web analytics

Government & The Sociopathic Business Model™

By Melayna Lokosky
Apr 14th, 2014
0 Comments
1033 Views

ScoobyDooRuhRoh final

The text for the body of the article is directly from techdirt (where the full article can be read) but for our purposes we’re gathering data from this article  so that we can start to create a working Case Study. Let’s first start with the basics:

The Sociopathic Business Model ™ suggests:

Corporations* are operating more like corrupt monarchies,

where illegal behavior is encouraged, replicated and rewarded.

King (CEO) demands loyal subjects (employees) do as they’re told

(even if it’s illegal, especially if it’s illegal)

or it’s off with their heads!

*For this exercise think of the government as a corporation and the CEO is The President.  This could work with any former President so remember this is not political it’s showing a pattern that is entrenched in business and government so that we can quickly identify, remove and create positive change. Watch for language or actions  that are inconsistent and contradictory as starting point. 

The SBM with Logo finalSenator Chuck Grassley appears to have a bit of a double standard with his staunch support for whistleblowers when it comes to Edward Snowden, it is true that he has fought for real whistleblower protections for quite some time (1). Lately, he’s been quite concerned that the White House’s “Insider Threat Program” (ITP) is really just a cover to crack down on whistleblowers (2). Despite early promises from the Obama administration to support and protect whistleblowers, the administration has led the largest crackdown against whistleblowers, and the ITP suggests that the attack on whistleblowers is a calculated response.

For this exercise:

Senator Chuck Grassley=Employee

FBI=Employee

Government/White House=Employer:

-(1) The double standard is inconsistent and contradictory in both language and actions.

- (2) Employee Grassley is challenging his employer (government/White House)

The program documentation argues that any leak can be seen as “aiding the enemy” and encourages government employees to snitch on each other if they appear too concerned about government wrong-doing. Despite all his high minded talk of supporting whistleblowers, President Obama has used the Espionage Act against whistleblowers twice as many times as all other Presidents combined. Also, he has never — not once — praised someone for blowing the whistle in the federal government.

Employer:

-Manipulates does not recognize the rights of others

-Views employees as accomplices ( whistleblowers, Grassley and FBI) who will all become eventual victims 

-Creates hopelessness in victim

-Creates an unhappy and unproductive work environment

Given all of that, Senator Grassley expressed some concern about this Insider Threat Program and how it distinguished whistleblowers from actual threats. He asked the FBI for copies of its training manual on the program, which it refused to give him. Instead, it said it could better answer any questions at a hearing. However, as Grassley explains, when questioned about this just 10 minutes into the hearing, the FBI abruptly got up and left:

Employer uses FBI as accomplice and Grassley is now a victim

-Verbal Outbursts

-Poor behavioral controls

-Irresponsible

-Demeaning and Insulting

-Rarely challenged and prefers to work that way

Meanwhile, the FBI fiercely resists any efforts at Congressional oversight, especially on whistleblower matters. For example, four months ago I sent a letter to the FBI requesting its training materials on the Insider Threat Program. This program was announced by the Obama Administration in October 2011. It was intended to train federal employees to watch out for insider threats among their colleagues. Public news reports indicated that this program might not do enough to distinguish between true insider threats and legitimate whistleblowers. I relayed these concerns in my letter. I also asked for copies of the training materials. I said I wanted to examine whether they adequately distinguished between insider threats and whistleblowers.

In response, an FBI legislative affairs official told my staff that a briefing might be the best way to answer my questions. It was scheduled for last week. Staff for both Chairman Leahy and I attended, and the FBI brought the head of their Insider Threat Program. Yet the FBI didn’t bring the Insider Threat training materials as we had requested. However, the head of the Insider Threat Program told the staff that there was no need to worry about whistleblower communications. He said whistleblowers have to register in order to be protected, and the Insider Threat Program would know to just avoid those people.

Now I have never heard of whistleblowers being required to “register” in order to be protected. The idea of such a requirement should be pretty alarming to all Americans. Sometimes confidentiality is the best protection a whistleblower has. Unfortunately, neither my staff nor Chairman Leahy’s staff was able to learn more, because only about ten minutes into the briefing, the FBI abruptly walked out. FBI officials simply refused to discuss any whistleblower implications in its Insider Threat Program and left the room. These are clearly not the actions of an agency that is genuinely open to whistleblowers or whistleblower protection. 

-Manipulating does not recognize the rights of others

- Inconsistent and contradictory

-Demeaning and insulting

-Pathological lying

-Lack of shame or remorse

-Lack of accountability

-Creates hopelessness in the victim

-Creates an unhappy and unproductive work environment

-Motivation through fear

-Rarely challenged and prefers to work that way

-Bullies

There is more than enough evidence to support that the government in this situation is operating under The Sociopathic Business Model ™ and we can learn from this Case Study and probably predict a few things as well:

1.  All accomplices will eventually become victims (The FBI will be an eventual victim-blame will be placed here or worse).  Fact based evidence over time is the best predictor of the future.

2.  Grassley will be insulted and undermined until he is removed from the system for trying to expose the truth which could damage the image of the Government.  Remember the way to beat The Sociopathic Business Model ™ is to expose the truth and the fear of the facts possibly damaging the reputation may bring about positive change. Unless of course Grassley hears off with his head before all the facts are exposed.

Updated:  It was announed today that The Gardian US and The Washington Post were both awarded Pulitzer Prizes for their public service on the coverage of secret surveillance by the U.S. National Security Agency. Their reporting was based on documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who revealed details of global electronic surveillance by the U.S. spy agency.   Since Sen. Grassley has been getting the Edward Snowden treatment from the FBI and today’s announcement demolished the idea that Edward Snowedn was a traitor Sen. Grassley may change his tune as well.

 

 

 

Add Comment Register



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

facebook comments: