Speaker 1: Hey guys, it's Jack.
Speaker 2: I just wanted to talk to you today about a
Speaker 2: way that you can help support the podcast if you're
Speaker 2: not already to support the channel is to become a
Speaker 2: Patreon member. So we have Patreon memberships that started just
Speaker 2: five dollars a month, and when you sign up, you
Speaker 2: get access to all of our episodes add free. That's
Speaker 2: the big bonus for that. I mean, we also do
Speaker 2: some Patreon bonus episodes for our subscribers, but this is
Speaker 2: the biggest and best way that you can support the
Speaker 2: Teamhouse channel and podcast if you'd like to, and we
Speaker 2: really appreciate that, So go and check us out at
Speaker 2: patreon dot com slash the Teamhouse.
Speaker 3: Hello everyone, welcome to another episode of Iizon and I'm
Speaker 3: going to jump right to the chase. We've got Jack
Speaker 3: back on along with the customary in Criminals, both the
Speaker 3: d and Jason. Jack welcome aboard. I'm not going to
Speaker 3: use up your star space here by blabbing, So talk
Speaker 3: to us, man. What do you what are your thoughts?
Speaker 1: My thought what like about life?
Speaker 3: Or yeah this is your arena?
Speaker 4: Jack, what do you think about the state of masculinity
Speaker 4: in the United States today?
Speaker 2: You know, Okay, you're talking to that's the wrong Jack Murphy.
Speaker 2: You need to go talk to the other guy, that's
Speaker 2: and he'll help you out with that.
Speaker 3: I forgot we had d on the show. Okay. Let's yeah,
Speaker 3: I mean, let's start with current affairs. You know, yes, Saurah,
Speaker 3: Mick and Mark on recently you know, events in the
Speaker 3: the least.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I mean all of you guys have
Speaker 2: seen what's going on in the papers, and you know
Speaker 2: I follow it too, and you know, my, my, my
Speaker 2: thought about it is that there are, yes, some like
Speaker 2: really impressive operations that the Israelis have pulled off over
Speaker 2: the last month or so. Definitely did a lot of
Speaker 2: disruption of terror now works, definitely took some chess pieces
Speaker 2: off the board and set has Belah back probably at
Speaker 2: least a few years. And all that is is quite impressive.
Speaker 2: But on the other hand, I also can't help but
Speaker 2: think about the War on Terror and that we did
Speaker 2: that for twenty years and still lost the war. At
Speaker 2: least we lost in Afghanistan, in Iraq. I mean, we
Speaker 2: protected America thankfully, But.
Speaker 1: That's that's. Yeah. If you don't have.
Speaker 3: Any political the problem remains.
Speaker 2: Yeah, if you don't have a political solution that you're
Speaker 2: aiming towards, that there's a there has to be a
Speaker 2: political resolution to the conflict. Then I mean, you keep
Speaker 2: killing people all day, every day. And the Israelis have
Speaker 2: experienced this too. I'm not telling them anything they don't
Speaker 2: already know. You know, they've been down this road many times.
Speaker 2: And I mean, maybe you know it sounds crass, but
Speaker 2: I mean maybe it really is just a delaying strategy
Speaker 2: and like, you know, we're trying to delay this a
Speaker 2: few more years until hopefully a political resolution presents itself,
Speaker 2: because otherwise it doesn't seem like they really have like
Speaker 2: a long term strategy here. And I hear all of
Speaker 2: these people kind of talking out their ass about how
Speaker 2: like Hezbollah is finished, They're done, this is over, Like no, no, no,
Speaker 2: this is not over. This is the this is the beginning,
Speaker 2: not the end.
Speaker 3: Yes, the taken taken individually, I mean, these these moves
Speaker 3: have been have have certainly been debilitating, the kind of
Speaker 3: interesting and as the story emerges on, you know, both
Speaker 3: the Patrio attack and Walkie Tolkah attack and then the
Speaker 3: subsequent assassinations going off to the headquarters there in Beirut, it.
Speaker 3: It seems that this wasn't so much part of the
Speaker 3: widest strategy as kind of uh long targetsubupit tunity. You know,
Speaker 3: they had been targets of opportunity for a while, but
Speaker 3: now seemed like the right opportunity combined. But the real
Speaker 3: kicker here, I think, and this is why everyone is
Speaker 3: obviously on the edge of their seat the invasion part.
Speaker 3: The incursion part was the really controversial part. You know,
Speaker 3: the Nettan Yahoo's generals had offered, had argued the separately
Speaker 3: for it back in October. We're perhaps less confident now,
Speaker 3: but did did push for an incursion using just special
Speaker 3: operations forces? But to your point, at some point they
Speaker 3: have to withdraw.
Speaker 2: Right I mean that, Yeah, this happened in what nineteen
Speaker 2: eighty three and then again in two thousand and six.
Speaker 3: I recall, yep, yeah, this will be the third Lebanon War.
Speaker 3: And of course, and of course Israel has a very
Speaker 3: painful lega see from the eighty two through two thousand one,
Speaker 3: two thousand and two invasion, and you know, it was
Speaker 3: kind of their Vietnam and it was and it was
Speaker 3: the first time Israel was was shown in the role
Speaker 3: of Goliath rather than David. But anyway, I'm sorry, lot,
Speaker 3: but but my point is, ah, yeah, I agree with
Speaker 3: you one hundred percent. And and the real, the real
Speaker 3: sensitive part is the withdrawal, Right, what happens after you
Speaker 3: because you've got to you either stay either an occupy
Speaker 3: or you withdraw these guys the and and that is
Speaker 3: what what is left behind is going to be the
Speaker 3: tough part. Israelis don't you know, they don't believe in
Speaker 3: and clear and hold and build the way we do.
Speaker 3: They you know, they clear, and they rely, they clear,
Speaker 3: they hold briefly in their ally on other people to
Speaker 3: come in and build afterwards. And and that I think
Speaker 3: is the opportunity for the you know, hate say international community,
Speaker 3: but it really is. To your point, his ballers hold
Speaker 3: on Lebanon has been weakened significantly for the first time
Speaker 3: perhaps in a couple of decades. This would perhaps be
Speaker 3: the time to finally enforce you know, UN resolution seventeen
Speaker 3: oh what is it, seventeen oh one? I think, yeah,
Speaker 3: finally right, And and for the Lebanese government to to
Speaker 3: kind of get a grip and move ahead as an
Speaker 3: independent sovereign entity free of his pot you know, this
Speaker 3: sounds naive, but my point is this is the only opportunity,
Speaker 3: the greatest opportunity Lebanon the international community has had, and
Speaker 3: Israel's not going to follow. You know, Israel's not going
Speaker 3: to build this. We us international community should be ready
Speaker 3: to otherwise. Otherwise it's a third Lebanon War, and there's
Speaker 3: going to be a fourth, and a fifth and a sixth.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Unfortunately, my view at the moment leans towards the latter option.
Speaker 2: But like I said, this isn't the end, it's the beginning.
Speaker 3: And we haven't even talked about the relatives of the
Speaker 3: forty thousand or so casualties in Gaza. You know, they
Speaker 3: that that's the one thing that we sometimes forget, we
Speaker 3: don't factor in an encounterinsurgency, is that we're not you know,
Speaker 3: we're not dealing with statistics. We're dealing with human beings.
Speaker 3: And for every dead person who is a family member,
Speaker 3: there are there are waves of anger and retribution. We
Speaker 3: mirror image in other ways, but we don't mirror image
Speaker 3: our enemy or the civilian population and that way and
Speaker 3: realize the depth of anger that we are creating. I say,
Speaker 3: we you know, because we've done this.
Speaker 2: Yeah, No, people get upset sometimes when I pointed out
Speaker 2: it's a controversial issue, I get it. But what has
Speaker 2: happened in Gaza over the last year is going to
Speaker 2: haunt Israel for the rest of its days.
Speaker 1: I think.
Speaker 2: I don't think there's any They've moved the corner. They
Speaker 2: went around a corner in several different ways. I mean,
Speaker 2: what happened in October seventh chattered israel sense of security
Speaker 2: maybe forever, and then the response in Gaza, and that's
Speaker 2: something that's going to haunt Israel for a very long time.
Speaker 3: Yes, certainly, I think it's I think it's changed Israeli's
Speaker 3: perception of themselves. You know, it's undermined. There was always
Speaker 3: there's always this feeling of of kind of the plucky.
Speaker 1: Nation right with right on the right, Yeah, the underdog.
Speaker 3: Yeah. And I think in the eyes of the number
Speaker 3: of Israelis, that's been tested. But it doesn't matter that
Speaker 3: it's been tested, because fear has caused them, the whole,
Speaker 3: the whole country, to to you know, really solidify on
Speaker 3: this base that is to the outside well rather alaming. Right.
Speaker 3: This looks pretty extreme and it certainly obviates any potential
Speaker 3: for a two state solution, you know the way that.
Speaker 2: Yes, we've never been further away from that than now.
Speaker 5: I think the whole topic of normalization in the Middle
Speaker 5: East between Israel and Arab countries period has been fractured.
Speaker 5: You know, that was it was looking pretty good for
Speaker 5: a while there a few years ago. But I think
Speaker 5: this might might have started to call some cracks. I mean,
Speaker 5: that could be wrong on that, but that's what it seems.
Speaker 2: Well, that's one of the arguments, right, that the Iranians
Speaker 2: wanted October seven to happen in order to spike the
Speaker 2: normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, and Saudi
Speaker 2: Arabia of course being Sunni, Iran being Shia. That's like
Speaker 2: the Cold War of the Middle East, right, that those
Speaker 2: two nations are kind of pitted against one another.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, to be you know, to be sure
Speaker 3: and to be very clear for everyone, no crocodile tears
Speaker 3: for his Bala or as Rahsrala. I mean, yes, I mean,
Speaker 3: we're all delighted that the organization is on the ropes.
Speaker 3: The question here is is it part of a bigger strategy?
Speaker 3: And if not, then his Bolla will return and will
Speaker 3: return probably stronger than before, because that is that that's
Speaker 3: you look through the site. It doesn't matter who's been
Speaker 3: leading his bolla, that is what has happened in the past.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what a mess.
Speaker 3: On that note, though, what's what's going on? I was
Speaker 3: going to say, from what a mess to on that note,
Speaker 3: what is what's going on in your life? Jack? But
Speaker 3: I do want to say that because I think that
Speaker 3: our audience doesn't get enough of you. In fact, a
Speaker 3: lot of a lot of our unfanned mail, you know,
Speaker 3: beyond Hey, why you guys are we want to see
Speaker 3: LEVI is we want to see more of Jack.
Speaker 1: I don't.
Speaker 2: I don't think you get those emails. I think that's
Speaker 2: a lie.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 2: I just got back last week from a trip to
Speaker 2: Kyrgyzstan in Kazakhistan.
Speaker 1: That was really fun. I was over there.
Speaker 2: Hiking, horseback riding, cruising around Bishkek and Almadi. There's a
Speaker 2: real eye opening trip, a lot of fun. Like I'd
Speaker 2: love to go back. I'm actually hoping to go back.
Speaker 3: You went to Kugaskan on vacation.
Speaker 2: Yeah, basically, I mean my girlfriend is from there, so
Speaker 2: I mean I had a pretty squared away tour guide.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Okay, yeah, excellent. You tried out the horse's milk es.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I drank the fermented horse milk. It was awesome. Uh,
Speaker 2: partook in the manly sports of horseback riding in the mountains.
Speaker 1: Yeah, all of that, nice.
Speaker 3: Bare chest did So anyway, welcome, welcome back from that.
Speaker 3: What are you thanking?
Speaker 2: And well, let's see, uh where I've been reading this
Speaker 2: new book, David mccloskey's new spy novel, The Seventh Four.
Speaker 2: We're gonna have him on the team house. Not this week,
Speaker 2: I think next week we have him coming up. Interesting guy.
Speaker 2: He was a CIA analyst.
Speaker 1: And oh and then the other thing too.
Speaker 3: So hey, so that book is, uh, it's a novel. Check.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, it's a novel.
Speaker 2: Mkolsk was a CIA analyst and he's written three spy novels,
Speaker 2: Damascus Station, Moscow X, and this new one that just
Speaker 2: came out, The Seventh Four. I wasn't a huge fan
Speaker 2: of Damascus Station, didn't really do it for me, but
Speaker 2: I did. I really enjoyed Moscow X. That was a cool,
Speaker 2: cool novel. And the Seventh Floor is a is a
Speaker 2: counterintelligence story.
Speaker 1: It's a mole hunt. And I've been enjoying it so far.
Speaker 3: And so what about the agency? How Jason, of the
Speaker 3: these books, I mean, are they well acclaimed within the
Speaker 3: agency or are they?
Speaker 5: Honestly, I have to I check them out.
Speaker 3: I haven't.
Speaker 5: I've heard of McCluskey, but I haven't read the book.
Speaker 5: So but I'm sure if it made it to the
Speaker 5: past publication review.
Speaker 6: That you know, do they have to do that even
Speaker 6: for fiction.
Speaker 5: Yeah, because you can still insert uh, you know, methods
Speaker 5: and procedures in there, you know, under the guise of fiction.
Speaker 3: So yeah, it still has to go through.
Speaker 4: It's a very good book. The Moscow action is incredible.
Speaker 3: Yeah, now that whole review protests took nine months to
Speaker 3: my book. I was going to say, I was going
Speaker 3: to ask you how long years too?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I got it was. I can say that it
Speaker 3: was bogged down by the intel community.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 4: Did.
Speaker 2: I was going to ask, like, did you have to
Speaker 2: just submit it to d O D or did it
Speaker 2: have to go through other agencies?
Speaker 1: Also?
Speaker 3: It went It starts at the at d O D
Speaker 3: and then it goes and then they you know, so
Speaker 3: I know, I know they sent they sent a copy
Speaker 3: to anyway, it doesn't matter. They sent it to different agencies,
Speaker 3: and they sent it within d O D to dev
Speaker 3: group and and you know, any any organization that might
Speaker 3: have been and so any organization can come back and say, hey,
Speaker 3: we want this to be redacted. And I was lucky
Speaker 3: I got away with some minor I thought were quite
Speaker 3: minor points. But I've been careful writing the book. I thought,
Speaker 3: you know, I wrote a lot about signals intelligence targeting,
Speaker 3: and I knew everything that I wrote there was precedent
Speaker 3: in open source, you know, which because that's the only
Speaker 3: way to do this right. There's no you know, you
Speaker 3: don't want to be you don't want to be ice
Speaker 3: breaking when it comes to releasing information. So you know,
Speaker 3: I'd look at, okay, can I write about that? And
Speaker 3: I'd find somewhere where it was written about, which is laborious,
Speaker 3: but it got me through the final check. And actually,
Speaker 3: there's a huge amount out there in open smace information
Speaker 3: about targeting methodology and signals and diligence. There is no
Speaker 3: I mean, most people would agree there's very little you
Speaker 3: cannot learn from open source intelligence.
Speaker 2: I have a friend of mine written novels and he
Speaker 2: had to submit to both d O D and CIA,
Speaker 2: and they ended up killing basically killing his series, you know,
Speaker 2: because both D O D and CIA wanted the first look,
Speaker 2: and he's like, I can't give both agencies the first look.
Speaker 1: That's not possible.
Speaker 2: It was like basically they found a bureaucratic way to
Speaker 2: stop him from writing.
