But I think I'll have to re-read it to get all the details. With a pen and paper to jot down all the names and connections.

I think readability would be enhanced greatly if this diary were split in three parts: One about the ideological foundations of neoconservatism, one about how Chalabi exploited the Bay of Pigs Syndrome to snooker the US intelligence agencies and one about Litvinenko et al. Possibly also a fourth part about the "flex players" and "private security contractors" - no, let's not mince words here, private militias operating outside the rule of law - that have sprung up in The West(TM) in the last few decades.

As an aside, I am not sure that I agree with the conclusion that the neocons are ideologically motivated. It seems to me that a simpler explanation which would also fit all available information is that they are simply sociopathic thugs motivated by personal enrichment and power. When people make naked grabs for power and wealth, I don't think you need any ideology to explain their behaviour.

And the lobotomisation of the intelligence community, while consistent with ideological motivations is also consistent with a consolidation of personal power: By filling up the CIA with apparatchiks, they rendered a formerly quasi-independent power centre subservient to them.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.