobias's departure?

http://www.state.gov/p/io/rls/85044.htm

Posted on Fri Oct 26, 2007

Martin in California writes:

Is Condolezza Rice going to ask that all military operations are videotaped, as she did with Blackwater, in order to be able to respond accurately to accusations of civilian killings?

Posted on Wed Oct 24, 2007

Kris in New Jersey writes:

The blog idea is a good attempt at breaching the gap between government and the people.

But the name is a poor choice despite your use of it in the circle you inhabit. You must realize this by now.

The grey text on black is unbelievably hard to decipher. I tried to read through parts of the site and became very frustrated. Being a Mac user I can invert the colors on my screen which helps, but the text is still a dark grey against a lighter grey. That makes it more legible but the contrast needs to be improved. I will probably not visit often unless you change the color scheme. Good old black on white is best for the text area. Your attempt to be hip with the black scheme only works on teenage gaming sites. Besides, the name just destroys any 'coolness' you may have desired.

Also, in the comment section it would be helpful if your replies were of a different shade so it is more obvious who is 'speaking'. Or make your names a different color so they are easily set apart.

Good luck.

Posted on Tue Oct 23, 2007

Hannah in Texas writes:

I'm very excited that our government has decided to create this site. I'm sure everyone else has discovered this way before I have, but I think this was a very smart move made by the state. Thanks!

Posted on Sun Oct 21, 2007

KJ in Iran writes:

Hello, First I am very glad to find this chance to have close by contact with the U.S. Second please encourage me for my English,(and excuse me for my mistakes). I am a student in Iran. They call my brand the "activists" and then brand us to be linked to you. We had our last demonstration which to our surprise was covered finally by some press, but disappointingly, declared to be only 100.For us, we were happy to see some sort of coverage any way. I like to be in touch with you. It is not easy to do so, as you know the whole system in Iran is monitored, many of us either risk or take lots of precautions, such as software to remind the supervisory monitoring section of the RGC on the internet that we are not in Iran, and could not be reached. I am studying civil Engineering in Tehran University, I myself am from Mashad, but had to come to Tehran. In our last demonstration, I think by our slogans you know by now what we want. But to make sure I like to underline them here once again; Regime change but not a reform. We know that by now with the whole system unified and hardliner, there is no chance for reform. It was a mirage from the start. But now that the Guards are in the list, and there is the chance of a military attack, we shall take this opportunity to do the best in all chances, with demonstrations. Our friends are still in prison under torture, and we shall not quit till they are freed or till we are also taken to the last drop. let it be known that the Iranian people don�t want this regime. You should be decisive, that the only way to stop its advances in Iraq and other places is to choose. Of course the choice would bring consequences but if you don't take this chance the whole world will fall because of mistakes of an appeasing policy. International community does not understand the nature of the mullahs , we do, they are deceptive and live by their pockets till death. Already many have moved great lumps of sums abroad to escape the anger of the people. But we think you are helping them in staying on, in a way you are a helping hand in every day hangings. Because of difficulties you yourself have obviously in the U.S., and the lobbies backed by Iranian money, to destabilizes your policy of firmness. But unlike what you think the mullahs are very much weak. They had to apologies to us after the demonstration we organized by the help of the opposition in France. They had retracted their threats. All the reactions you see are hollow. The threat about the missiles and so...we laugh in Iran when we read all this ..you call it much ado about nothing? in English. So please hear us out. This is a very important opportunity for us to have our say.

Posted on Sun Oct 21, 2007

Martin in California writes:

Regarding the genocide question, at what point, if ever, did the State Department, in its wisdom, decide that Rawanda was genocide?

Posted on Sun Oct 21, 2007

Edward in China writes:

It's a great idea to have such kind of channel for people to know more about what U.S. diplomats are thinking and doing. Hope that there will soon be a similiar website for their Chinese counterparts to say something......

Posted on Thu Oct 18, 2007

Scott in New York writes:

What is the Interagency Guidance on Response Programs for Unauthorized Access to Customer Information and Customer Notice, or Response Guidance, and how does this help protect against crimes such as identity theft?