Speaker 5: Yeah, now, Jack, with your books, did you have to
Speaker 5: go through a reviewer?
Speaker 3: No?
Speaker 2: Oh, I didn't put any of my books through a review.
Speaker 2: I put an article I wrote through D O D
Speaker 2: review once. I'll never do it again. It was absolutely
Speaker 2: it's absolutely a political process.
Speaker 1: And I had a lawyer going to them.
Speaker 2: I mean it was bizarre because I'm showing them point
Speaker 2: by point, like how is it that you cleared this
Speaker 2: information here in this publication, but suddenly it's reclassified again
Speaker 2: when I'm writing the exact same thing, Like it's politics,
Speaker 2: it's not.
Speaker 1: It's not about that starting information.
Speaker 3: It's exactly. It becomes for its critics, it becomes the
Speaker 3: facto censor ship. Yeah, and what Jack's talking about, Uh,
Speaker 3: it is something that is has been kind of validated
Speaker 3: by a series of lawsuits against DO O D where
Speaker 3: law authors had said, how come you block me for this,
Speaker 3: but now you released it here and there's certainly is
Speaker 3: a perception that if you are being critical of D
Speaker 3: O D in your book, you're going to get a
Speaker 3: much mo harder ride when it comes to getting play
Speaker 3: it ful security.
Speaker 2: And my, my, the article I submitted was very pro
Speaker 2: us army. It was like, good job, boys, you know
Speaker 2: you've done well.
Speaker 3: That's that's why it made people suspicious?
Speaker 2: And what else was I going to say on that though?
Speaker 2: But yeah, yeah, the review process is bullshit.
Speaker 3: So you're about to show us the book in the background.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah.
Speaker 2: So the other thing I've started working on, it's in
Speaker 2: the nascent phases, is uh, I haven't read any of
Speaker 2: these books yet, but these are books about the military
Speaker 2: liaison mission in Berlin or in the Cold War, these
Speaker 2: ones too. So this is my like full winter reading
Speaker 2: that I'm i gotta get on. So the military liaison
Speaker 2: mission was under like I think it was under the
Speaker 2: Four Powers Agreement that governed Berlin after the end of
Speaker 2: World War Two. The way Germany was chopped up was
Speaker 2: that you know, American, French and British military liaisons in
Speaker 2: uniform in an official vehicle could go and drive into
Speaker 2: Communists held East Germany, and the Soviets could do the same,
Speaker 2: they could come over to our side and do the same,
Speaker 2: just sort of like a as like an inspection to
Speaker 2: make sure everyone's following the rules basically, but those openings
Speaker 2: were used for all manner of espionage by both sides.
Speaker 2: And I've been talking to some of the Special Forces
Speaker 2: guys who were assigned to the Military Liaison mission, and
Speaker 2: there is some epic, epic stories that I don't think
Speaker 2: I've ever been written about before that I'm looking forward
Speaker 2: to chronicling a lot of stuff like stealing Soviet military
Speaker 2: technology and then reverse engineering it, putting guys up across
Speaker 2: the border and getting pictures of tactical ballistic missiles that
Speaker 2: weren't supposed to be there.
Speaker 1: Dudes actually like getting up.
Speaker 2: Under the tarp and crawling into like the brand new
Speaker 2: T seventy two tanks and taking like in there, taking pictures,
Speaker 2: like just really cool stuff.
Speaker 1: So that's that's something I'm working on right now.
Speaker 3: I guess a lot of that was pretty it very
Speaker 3: you know, I don't know if it was classification levels
Speaker 3: at the time, but you know, it's kind of also
Speaker 3: eclipsed by what was going on in Vietnam. But that
Speaker 3: I mean that the story the stories you've been you've
Speaker 3: been recounting and researching at being really fascinating. Yeah, who knew,
Speaker 3: because you know, I was still at the COBOL. Must
Speaker 3: have been a really boring time. I mean, it was
Speaker 3: a boring time I was there. Thank you, Phil. I've
Speaker 3: done a pang about my knee jack. It was so soil,
Speaker 3: the paper's chained to the wall. But it was generally
Speaker 3: a very boring time in the military. So when whenever
Speaker 3: I see Cold War, you know, Cold War whatever, except
Speaker 3: for Cold Wall's Spy obviously those books are interesting Cold
Speaker 3: War Warrior, I'm like, uh, you know, how boring. Uh,
Speaker 3: But but you you know, if you you bring up
Speaker 3: a like a genre that's not not well known, but yeah,
Speaker 3: kind of at the core of our ethos.
Speaker 2: Right, I mean, the probably probably the reason why I'm
Speaker 2: still doing this job. Like what have I been working
Speaker 2: this for like twelve years or something like that, thirteen
Speaker 2: years is I mean, there's always something new to learn,
Speaker 2: There's always something interesting and surprising. And like the article
Speaker 2: I was complaining about that I submitted to d O
Speaker 2: D Review that was about Special Forces Detachment A in Berlin,
Speaker 2: and I wrote that and I was like, Okay, I
Speaker 2: unraveled the mystery and then said, only the m L
Speaker 2: E thing lands in your lap. And it's like, oh shit,
Speaker 2: there's all this other stuff going on. There's there's always
Speaker 2: more and more, you know. My I wrote a I
Speaker 2: wrote a book that's coming out in December that's going
Speaker 2: to have a huge amount of Special Forces history that's
Speaker 2: never been published before. And one chapter is Detachment A.
Speaker 2: Another chapter is about Detachment K in Korea, and then
Speaker 2: blue Light Green Light, and then the Commander's in Extremist Force.
Speaker 2: And I just added like five more pages to the
Speaker 2: manuscript about the creation of C three seven, which was
Speaker 2: Seventh Group's fifteen down in Panama, and there's a whole
Speaker 2: epic story about how they they got stood up and
Speaker 2: did some chicanery to get the facilities and weapons that
Speaker 2: they needed to do that job.
Speaker 1: Pretty cool.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I ended up just this was before just Cause,
Speaker 2: so this would have been ninety eight. So the tasking
Speaker 2: for C three seven, I believe came in seventy seven,
Speaker 2: and I think they finally got it up and running
Speaker 2: in nineteen eighty. They got like a year extension to
Speaker 2: get that going. So like all this stuff is happening
Speaker 2: in tandem with the creation of Delta Force and these
Speaker 2: other counter terrorism capabilities. You know, they're trying to do
Speaker 2: these stand these elements up at the same time.
Speaker 3: What are they using a sem model?
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, that's interesting. So Charlie Beckwick absolutely was using
Speaker 2: the SAS as the model for Delta Force. Hence why
Speaker 2: they have squadrons and troops and so on. When when
Speaker 2: when they stand they stood up? C.
Speaker 1: Three seven.
Speaker 2: Colonel Chuck fry who is the Battalion commander of third Battalion,
Speaker 2: seventh Special Forces Group at the time, he called up Charlie,
Speaker 2: who he had served with in Vietnam and asked, hey,
Speaker 2: do you have any lessons learned, like best practices as
Speaker 2: I as I stand up this this counter terrorism element
Speaker 2: in seventh Group. And Colonel Frye reports that Charlie told
Speaker 2: him fuck off, Fry and like hung up the phone.
Speaker 3: That was that so and so and so it began there.
Speaker 1: Right, Yeah.
Speaker 2: So a lot of the Special Forces counter terrorism capabilities
Speaker 2: came out of the Blue Light experience. Nineteen seventy seven
Speaker 2: seventy eight, they had their own interim counter terrorism force
Speaker 2: called Blue Light at Mott Lake in Fort Bragg, and
Speaker 2: a lot of those lessons learned after blue Light was deactivated,
Speaker 2: those lessons learned were kind of retained out at Mott Lake.
Speaker 3: Who we were they were they drawn from Special Forces.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, they were all Fifth Group guys, and almost
Speaker 2: all the n c O s were Vietnam veterans. They
Speaker 2: were like mac V SAG guys, Suntai raiders. A lot
Speaker 2: of them had served in the projects, you know, Sigma
Speaker 2: and Omega and so forth.
Speaker 1: These were these were very seasoned guys. And then the.
Speaker 2: Lessons learned, the TTPs they developed got retained in Special
Speaker 2: Operations Training, which was a course that was run into
Speaker 2: the like late nineteen nineties actually out at Mott Lake.
Speaker 2: And then the next generation of all of this comes
Speaker 2: around later on in the nineteen eighties when the SITH
Speaker 2: concept is becoming more formalized and they stood up Sephardic
Speaker 2: as a course to qualify SIFT Team members. And in
Speaker 2: order to do that and the way the SITH mission
Speaker 2: was structured to augment Delta Force in real life operations
Speaker 2: as an in extremist force, they had to harmonize the TTPs, right,
Speaker 2: they had to be on the same sheet of me.
Speaker 2: So there was a whole process where Sephardic and Phil Hansen,
Speaker 2: who was a former Delta Force member who helped stand
Speaker 2: up Sephardic, was a big part of that, and they
Speaker 2: had to go through all the binders and everything and
Speaker 2: basically take all the Delta Force stuff and condense it
Speaker 2: down to just what the SIF guys needed to know
Speaker 2: to execute their mission, the inextremist mission. And so that
Speaker 2: was sort of the next iteration that formalized it. And
Speaker 2: I think the first Sephardic course was probably ran in
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty seven, and then I think it got renamed
Speaker 2: as Sephardic and became more formalized in nineteen eighty eight.
Speaker 3: As I recall, check, let me ask you something about
Speaker 3: because I know that your relationship with you know, with
Speaker 3: the Army, but more specifically with special Forces and probably
Speaker 3: the Ranger Regiment probably similar to mine in the Marine Corps,
Speaker 3: you know, except the Marines just seemed to have a
Speaker 3: much greater hold. And I was in the military about
Speaker 3: sixty years longer than you. But aside from that, you know,
Speaker 3: it's kind of that that that pride at having been
Speaker 3: part of the institution, pride in their history. But at
Speaker 3: the same time also a determination to be absolutely blunt
Speaker 3: about the shortfalls in the organization that you love and
Speaker 3: and you know, it's the amra of the Green Berets,
Speaker 3: you know. My I can also say though that just
Speaker 3: like the marine call, they're a victim of their own
Speaker 3: legends sometimes. And you know, when it comes to and
Speaker 3: I will give you an example, when it comes to
Speaker 3: unconventional warfare. Oh my god, you know that that doctrine
Speaker 3: became almost a religion, and yet they just didn't. You
Speaker 3: had all the doctrinaires and they only MSF can do this. Meanwhile,
Speaker 3: in the real world, this ship was going on counterrisis,
Speaker 3: you know it was, but it was marines and sailors
Speaker 3: and and you know, Air Force as well as army
Speaker 3: guys doing this shit, not just Green Berets working out
Speaker 3: how to do all that stuff, working with the resistance
Speaker 3: and los all army. Doctrine didn't change one fucking iota.
Speaker 3: It didn't even ask for input from that, you know,
Speaker 3: because who are these non cognizante They're not part of
Speaker 3: the UW, you know. And and so the doctrine went
Speaker 3: on and pointing about auxiliaries and blah blah blah that
Speaker 3: I mean have you come across that. Do you think, though,
Speaker 3: do you think that that Special Forces R and D
Speaker 3: changing fast enough to adapt to what's going on? I mean,
Speaker 3: they aren't so great.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's that's a tough question the answer. And
Speaker 2: also I'm not quite current. I left the Army like
Speaker 2: fifteen years ago. But what I do know is that
Speaker 2: Special Forces has been conducting some experiments essentially about you know,
Speaker 2: messing around with their task organization of the ODA, the
Speaker 2: basic maneuver element of Special Forces. And there's all kinds
Speaker 2: of different thoughts and I'd have to look and see
Speaker 2: where exactly they're at with it. But they're looking to
Speaker 2: have like, you know, maybe an electronic warfare guy on
Speaker 2: the team, to have maybe a drone guy on the team,
Speaker 2: you know, maybe cyber to kind of like have these
Speaker 2: elements as being organic to the ODA structure and bumping
Speaker 2: the teams up from twelve guys to sixteen. That's something
Speaker 2: else they've looked at. I've even heard some stories about
Speaker 2: how like they want to have a Space Force guy
Speaker 2: on the team, which I think is ridiculous and will
Speaker 2: never happen. Maybe you'll have a Space Force guy up
Speaker 2: at group, you know, group level. But they are looking
Speaker 2: at these things and it's it's interesting.
Speaker 1: I mean, a lot of.
Speaker 2: Something that was really influential on me, you know, was
Speaker 2: science fiction, honestly, and I mean I mean I have
Speaker 2: tattoos on me of the film Ghost in the Shell,
Speaker 2: which in this film it's a clandestine unit does direct action, disinformation,
Speaker 2: cyber warfare. And now it seems it took you know,
Speaker 2: till about today for the Army and the in Special
Speaker 2: Operations to come to the conclusion that we should have
Speaker 2: these blended capabilities.
Speaker 1: And one team. So it's interesting to see that starting
Speaker 1: to come about.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's all right, you know, I asked that question
Speaker 3: being equally critical by the way of the Marine Corps,
Speaker 3: but it's it is. Yeah, holding on to holding on
Speaker 3: to our traditions, holding on to the legends of the
Speaker 3: past are all hugely positive and and and until now
Speaker 3: it's been positive as far as projecting the ethos for
Speaker 3: the future. But I'll just give you an example, you know,
Speaker 3: I mean, the Marine Corps, the Marine Cops grappling with Hey,
Speaker 3: we need to really bring in a lot we we
Speaker 3: we need to bring in more guys who are you know,
Speaker 3: cyber oriented, ew oriented. We need way more of these
Speaker 3: guys than we do with a guy who can carry
Speaker 3: a sixty pound pack, you know, and strangle someone with
Speaker 3: a length of cheese want and that is you know,
Speaker 3: that's the image of the new Marine call. But it's
Speaker 3: not the image of the Marine Corps, you know. So
Speaker 3: how do you how do you reconcile all of this?
Speaker 3: I think I imagine a mes's wrestling with the same
Speaker 3: some of the same stuff.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean the military. I mean it's like the
Speaker 2: as you know, I mean, the military is what it is,
Speaker 2: and like as an animal, it's only so malleable. It's
Speaker 2: only going to change so much. And there's still I mean,
Speaker 2: there's still this sort of like vestigial aspects of military
Speaker 2: tradition dot com about you know, when you had illiterate drafteeves.
Speaker 2: We're not really there as a country anymore. You have,
Speaker 2: you know, people with high school degrees, if not college degrees.
Speaker 2: We're just in a different culture. And all this like
Speaker 2: standing around in formation and haircuts and stuff. It's kind
Speaker 2: of keeps people in an infantile state. I think, as
Speaker 2: I when I look back on it now, and I mean,
Speaker 2: of course there needs to be adult supervision, but some
Speaker 2: of that.
Speaker 3: Stuff, that's that's why it's cold the infantry.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I mean and so, but I mean at
Speaker 2: the same time, I mean, look, that organization, like I said,
Speaker 2: is only going to change so much.
Speaker 1: We have to be realistic about that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, certainly, the there's the requirement for kind
Speaker 3: of mass warfare does not go away. Absolutely, and yet
Speaker 3: and yet even that requirement for mass warfare becomes increasingly
Speaker 3: technical as the Ukrainian side.
Speaker 1: Well, that's that's the fear.
