Author Archives: Barry Kelly

About Barry Kelly

Author of "Justice Beyond Law," "Justice Without Mercy," "Shades of Justice," "Justice Without Mercy," and "Run to Freedom," as well as two ,"nonfiction books ,"INSIGHTS-The Transforming of America," and "INSIGHTS-Stepping Stones to Tyranny. He also is the author of the blog "8 Decades of Insights." Barry Kelly is no stranger to the world of espionage, counter-terrorism, weapons, deep cover, and the inner workings of the governmental security apparatus. His immersion in the Cold War began with enlistment in the U.S. Navy during the Korean War. Following his discharge, he earned a BA from the University of Pittsburgh and a master’s degree from Duke. His career in the CIA included deep cover operations and overseas experience, primarily in South and Southeast Asia. He has been awarded the Certificate of Merit with Distinction, the Intelligence Medal of Merit, the Cross of Gallantry with Silver Star, the Distinguished Intelligence Medal and the Intelligence Officer of the Year Award. After retiring from the CIA, Kelly served as a special assistant to President Reagan. He holds a first dan black belt in hap-ki-do. Visit www.factsandfictions.com or find the author on Facebook.

by Barry Kelly | April 26, 2017 · 4:44 pm

The Professor and Saving the Democrats

“Are you all ready for the summer break? Next year you will all be sophomores. I am very pleased with this class. Because of you, I have agreed to teach this honors class for two more years. If you can put up with me, we will have more time together. Starting with Paul, please go around the table and tell us very concisely what you plan to do for the summer and what are you planning to do after graduation.”

In less than ten minutes everyone had responded to the Professor’s request. The Professor leaned back in his chair and said, “All your responses are worth more comments but with the time available, I’m going to focus on Carlos’s statement. Carlos, you said you wanted to work within the Democratic Party organization after graduation. Why did you pick that as a career choice?”

“My family and all our friends have always been Democrats. No one in the family can even remember anyone in the joint family who joined the Republican Party. When we needed something, or had a complaint, we always took it to our Democratic party contact. I grew up in a small town in Western Pennsylvania. My grandparents on both sides worked in the mills or mines. They were all union members. They would tell us stories of how tough life had been when the Republican Party was dominant and cautioned us to never let them takeover political power again.”

The Professor said, “Yes. I’m old enough to know how things were then. The base of both political parties often goes back for several generations. This last election I think is the beginning of new political alliances. The Republicans running on a populist and nationalist platform made serious inroads into working class communities. The political map today is very different.”

“Professor,” Carlos asked, “Will you give me some advice in getting started?”

“I assume you goal is to bring the Democratic Party back to its traditional place of power with working class citizens. To begin you must understand what caused this sudden and dramatic change. The Democratic Party of your parents and grandparents was the voice of the working people. It was a center and slightly left of center party. With exception of the intellectuals in the party, the rank and file were definitely not socialists and were not apologists for American power and uniqueness. Under Barack Obama and the Progressives, the Democratic Party swung rapidly to become the very left-wing of the American political world.

“During his eight years in power, the Progressives took over the party with a strong socialist and internationalist ideology. The welfare of the working-class families was ignored in favor of destroying the opposition political party and America’s economic and military power. The Progressives knowingly turned away from American working and middle-class traditions and heritage in favor of socialist principles.

“They did this very abruptly and successfully. Their globalization priorities overrode America first responsibilities. Jobs, decent pay with good working conditions and benefits were no longer the top priority. Control of the media and education using class warfare rhetoric to replace the traditional working class goals of improving the status of the family via education and hard work. Every parent wanted life to be better for their children than it was for them. If you look at the leaders of the Democratic Party today, it will show a clear dramatic move to the left. One of the heroes of the party today is a declared Socialist who is not even registered as a Democrat. It will be a long way back and that journey is not for the faint hearted.