Posted on Wed Oct 17, 2007

Martin in California writes:
What was the role of the IMF in Burma's decision to raise gasoline prices? I hear that the IMF generally ignores the impact of its recommendations on the poor, as in, for example, the Aristide situation.

Posted on Tue Oct 16, 2007

A in Florida writes:
Why didn't the U.S. arrest the President of Iran for war crimes based on his being a guard during the Iran Hostage Crisis?

Posted on Mon Oct 15, 2007

Robert in Connecticut writes:
What are the State Department officials doing in Iraq? ...That we need to spend 1 billion dollars to protect them. Doing???

Posted on Fri Oct 12, 2007

WBCHS in Florida writes:
If the U.S. Congress is considering a resolution to condemn the Turkish/Ottoman "genocide" of erstwhile Armenian collaborators with Russian enemies of Turkey, why not condemn the British attacks on American patriots at Cowpens? Why not condemn the American indiscriminate bombing of Cambodian civilians under Pres. R. Nixon? Why not condemn the Israeli genocide of Palestinians? Why not condemn the Kahn's genocide of anyone who stood in his way? How many centuries of world history do you want to cover, Congressmen? Better pay attention to the Farewell Address of President George Washington - avoid entangling alliances - even with Armenians!?

Dipnote Bloggers write:
@ WB in Florida -- Your question seems to be directed toward the U.S. Congress, not the U.S. Department of State. The State Department's view on this matter, however, was expressed by Deputy Spokesman Tom Casey during yesterday's Daily Press Briefing:

"As you've heard from Dan Fried and from others and Nick Burns yesterday, we just don't think that this resolution is the right response to the mass killings at the beginning of the last century. We recognize that this was a great tragedy and we're not trying to minimize or deny the enormous significance of this. But the determination of whether these events constitute genocide is something that we believe should be a matter for historical inquiry not for political debate."


Posted on Fri Oct 12, 2007

If the U.S. Congress is considering a resolution to condemn the Turkish/Ottoman "genocide" of erstwhile Armenian collaborators with Russian enemies of Turkey, why not condemn the British attacks on American patriots at Cowpens? Why not condemn the American indiscriminate bombing of Cambodian civilians under Pres. R. Nixon? Why not condemn the Israeli genocide of Palestinians? Why not condemn the Kahn's genocide of anyone who stood in his way? How many centuries of world history do you want to cover, Congressmen?
Better pay attention to the Farewell Address of President George Washington - avoid entangling alliances - even with Armenians!?

Posted on Fri Oct 12, 2007

Martin in California writes:
Another follow-up to your April 8th, 2006, statement after Ambassador Brownfield's car was pelted with fruits and vegetables by people on motorcycles. You said our response would be "asymmetric" - meaning that there would not be an axis of symmetry to out response. Was that intended to rule out the use of motorcycles - since that would create a symmetry along the vehicular axis, as well as to rule out the use of fruits and vegetables which would create a symmetry along the food axis? Or did you intend to take off the table only the option of American personnel on motorcycles who at the same time used fruits and vegetables as being a possible response? That is, did you intend to rule out a maximal-axis or only a mono-axis of symmetry? The common interpretation would be the mono-axis I believe, but I am not sure if this is what you intended.

Posted on Thu Oct 11, 2007

Rob in Thailand writes:
For decades the standard arts of diplomacy have been tested and found wanting over the Burma question. The international community remains moved but effectively motionless, the brothers of ASEAN remain very Asian. China drives along iron rails of self interest. By definition, then, useful non-violent measures if they exist lie outside the well-handled box.

Here's one.

The junta has one collective point of some vulnerability: they are all soldiers. It's a matter of self-definition, and in their emptiness of anything else to point to, probably the determining element.

Take every country in the UN that has voted in support of condemnations of Burma. Take several ranking officers of the armies of each country into a league, dozens of them in toto, and ask them to participate in a sort of professional condemnation of the behavior of the Burmese officers as supposed guardians of the people who are instead oppressing them--and the mockery this makes of the honorable profession these signers have followed...you see my point.

This alone would hardly topple the regime. But it would be a telling shaft to their pride; most importantly to the pride of the younger Burmese officers whose questioning would be sharpened.

If a commission like this could be kept in being and called to conference from time to time, it might become a useful tool against other regimes too, increasing in stature and influence (like Amnesty International, for example) over the years.

The effect on the members of the junta, no longer invited to international military conferences, ignored at the ones they do attend, could be notable. Shunning has proved pretty powerful in a number of societies through the ages. And this is one form of international sanction, maybe the only kind, that doesn't hurt the people themselves in a targeted country.

Posted on Wed Oct 10, 2007

Steve in Florida writes:
This is an interesting venue, no doubt. All other matters aside, however: our nation's concern is focused on Iraq and the seemingly endless violence associated with this mission. I have only one question. "Why are we characterizing the military mission as one in which we will stay in Iraq until al Qaida is defeated, a mission which only draws more violence into the paradigm (if you will)? Why don't we characterize the military mission as on in which we stay in Iraq until the end of hostilities between Iraqis, a mission which immediately states to the belligerents that when they stop fighting and killing each other we will leave?" I know I don't have sufficient information to actually analyze this matter, but I am curious as to the mission statement of the U.S. Military in Iraq. Thank you for your time.

Posted on Wed Oct 10, 2007

Tag in China writes:
Just a suggestion. I'm not intending to avoid some issues like pet food and toys for children. I deeply understand the influence of these issues on American people and feelings you're having. Due to my observation, quality problems does exist in China although government is taking more strict control. Chinese people deserve rights of life and safety as other people around the world. And these issues, e.g. product quality, always bear the direct impact on us here in China. Through continuous effort from people and government, things are improving, which brings hopes that these problems can be solved. In addition, central and local government have taken various measures to solve these problems, which is on the contradiction of some U.S. people's remarks that I've seen on MSN bulletin. As a Chinese, I feel deeply sorry for what has happened and actually we are in the same situation because that influeces our life as well. As I saw those remarks on MSN bulletin of "the mistakes made by Communists" or some like that, I feel so upset. I'm not interested in politics and this is not about so-called difference of "communists and capitalists". This is about human rights, which is also the fundamental principle in China. We want to live a life peacefully, enjoy happiness with families and friends, have good education, get married and have babies. Nowadays we place problems aboveboard to find ways to solve them. And we see improvement and hopes.

I'm thinking that whether Dipnote can provide the opportunity to share opinion of American government and people, as well as of people from other countries. To communicate through direct conversation may help people from different places understand each other more, therefore it may come up with better ideas to solve problems both of us are facing.

Posted on Wed Oct 10, 2007

Laurie in Illinois writes:
I would like to know what America is doing in helping the people of Darfur. I did research on it to present the situation to my 7th grade students. I was appalled that all this killing, raping, and torture is still being allowed. Didn't we learn anything from the Holocaust?

Dipnote Bloggers write:
@ Laurie in Illinois -- Thanks for writing. Ending the destruction and murder in Darfur is a priority for the United States government. The Administration has been at the forefront of the international communities efforts to bring peace to the region. Those efforts are summarized here http://www.state.gov/r/pa/scp/92492.htm. In addition, take a look below at the blog entry by Andrew S. Natsios, the President's Special Envoy for Sudan, on his latest travel to Sudan.

Posted on Tue Oct 09, 2007

Karen in Lebanon writes:
It is such a good idea to let us in the state department and maybe you would listen to our humble suggestions, to improve America's foreign policy.

Posted on Tue Oct 09, 2007

Elizabeth in California writes:
Good idea. Can't wait to see how it developes and I'm eager to participate.

Posted on Tue Oct 09, 2007

Jim in Wisconsin writes:
Thank you for sharing. Very interesting

Posted on Tue Oct 09, 2007

Martin in California writes:
The search feature does not show the comments that have the searched for text, only the Dipnote that have comments that match the searched for word. IT does not seem like the best implementation of the feature. Should I be using Google to search this site?

Posted on Tue Oct 09, 2007

Martin in California writes:
Wouldn't it be nice not to lose Kandhar to chaos? How about giving a hand to small efforts like Arghand? Crumbs can go a long long way. Even sending them an autographed picture of yourself might be pleasant.