Speaker 2: You know that we have these like legacy capabilities, you know,
Speaker 2: like uh, you know, mass tax static line parachuting, and
Speaker 2: a lot of people say, we'll never do that again,
Speaker 2: we'll never use that again. But it's one of those
Speaker 2: things that you get, you get rid of it, and
Speaker 2: then you know six months later you're gonna need it.
Speaker 2: There's always those feelings lingering.
Speaker 3: So I'm going to ask you something about totally unrelated
Speaker 3: But i know we're coming to the end of our
Speaker 3: of your very valuable time, and you've got to leave
Speaker 3: us to sign autographs and and and take care of
Speaker 3: your hair.
Speaker 1: Photographs, you know.
Speaker 3: But you know, I'm intrigued by the drive you as
Speaker 3: an investigative journalist. One thing, I you know, one point
Speaker 3: where you have been absolutely I use a cliche, laser focused.
Speaker 3: Has been kind of uncovering hypocrisy. And I admire that,
Speaker 3: all right, And I hate telling you admire anything, but
Speaker 3: I do. But but can you talk a little bit
Speaker 3: about that. I mean, you know, hypocrisy. I know you've
Speaker 3: gone there have been some we talked about the high
Speaker 3: profile officer cases, but it was never you know, the theory,
Speaker 3: the feeling like it was. It's never personal. It was
Speaker 3: just in a position, people in positions of authority and hypocracy.
Speaker 2: Yeah, people abusing positions of authority.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean so from like the Army's perspective, someone like
Speaker 2: me is a double edged sword, right. There are some
Speaker 2: people who feel that I can be an asset to
Speaker 2: special forces because I write this stuff, you know, I
Speaker 2: write these histories. There are some people who I mean,
Speaker 2: I've been called a cancer. I've been called the TMZ
Speaker 2: of Special Operations, all sorts of things.
Speaker 1: So there are some.
Speaker 2: People out there who are not huge fans of your
Speaker 2: pal Jack, and that's just that's just.
Speaker 1: The name of the game.
Speaker 2: I mean, I sometimes write, like you said, expose you know,
Speaker 2: some bad actors in the ranks and exposed some dirty
Speaker 2: laundry that's getting, you know, swept under the carpet. And
Speaker 2: when you do that about a closed off, insular group
Speaker 2: of people who are not used to outside criticism, naturally,
Speaker 2: there's gonna be some pushback from that.
Speaker 3: And is there a case you can is this something
Speaker 3: an example you can talk about where that's happened.
Speaker 1: I mean there are there, Yeah, there are many.
Speaker 2: I mean, yeah, there's there's quite a few out there,
Speaker 2: and I mean it's the form it takes well, I mean,
Speaker 2: it's it goes all the way from uh, you know,
Speaker 2: I had one person threatened to kill my daughter, and
Speaker 2: they'll they'll threaten to come after your family. Then there
Speaker 2: are other times where people threaten to come after you legally,
Speaker 2: and I have not been sued to this day, but
Speaker 2: you know that's the go to. Everyone threatens it right
Speaker 2: off the bat. And then yeah, but I mean it's
Speaker 2: it's interesting because I maintain a foot in both of
Speaker 2: these worlds, and there are former colleagues and teammates who
Speaker 2: I don't think would associate with me at this point,
Speaker 2: but there are others who do, and and there's a
Speaker 2: lot of support for what I do out there as well,
Speaker 2: and all of that is just comes with the territory,
Speaker 2: you know.
Speaker 3: So yeah, next Jack, I'm sorry, go ahead, Jayson.
Speaker 5: No, No, I was just gonna say it would probably
Speaker 5: be less so if you didn't have one foot in
Speaker 5: their world. Yeah, if you were just an outsider trying
Speaker 5: to work your way in, they probably would be just like,
Speaker 5: pardon my language, but like.
Speaker 3: Just fuck off.
Speaker 5: Whereas with now, because you know, they can say certain
Speaker 5: things and you're like, yeah, that's bullshit, you know, because
Speaker 5: you know.
Speaker 2: So yeah, that drive that drives some people nuts. And
Speaker 2: it's funny the way they always want to like re
Speaker 2: litigate my military career. It's like, man, that was that
Speaker 2: it's like going it's like going back in time and
Speaker 2: re litigating your little league games. At this point, Yeah,
Speaker 2: like I'm a little I'm a little you know, long
Speaker 2: in the tooth. You know.
Speaker 1: It's so.
Speaker 2: But but that's because they assumed that I'm like them,
Speaker 2: and that the military is my thing and and my
Speaker 2: time in the army. Is this like the only thing
Speaker 2: I have going on in my life, and it's an
Speaker 2: important part of my life. But it's also quite a
Speaker 2: ways in the rearview mirror at this point, and I
Speaker 2: enjoy what I do today and I like it so.
Speaker 1: But you're right, Jason.
Speaker 2: Yeah, if I wasn't, you know, sort of a quote
Speaker 2: unquote inside er, the response would have been maybe a
Speaker 2: little bit different.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I think a good A good validation of that is
Speaker 3: the fact is just comparison between reaction towards you and
Speaker 3: say Sean Naylor. Right, you know, Sean Sean created I mean,
Speaker 3: when he came out with Relentless Strike, it created funeral.