“Carlos, my advice is to begin working this summer as a low-level party volunteer in a role that gives you daily contact with people and party officials. Watch, learn and do not offer much advice to your superiors. Keep good notes, make numerous contacts, pick a catchy subject and use your writing and analytic skills to get published. Once you have established your credibility you can move up the party ladder at the next opportunity. Take advantage of every speaking opportunity. Get comfortable with yourself. You have chosen a hard and nearly thankless path. But it needs done. I don’t think you or anyone will be able to bring the Democratic Party back to the point your parents will recognize it, but you may be part of the task of saving what can be saved to form the foundation of a new party.”

You can sign up to receive these blog posts via email by subscribing at www.factsandfictions.com.

Leave a comment

Filed under Barry Kelly, class warfare, Conservative views, democrats, Eight Decades of Insights, Intelligence & Politics, Politics, Progressives, Republicans

by Barry Kelly | April 24, 2017 · 2:13 pm

The Professor: Freedom and Two-Party Government

The class was halfway over and the momentum of the discussion was slowing when Alison asked, “Professor, if everything is political, how much does the viability of our system of government depend on the existence of two or more political parties?”

“Good question and one that is outside the ‘box.’ People create and join with a group of like-minded citizens to be able to push their political and social beliefs. Without such ‘parties’ it is hard to see how a democracy could exist. The alternative is clearly an autocratic dictatorship or single party led by an elite group. Recent and current communist and socialist governments fit this template. The other possibility is a utopian plan such as the utopian agrarian parties common in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The utopian parties, with their roots in European socialist philosophy, all failed for the same reason, the lack of an authority to motivate members to follow the rules, written or unwritten.

“The Socialist and Communist governments fixed this problem by establishing a one party ruling elite with strong coercive powers. They all failed due to over centralization and harsh penalties for those who have the courage to dissent. The combination of centralized control leading to a falling standard of living and increasing political repression eventually bring the people to revolt.

“Enough background. American democracy needs a political arena of more than one party. A one-party system has always led to a loss of freedom regardless of the political ideology of the ruling party. During your lifetime, you will face a continued struggle between the Progressive Party and its conservative opposition. It sounds theoretical, but it is very real. The Progressive Party has swallowed the Democratic Party. It exists only in name. In the last national election, more than 50% of the voters voted for the Progressive Party. Only the Electoral College system established in the Constitution kept the Progressives under Hillary Clinton from winning the White House.

“The Progressives owe their name and political program ideology to Saul Alinsky, a brilliant American Socialist, who had a defining impact on both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. He, too, was a Community Organizer in Chicago. The Progressive ideology is to use any means available to destroy the opposition and seize power to redistribute individual and national wealth using the power of a single party government. In the process of destroying the opposition political party, it was first necessary to destroy American economic and military power. President Obama, I believe, made an impressive start to destroying American uniqueness and the faith the citizens have in their government. The entire Civil Service now has a questionable first and second tier leadership.

“The next four to eight years of leadership is critical. We were close to the tipping point and unless the media reverts to reporting all the news and the conservative leadership becomes far better at getting its message to all Americans, freedom of choice of the individual will be lost. Pick your side. There can be no fence siting.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Alinsky, Barry Kelly, centralization, Clinton, Conservative views, democrats, Intelligence & Politics, Obama, Progressives

by Barry Kelly | April 17, 2017 · 4:53 pm

The Professor and White House Information Flow

The Professor thought teaching political science at the honors level in the first 100 days of the Trump Administration is more demanding than I remember at any period in the past. Foreign policy, military operations, domestic legislative crisis with healthcare and tax reform. Now we have critics clamoring for more information regarding the President’s plans and intentions in Syria, North Korea and Afghanistan. In addition, the political talking heads are ranting about control of information in the White House. They are all showing they know not what they are mumbling about. But I must write a short note to my students. It will be three days before the next class.