Posted on Tue Oct 09, 2007

James in China writes:
Well, I like this kind of forum to communicate with the public, and we will also know the general discipline of the Sino relationships and it's updated processes.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Mike in Illinois writes:
This is a great idea! It open's windows of opportunity to make the Us Dept. of State more transparent and open so that the average citizen might really have a feeling for what goes on behind the political and propaganda wall imposed by our leaders. It'd be great if some of the other Departments in government did the same. Open up and trust that American citizen are not non-caring fools, give us a chance. Not all decisions made by our government should be on a need to know basis or made strictly for our welfare without our knowing what brought about a decision!
Great Idea!!

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Martin in California writes:
Why is Chevron exempt from the "sanctions" on Burma! What good are the "sanctions" if you exempt the oil business? Another "Oil for Food" program. Pfft.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Carl in Texas writes:
If he doesn't already know about this official State Department blog -- and I suspect that he already does -- then my international studies teacher will be quite intrigued to learn about it tomorrow. (Yes, international studies is my intended college major.) Personally, I would love to see Sean McCormack's boss offer her perspectives on challenges to American international diplomacy one of these days, particularly Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's apocalyptic machinations and the baleful bedlam in Burma. I'll conclude by agreeing that this blog needs a better name.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Kaelinda in West Virginia writes:
So far, this blog seems to be written by the public, not by State Department personnel. While it's nice to know what other people think, most of the responses here relate to the existence of the blog and its name (which, admittedly, has its problems). Where are the posts by the diplomats telling us what is going on in the world? Our American news media does a lousy job of keeping us informed, and I'm hoping this blog will do a better job. Regarding the blog's name, most people have criticized it, and rightfully so, as sounding like a rip one would hear on a school playground. Only one person has come up with a suggestion for an alternative name: DiplodocUS (sounds like the name of a dinosaur). How about DoS_Notes?

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Bill in Thailand writes:
Good luck !! Looking forward to great things. Can you help us with any ideas how to help our effort here in Bangkok. As to the name, color, damn the torpedoes full speed ahead!! Bill

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Bonnie in New York writes:
This a great idea.

I have a name suggestion: diplomacy notes.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Dwayne in North Carolina writes:
What can we do to improve our image overseas? My guess is that our image has been tarnished around the world with all that we're involved in good or bad.
Other countries spend millions to promote themselves. We spend zero. Is there a plan in place to do some PR work abroad to continue to drive toursim into the U.S.?
This should be a non partisan issue.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Nelson in Poland writes:
Hi I am Nelson, I work for the U.S. in Poland. It is a great place to be. I am following the Missile Defense project proposed for Poland and Czech Republic.

This is a great idea. However, I think it would be better if we could create accounts to authenticate email addresses. Also the blog seems to just have a long string of posts. It would be nice if it was organized at least by posts related to a continent or subject.

Dipnote Bloggers write:
@ Nelson in Poland -- Thanks for your comments! We recently began implementing a feature that allows you to select posts by topic. There's a "View All Posts By Topic" link in the right column under the "Archives" heading.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Bonnie in Washington, DC writes:
Hello: I am a Georgetown University graduate student and a member of the Pearl Project -- an investigative reporting project into the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002.

I'm looking for people with direct knowledge of State Department actions, communications and involvement in the Pearl kidnapping and murder investigations. Thank you.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

L.W. in DC writes:
Yes - the name has to go (despite the explanation). Since the U.S. is so often compared - accurately in many cases - to a dinosaur, I suggest: DiploDoc-US.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Brian in Indiana writes:
First time here, but a couple of recommendations. First the name, enough said.

Second, possible break the blog out into world reagions or individual nations and also include a "hot Spot" or hot topic list.

Other than this, I am looking forward to reading the posts.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Kolupana in Hawaii writes:
Yes, what a wonderful idea ... I'll be sharing information about the Hawaiian Kingdom and what really happened here in the wake of the 1893 rebellion,known as the 'Hawaiian Overthrow,' by a group of American seditionist headed by the Dole family,(as in Dole pineapple.)

If you have a love of history and the truth, I'll run various colorful facts through your spectrophotometers in hopes of raising the American level of awareness,(concerning the Hawaiian Apology Resolution), and then going backwards in time, I'll let you know what the Dole family and later the United States Government did to this archipelago in terms of human suffering, species extinction, mis-management, and eventually the complete annexation of a sovereign foreign government. It's a most interesting read and I dare say, no educated American should be bereft of this information ... especially at State.

Aloha

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Joanne in Littleton writes:
First of all, thank you for this forum. I would like to write to bring attention to the adoption issues currently facing potential parents attempting to adopt from Guatemala. Please, do whatever you can to influence the Guatemalan government to allow the legal adoptions currently in process to go through. My sister and her husband have been going through this process for eight months now. They have spent much time with the little girl and boy siblings they are trying to adopt. There is a deep bond developing. I know that there are many such couples would be absolutely heart broken if the process was not allowed to play it's course. Please, please help my sister realize her dreams of becoming the mom these kids so desperately need! Don't let these and other children in Guatemala suffer - there are mom's and dad's trying desperately to provide loving and stable homes, and a better future for these beautiful and needy children. Thank you.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Martin in California writes:
After some people in Venezuela threw fruits and vegetables at ambassador Brownfield's car in Caracas, you said the U.S. response would be "asymmetric." Does this mean that he decided not to throw fruits and vegetables back at them? This is wise, because they were on motorcycles, and that could be dangerous. All the same, I am surprised that we would take any option off the table, especially vegetables or fruits.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Jim in Texas writes:
Good idea. Speaking of which, I have an idea you might want to bounce around. What about constitutionalizing parts of the United States foreign policy? This would probably go a long way in telling other governments what the United States stand for and against as well as giving continuity in at least some policies administration to administration. I'm not suggesting doing the whole Enchilada, but there must be some areas that could be covered in the spirit of the original constitution.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Ron in North Carolina writes:
@ State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack --Thank you for a very good way to look inside the world of international diplomacy.

As a Canadian that moved to the North Carolina just 5 years ago, I feel it is very important for everyone to get an understanding that the world is a very diverse place. Opinions that differ from our own are not wrong, they are just different.

I hope this site can be a way to show the humanity of the people of other nations not just the inhumanity of some of their leaders.

An open forum like this can be a tremendous tool to show the compassion of our diplomats however the fastest way to loose readers will be to allow partisan opinions to be posted. There is an official website for this and people need to understand that the majority of us hold no strong political alliance and want to hear people speak from their hearts note from official policy. Some of the blogs already look far too official.

Thanks for a very good idea.

Ron

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Linda in Ohio and Egypt writes:
Hi! I think this is a great idea! I just read the article about this new endeavor at Foxnews.com. I personally like the name DipNote. Kudos to everyone involved! Communication is a good thing!

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Steve in Pennsylvania writes:
This is a great concept and one I will visit regularly!

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

R in Alabama writes:
You will (no doubt) now be flooded with visitors and comments after the article (about DipNote) at MSNBC. The variety of the message should increase proportionately.

The United States is home to an incredibly diverse people that have very little in common except their love for liberty and hatred of tyranny. In fact, you could well note that our diversity is something of a microcosm of the world that surrounds us. Take away the names and locations of your domestic commenter and you might easily fit them with the views of people from anywhere on the globe.

We are a living fossil of an ancient ideal. Our mere existence proves that a dynamic and vastly diverse culture can live side by side under a single banner. It's a shame that this important experiment and the ongoing results are so often neglected in practice elsewhere but that's where you come in. You are the ones who, by virtue of our will, are on the front lines. You speak for the many of us, the all of us and in doing so, convey both our good will and our great hopes for humanity.

Remember that "We the people" has never had beside it an asterisk. Every word you hammer out on a keyboard or speak in a foreign tongue also speaks for 300 million Americans who will observe them without mercy if you neglect our commons in favor of the partisan political expediency.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Elizabeth in Virginia writes:
Thanks from a citizen who feels if you can make this a real forum in which multiple concerns can be addressed you have done all of us a favor. Much easier said than done.

I would like to see a greater show of unity in this country across the board with more support for our president whom we may certainly disagree but should not denigrate. We give those who should be our allies a false picture. It will be interesting to see if this remains a place of learning or if it becomes one more place to air propaganda.