Speaker 3: But when it all came down to it, there wasn't
Speaker 3: a lot no. I when when I heard military guys
Speaker 3: talk about Sean, it was like, yeah, fucking gentleman, that
Speaker 3: was a good book though, you know, I mean it was,
Speaker 3: but it was kind of okay, That's that's what we expect.
Speaker 3: He's a journal, he's a journal. He's he's kind of
Speaker 3: the enemy, you know. But there's a sneaking respect. And
Speaker 3: of course they have more than a sneaking respect for you, Jack,
Speaker 3: but but with you, when you say something in it,
Speaker 3: and I imagine to a lesser extent, far lesser me too,
Speaker 3: it just it hits something visceral and people wearing uniform
Speaker 3: because it looks like a betrayal. Right, you are you
Speaker 3: are violating murder? You are you know you you're criticizing
Speaker 3: cousin nostra publicly, and that that makes you a particular
Speaker 3: type of villain, you know. It's it's rubber.
Speaker 2: Everyone everyone has, Everyone has some claim the fame out there.
Speaker 2: Mine may be that I'm the most controversial former Green Beret.
Speaker 3: This well, there's infinitous. There's a couple more and actually
Speaker 3: one or two in jail right now. Who me you
Speaker 3: know who are in running for that title? Jack?
Speaker 1: It's a tight race, all right.
Speaker 3: Okay, so sweet raw to it close, you know, with
Speaker 3: with our whole hierarchy, chain of command, teamhouse and eyes
Speaker 3: on here. I'm gonna let you guys close this with
Speaker 3: whatever however you want to. And I'm simply going to
Speaker 3: sign off and say, this was a delightful conversation and
Speaker 3: very nicely game to see you all and to be
Speaker 3: able to talk to our audience.
Speaker 5: So it's it's just completely unrelated. But you're just talking
Speaker 5: about TMZ Jack, We're talking since they do there what
Speaker 5: is it their celebrity spottings, Our good buddy Victor bout
Speaker 5: the arms Dealer, yeah. He So apparently the HOUTHI sent
Speaker 5: some emissaries to Moscow to broker a it was like
Speaker 5: ten million dollar arms deal. It was what was supposed
Speaker 5: to be for like automatic weapons, and who met them?
Speaker 3: But about so he's back on the market.
Speaker 5: Yeah, so his apparently his attorney, I didn't know he
Speaker 5: was a New York based guy. His attorney declined to Moscow.
Speaker 5: Won't comment and who Thi's won't comment. But apparently there's
Speaker 5: video and pictures of it.
Speaker 1: That's got to drive CIA up the fucking wall.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, yeah, that's awesome.
Speaker 6: Jack's books coming out December ninth. Check it out. We defy.
Speaker 6: The link will be in the description. You can pre
Speaker 6: order right now.
Speaker 4: Of course, Andy's book When the Tempest Gathers also in
Speaker 4: the description.
Speaker 6: Really good books.
Speaker 1: Jack.
Speaker 4: We're gonna do an audiobook right once you lock in
Speaker 4: the freaking manuscript.
Speaker 2: I think I think that Amazon has like AI loaded
Speaker 2: into it or something like that that will do an
Speaker 2: audi or.
Speaker 1: Text the speech. Yeah, okay, cool, I think they can
Speaker 1: do it automatically.
Speaker 2: But yeah, I kind of finished the manuscript yesterday. There's
Speaker 2: a great forward from former Secretary of Defense Chris Miller
Speaker 2: in the book, and now I just got a format,
Speaker 2: the paperback edition. So people keep asking me, is there's
Speaker 2: going to be a hard copying?
Speaker 1: Yeah, there is.
Speaker 2: I just can't set up pre orders on Amazon. They
Speaker 2: won't let you do it for the paperback for some reason.
Speaker 4: So ridiculous.
Speaker 6: It makes no sense why they don't.
Speaker 1: I don't get it.
Speaker 3: What's what's what's really cool though, is they're releasing the
Speaker 3: paperback the same time as odd back, right.
Speaker 2: Uh No, it's just paperback. There's not going to be
Speaker 2: a hardback. Yeah, so you'll but that will The paperback
Speaker 2: will be for sale on December ninth, on the release date.
Speaker 6: Yeah, so check it out. The link is in the description.
Speaker 6: Very exciting.
Speaker 4: It's a good salogy.
Speaker 2: I'm stoked to finally get it out. And there may
Speaker 2: be there may be a volume two. We'll see how
Speaker 2: things go.
Speaker 4: What can people do to help support the show, both
Speaker 4: the Teamhouse and eyes On. They can go to patreon
Speaker 4: dot com slash the Teamhouse. The link is in the description.
Speaker 4: You get ad free audio and video, some bonus content
Speaker 4: things of that, early access to the eyes On episodes
Speaker 4: and stuf like that because I put them out early,
Speaker 4: so on Patreon. So help the show out. Excuse me,
Speaker 4: help the show out. I got it emotional. Uh, YouTube
Speaker 4: is crushing our souls. Jack can test to that. They're
Speaker 4: not playing ball and we're not happy with it. But
Speaker 4: YouTube's a big part of our show. So Patreon dot
Speaker 4: com slash the teamhouse please.
Speaker 1: Yeah, thank you, guys, thank you.