Not to worry class this is only a few thoughts on the by-play of people who should know better. Recently former officials and socialist critics of the current Administration have been raving about the need to have one person in charge of information in the White House. Unless they mean the President and, they don’t, this is an exceedingly dumb and dangerous idea. President Trump maintains personal contact with the outside world, both foreign and domestic, better than any other president in my life time. The office of the President can be and very often is a very isolated position. While it may be difficult to get to the President, it is hard for him to develop and maintain multiple points of access.

If one person controls information flow in the White House, he or she can control the President and have an undue influence on presidential actions. The gate-keeper of the Oval Office can be a very powerful position. So, when you find yourself as a player in presidential politics in a few years, resist the efforts of the former players to control the flow of information in the White House. If the people have elected the right person, that person will be in charge.

My second concern is also directly related to information flow. The President’s opponents in both parties believe they are entitled to a complete plan on everything he has done or is planning to do. ‘Why doesn’t he give us his complete plans for dealing with North Korea, Syria, Russia and others? We in Congress or in the party of opposition deserve to know. It is our right!

No! It isn’t. You do not have the right. Only those with a legal need-to-know the information on a case-by-case basis have that right. While Obama ranted on about his military and foreign policy objectives, he never seemed to realize, or more likely to care, that you cannot tell most of the nation without telling the enemy in the process. For example, a far left socialist Senator demanded to know what foreign policy objective the President was trying to achieve with the cruise missile attack on a Syrian military airfield. How about the message, ‘if you use chemical weapons, again bad things will happen to you?’ Or to ISIS and the Taliban in Afghanistan. ‘You are no longer safe in caves or tunnels.’ Talking heads, journalist, media anchors on the left and right, senators and congressmen, repress your constant whining about being briefed in greater detail. It won’t make you any smarter or help you serve the people. The only measurable result will be giving our enemies a better chance of getting our secrets.

What’s is wrong with short policy statements like destroying ISIS, stopping North Korea and Iran from developing nuclear weapons they can deliver to America, pushing NATO members to pay their obligated military investments, reduce funding to the UN, protect our borders, renew our traditional relationships with Sunni Arabs, standby Israel, pressure Russia to stop its aggressive acquisition of territory from other sovereign nations, and get better foreign trade deals?

What was the George Kennan policy during the Cold War? A single word, Containment. How, is what was done in secret with a strict need-to-know.

1 Comment

Filed under Afghanistan, Barry Kelly, Conservative views, foreign policy, General, Intelligence & Politics, Iran, ISIS

by Barry Kelly | April 15, 2017 · 2:39 pm

The Professor and the Art of Governing

Two more days of taking these damn pills, mused the professor as he waited for the students of his honors seminar to arrive and settle down. At least I’m feeling better. A lung infection at my age is not a good thing. Today I’ll give my students something to think about in the world of governing, political commentary, and the royal opposition.

“Good Morning class. Today, I’ll do the work. After all, you are paying outrageous tuition to attend this university. So, this over-paid professor will try to earn his paycheck. I’ve been encouraging you to learn how to identify, approach, and solve problems. But problem solving is not done in a vacuum. It plays out against a backdrop of the requirements of governing.

“We’ve elected a president who is not an ideologue. At his core, he is a pragmatist who is very much at home identifying and solving problems. In his world, past and present, wins are counted by the number of problems that were successful solved. By solved I mean problems where the primary parties walked away feeling they had gotten as much as they could from the negotiations. That doesn’t mean they won or lost. It means the solution to the problem is acceptable to their group, even if it was difficult for all of them to swallow the agreed upon solution.

“The process of governing demands the needs of the citizens be met as well as the resources available allow. At the center of nearly all solutions to problem solving in the national arena is the question of the existence and allocation of resources. A solution without the required resources, is no solution. That is why the big problems of health care and tax reform have, so far, proved to be elusive. President Trump is probably one of the best problem solvers in the country with decades of experience. But he is now working on problems that are far beyond the scale of problems that he has worked on outside the process of national governing.