But thanks for the attempt.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Pete in Florida writes:
Enjoyed the reading so far. Looking forward to future posts!

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Barborka writes:
If I may give my 2-cents:

Why don't you link this blog to some of the good publications that the State Department, and its current and former employees -or their dependents-, generate? Some of these publications are really a window into the somewhat remote life of State Dept. bureaucracy and diplomacy. Here's a list that comes to mind:

American Diplomacy (http://www.americandiplomacy.org/)
Foreign Service Journal (http://www.afsa.org/fsj/)
Inside a US Embassy (http://www.afsa.org/inside/)
State Magazine (http://www.state.gov/m/dghr/statemag/)
Tales from a Small Planet (http://www.talesmag.com/)

Good luck with your endeavors!

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Kurt in Thailand writes:
Sean --

As others have already said, this is an idea with great potential. You've already realized, it's obvious, that "Dipnote" isn't exactly an inspired name choice for this, one subject to obscene abuse. I run a website, and while I use a black background, I don't use white text (bright yellow has worked best for me), and I use a text style and size that shows up large enough that most people don't have to enlarge the image to be able to read (which I did have to do here).

But those are details. On a more fundamental level, I do suggest that should this site be a place for official releases of any type, then any such posting should be clearly identified as such. Closely tied to that is it needs not to become a mouthpiece for anyone at State with an agenda that may, or may not, be in accord with Department of State policies. I'm thinking political appointees, of course, though I suppose senior professional career folks sometimes have their own private agendas.

But as an ordinary American citizen who has had the pleasure of becoming acquainted with a few American diplomats during my years in China and Thailand, I find this a refreshing place to get the benefit of insights from folks on the ground reporting what they're seeing and experiencing, such as in Burma now. I fully recognize that Ambassadors are expected to toe the official line (career or political appointee), but people on down the pay scale can more open and individual in passing along their experiences and interpretations of them (and need to be allowed to do so, free of meddling by any superior, so long as secret or other confidential information isn't blogged to the universe).

Heck, I'd like to see all major departments of every branch of government set up blogs such as this one.

You've got support from this reader.

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Charles in Denmark writes:
Was just wondering if folks on the Saudi desk have seen "Kingdom" and, if so, what they thought of it personally...

Posted on Mon Oct 08, 2007

Bill in Michigan writes:
Change the name... Already the blogosphere is giggling with "DipNote... What? Dip****s writing notes?"

The dictionary definition doesn't matter, it's too obscure, the 'insider' jargon rationale is not going to cover it, "Dipnote" is just... poor.

It sounds like a playground pejorative

"What a pack of DipNotes."

Posted on Fri Oct 05, 2007

Jon in Illinois writes:
Please do something about the communists in Laos. They are persecuting Christians, destroying resources, depriving their own people of basic human rights. They are far more brutal than the Burmese regime.

Posted on Fri Oct 05, 2007

Paul in North Carolina writes:
I would like to call attention to the plight of thousands of children in Guatemala. They are orphans, (for whatever reason), they have American families that are currently trying to bring them into their families, but they are under fire. These are children, just as my own, that have loving American families. Please try to intercede on their behalf. Without support from our Dept of State, the Guatemalan government may not allow these in-process cases to complete their adoptions.

Adoptions as a whole are very debatable. Some believe it is a blessing, while others think it is socially degrading. The debate over adoption is not what is at stake here. At this point, the lives of the children left behind are. Surely one can see the horrible future these children face without the opportunity of completing their adoptions. They will be forgotten by a country that is ill equipped to care for them at this point. The families that entered into these contracts did so in good faith with a system that at the time was current and very much open to adoptions. They should not be allowed to close the door on these cases. They have no plan on what to do from here. They have taken the step to close adoptions, but now what? What do they do with the thousands they have left in their wake? THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE DEALT WITH TODAY! The time is crucial...laws are being made that will effect thousands and the ripple effect will be devastating. Please help!

Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

Carolyn in Indiana writes:
Thank you Mr. McCormack on your efforts. As an average U.S. mom of teenagers who are just becoming interested in our government's policies and procedures, this site reaches them on their terms. My question as a concerned parent is this: Do you monitor comments for appropriateness and accuracy prior to posting them? Especially if statements appear to be stated as fact rather than opinion? Also - ditto on the title "Dipnote" - I laughed when I first read it before I read your "Jargon" definition.

State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack writes:
@ Carolyn in Indiana -- Carolyn, we don't allow coments or posts containing profanity, and we encourage civil discourse. But we do not filter comments for criticism. I view the blog as a community where we can read criticism, encouragement and everything in between. As for fact vs. opinion, we do check statements in posts presented as fact. That said, I'm sure you will find comments disagreeing with a "fact", and I encourage any visitor to the space to read all content with a critical eye. I also want to see conversation, so share your thoughts, ideas, and opinions.

Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

Ryan in Wisconsin writes:
So how is this going to be more than just a series of press releases or a vehicle to put a smooth gloss over poor policy choices?

How about this: allow State Department employees to blog about their lives anonymously and without being edited. For example, they could discuss life inside State, the lovely people they get to know on their travels, their disagreements with poor policy coming from the top, self-photos taken at weird angles, etc. that is, something authentic, not manufactured to soothe a public that is smarter than you guys think.

Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

Thomas in Pennsylvania writes:
This is an interesting effort in public diplomacy. Were I to be organizing the blogging efforts of the State Department (DoS) I would likely stand up three separate blogs, a world affairs blog, a State Department inside view blog, and a blog about DoS careers.

The world affairs blog would allow DoS to post information on international affairs and US Government initiatives related to those affairs. It would be the place where the DoS could present the government stance in simple, understandable language and get feedback from citizens from around the world. It would also be where much of the often fractious debate of the "should's" and "should not's" of those issues could occur. Having real dialogue between DoS officials and both opponents and proponents of US policy would be of benefit to all involved.

The DoS Insider would be a window on the day to day activities and efforts of the DoS to represent the interests of the US in the world. Helping us understand you is a great way for people to realize the human stories behind the headlines and more particularly the efforts that never make the news.

The final blog would concentrate on DoS careers, what they are really like, and how a person can work for the DoS. The Careers pages on the DoS website give a basic view, but from the numbers of unofficial groups that spring up around the Foreign Service Exam and similar matters, having an official place to go for discussion, with input from people within the DoS would be very useful. As one might guess I am interested in a Foreign Service career and am particularly interested in the uses of new media for public diplomacy efforts.

I look forward to seeing more of this blog.

PS: Alternate name suggestions -- State of the Department, Diplomacy Insider, State Talk, or DiplomacyOnline

Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

Athena in California writes:
Regardless of the definition of "dipnote" - it's a very stupid name for a government blog. Blog = good idea. Blog name = very bad idea.

Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

Bert in Oregon writes:
Diplomacy was once defined as 'the fine art of telling someone to go to hell in such a way that they actually look forward to the trip'. Any chance you guys will end up telling this administration and their runway fraudulent war 'budgeting' to go to hell? What's your position on throwing away billions if not trillions of promissory tax revenue on trying to 'solve' other countries' problems, instead of getting to the heart of the matter and pursuing energy independence as one example for our country, which would likely solve a lot of the frictions we keep reading about over and over in the news, where this or that country has people fighting and killing each other over an oil well? I'd 10 times rather see the USA become a world science leader and start pushing for REAL progress in this area, because China will pick up on what we're doing, and then the innovations can propagate that way. I think it'd be WAY better for us to promote whirled peas with real technological advancements that'll ultimately also liberate taxpayers from having to pay for the next Operation Dubious Boondoggle to the tune of 900 billion or whatever.

Greenspan himself finally copped to the fact that the Iraq war is primarily about oil. What's YOUR take on that?
Thank you.

Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

Martin in California writes:
On April 8th, 2006, after Venezuelans on motorcycles threw bananas at Ambassador Brownfield's car in Caracas, you said that America would not be intimidated, and our response would be "asymmetric". Was that the fashionable word of the moment, or were you thinking of bombing somebody?


Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

Emilie in China writes:
I'm very interested in this blog and will follow its development. Thank you.

Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

Emilie in China writes:
I'm very interested in this blog and will follow its development.

Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack writes:
As Fred [Dipnote Blogger Frederick Jones] posted earlier, expect to see a couple of changes that will make the blog easier to read. Heath [Dipnote Blogger Heath Kern] showed me today the changes she has in mind. Let us know what you think once we've made the changes.

I've noticed a few comments saying we need to address more of the pressing policy issues of the day. I agree, and we are working to offer more posts on topics you want to discuss. I'll post something about our Iran policy in the next day or so.

@ Tek in California -- I've posted a couple of times on Blackwater and expect that I will continue to do so as the various reviews and investigations about Blackwater continue. The State Department is involved in three separate reviews/investigations involving Blackwater in some way. There is an investigation into the September 16th incident, which is being led at this point by our Diplomatic Security service. The FBI is assisting in the investigation, but we are also open to their playing an even more significant role in the investigation. We have a joint U.S.-Iraqi review of personal security contractor operations in Iraq, which would include Blackwater's operations.

We also have a team on the ground taking a big picture look at the operations of security contractor operations in Iraq. Secretary Rice will be looking to the leaders of this review for their recommendations about every aspect of how we protect our diplomats in Iraq. She will get an initial interim report from Pat Kennedy on Friday, and I expect Pat will also have an initial recommendation for action by Friday.

Other parts of the government (read the Department of Justice) have responsibility to take over investigations if they believe a criminal act may have been committed.

One final thought. Let's not loose sight of a bedrock American idea that one is innocent until proven guilty. It applies in court and we might extend the idea when we talk about the September 16th investigation. I don't want anybody to escape punishment if they violated the rules or broke the law. I also don't want to see lives ruined and reputations tarnished just because we couldn't wait for an investigation to be completed. Both the victims and those being investigated deserve a careful examination of September 16th's event, so you won't hear me passing judgment until all the facts are in.

Posted on Thu Oct 04, 2007

Tom in Colorado writes:
Dipnote... how appropriate. Arcane, self-serving and smug. I guess those of us outside of the beltway should strive to find the inside humor here. And, until your absolutely stupid, third-rate presentation made it obvious, I was assuming the "Dip" meant the entire State Department! Maybe it's only your web designer.

Posted on Wed Oct 03, 2007

Keith in Oregon writes:
This is really quite amazing. Maybe someone will actually listen.

There is a bit of irony in the State Department starting a blog since it has apparently disengaged from diplomacy on so many other issues.

I understand we live in a different world since 9/11 but the principle of logic should still hold true. In this day and age of security at any cost, why is the United States the leading exporter of weapons to poor and developing nations?

It can make a person question the very basis of democracy. Putin made a snide comment along these lines using Iraq as an example. Who would want democracy if it means 1/3rd of its citizens are to be killed, maimed, or displaced?

It could have gone so much better if we left our arrogance at the border before invading. Our arrogance is still hurting us. Arrogance is just another name for vanity, which is a sin. Would it have killed us to reinforce the dignity of the people of Iraq?

You know and I know that we are not going to attack Iran. An attack would not lead to a revolt of its citizens, it would harden the citizens of Iran against the U.S. They would rally around the flag much as we did after 9/11. Iran can retaliate in so many different ways, some of which could lead to severe economic hardships for us, that I'm sure even the most supremely arrogant members of our administration would not consider an attack on them when we most likely can just talk to them instead.

There are other considerations too. What about Russia? They would have to seriously take a look at things and could only come to one conclusion: with us engaged in Iraq and Iran, they would never find a more opportune time to roll up Afghanistan and elsewhere for themselves. China would be a wild card.

There are so many dangerous possibilities that it would be reckless folly on our part to even consider it. It's the kind of thing that could lead to nuclear war and would make us the most evil nation ever to exist.

We must get back to the high road. It is State Department's job to insist on trying something that has never been tried before in place of war: instead of cluster bombs and cruise missiles, we should drop reclining leather chairs, digital cable TV, and bags of Doritos on their heads and turn them into a bunch of fat and lazy consumers just like ourselves.

Posted on Wed Oct 03, 2007

Page 2 of 3 pages  <  1 2 3 Next