“What his critics call ‘flip-flopping’ should be labeled reconsidering based on new facts and/or failed approaches. The President calls this flexibility and I can accept that terminology. Only ideologues stick with the same solution even when it has not worked or revealed several flaws in application. Changing your mind in the face of failure or new data is a very rational approach. His liberal critics don’t accept a conservative leader changing his mind. After all he said very different things on the campaign trail and now he is flip-flopping. Pragmatists look at such comments and can’t believe what they are hearing. The art of governing depends on leaders who can react to new information or the changing nature of the problem. Only hard over ideologues, of the left or right, and members of the media who need to find provocative comments to improve the size of their audience believe in raising alarm over leaders who react rationally to changing facts and environments.

“The Art of Governing requires leaders who can quickly adapt to changes and who do not feel they are bound by comments and positions they have taken in the past.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Barry Kelly, Conservative views, Intelligence & Politics

by Barry Kelly | April 10, 2017 · 9:35 am

The Professor, Syria, and cruise missiles

The Professor liked to walk up the two flights of stairs to his office and adjoining classroom. He had used the elevator for the last month but feeling stronger today he took the stairs. At the top, he had to stop for a few minutes to catch his breath. Certainly, didn’t want to walk into his class until he could say a hearty ‘good morning’ to his honors students.

The students were all seated and talking about the airstrike on a Syrian airport used in a sarin gas attack a few days ago when he entered.

“Well, I see you are all into current affairs. With a little luck and hard work some of you will be part of future discussions and planning that go deciding to use lethal action in support of national subjects.

“Let’s continue with the discussion. Edward, what is your take on the president’s decision?”

“After seeing the images of the gas attack victims, I don’t see how President Trump could continue with his predecessor’s example of non-involvement or leading from behind. Strong words were not going to prevent Assad from committing more atrocities that are clearly war crimes or crimes against humanity. Add to that the fact that Assad and the Russians signed an agreement that guaranteed Syrian stocks of poison gas would be destroyed and a few days ago Russian supplied planes dropped poison gas bombs on civilian targets. That signed agreement turned out to be false and some decisive action had to be taken. Obviously, both the Syrians and Russians knew about the poison gas attack and didn’t believe there would be an American military response. I fully support the cruise missile attack.”

Several hands went up, and the Professor said, “Who wants to present a different argument? Okay Carlos, the floor is yours.”

“I don’t believe the Trump national security team was thinking beyond the mechanics of the airstrike. What happens now? Do they know what the Russians or Syrians will do in response? I don’t think so. Putin is not likely to give up his warm-water sea port at Tartus. Getting an ice-free sea port for their war ships has been a Russian national security objective for a few centuries. He will take more chances to keep Tartus. After all, he believes he is Russia’s latest czar.”

“Whose wants to go next? Alice, you’re up.”

“I want to put this airstrike in a larger context. For eight years, America has perfected the use of words in place of actions. Our military has been severely underfunded. Our traditional allies don’t trust us to break out of our isolation. What’s worse, our enemies no longer respect us. We can be good at the use of diplomacy but without the resolve to use force when necessary, diplomacy is ineffective. North Korea, China, Russia, and Iran do not believe we have the will to use military force. The cruise missile strike last night has changed the rules. Our enemies must reconsider their aggressive actions and our allies can take heart that we now have competent leadership who will protect American national interests. Was it not noted that powerful Sunni Arab leaders came for a visit and went away with new hope for American backing against Iran? Do you not think those fearful of Russian and Chinese aggressive actions now have new hope that America will again be a force for peace?”

The Professor smiled at Alice’s comments then said, “Divide yourselves into two groups, one pro the cruise missile strike and one against. I’ll give you ten minutes to get organized for the team debate. I know from personal experience that people like us can’t function without fresh strong coffee. While you’re sorting yourselves into opposing groups, I’ll arrange for coffee and doughnuts.”

You can sign up to receive Barry Kelly’s blog posts via email by subscribing atwww.factsandfictions.com