"The Plan is for the United States to rule the world. The overt theme is unilateralism, but it is ultimately a story of domination. It calls for the United States to maintain its overwhelming superiority and prevent new rivals from rising up to challenge it on the world stage. It calls for dominion over friends and enemies alike. It says not that the United States must be more powerful, or most powerful, but that it must be absolutely powerful."
Vice-President Dick Cheney - West Point lecture, June 2002
Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communications
In a ten month study, written before the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, the Task Force..The October 2001 Task Force recommended America’s leaders give higher priority to strategic communication...Three weeks after 9/11, a Defense Science Board Task Force sponsored jointly by the DOD (Pentagon) and Department of State issued a report on U.S. civilian and military information dissemination capabilities.
Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Managed Information Dissemination, October 2001, http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/. The report was briefed to the Secretary of Defense, the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, the Under Secretary of State for Management, and the NSC’s Senior Advisor for Strategic Communications and Information and Senior Advisor for Democracy, Human Rights, and International Operations. The Executive Summary appears in Appendix D.
The strategic environment has changed radically since the October 2001 Task Force report. We face a war on terrorism, intensified conflict within Islam, and insurgency in Iraq. Worldwide anger and discontent are directed at America’s tarnished credibility and ways the U.S. pursues its goals. There is consensus that America’s power to persuade is in a state of crisis. Global transparency, driven by new media and low cost technologies, shape the strategic landscape.
This Task Force re-examined the purposes of strategic communication and the salience of recommendations in the earlier study...
What should be done about public diplomacy and open military information operations?
...The Task Force met with representatives from the National Security Council (NSC), White House Office of Global Communications, Department of State (DOS), Department of Defense (DOD), Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), and the private sector (the schedule of meetings, briefings and discussions is contained in Appendix C). Based on extensive interaction with a broad range of sectors in the government, commercial, and academic worlds, as well as a series of highly interactive internal debates, we have reached the following conclusions and recommendations. This Task Force concludes that U.S. strategic communication must be transformed. Strategic communication is a vital component of U.S. national security. It is in crisis, and it must be transformed with a strength of purpose ...
Terrorism is a National Security frame. September 11, 2001 a catalyst in creating a new way to think about national security. The Global War on Terrorism replaced the Cold War as a national security meta narrative. Governments, media, and publics use the terrorism frame for cognitive, evaluative, and communication purposes. For political leaders, it is a way to link disparate events; identify priorities, friends, enemies, victims, and blame; and shape simple coherent messages. For journalists and news consumers the terrorism frame conflates and appears to make sense of diverse national security stories – Al Qaeda, Jihadists, Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Iran, Chechnya, Indonesia, Kashmir, the Philippines, Kenya, Spain [...]
No more ISIS JV (or as GWB sais “a rock band”} psyops now under ‘whole government’ strategic communications strategy (US retools message strategy below)
War with ISIS: The West is wrong again in fight against terror
Patrick Cockburn | The Independent | Jan 4, 2015, 06.34 PM IST
ISIS has its own state machinery and is conscripting tens of thousands of fighters to replace casualties, enabling it to fight on multiple fronts from Jalawla on Iraq's border with Iran to the outskirts of Aleppo in Syria....a growing power as the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad loses its advantage of fighting a fragmented opposition now uniting under the leadership of ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, the Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate. Yet only a year ago President Obama dismissed ISIS... last January, he said "the analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think it is accurate, is if a JV [junior varsity] team puts on Lakers uniforms it doesn't make them Kobe Bryant [famed player for the Los Angeles Lakers basketball team]." ...that at the time must have been the majority view of his national security staff.
US Director of Defense Intelligence Agency Report Aug. 2012
‘The Salafist, the Muslim Brotherhood and AQI are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria … There is the possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting powers [The West, Gulf monarchies and Turkey] to the [Syrian] opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime’ (DIA 2012).
DIA Intelligence Report ‘R 050839Z Aug 2012’ Judicial Watch, 287-293 (291) JW v DOD and State 14-812, 18 May< http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/pgs-287-293-291-jw-v-dod-and-state-14-812-2/> from: Evidence: U.S. Supports ISIS, by Professor Timothy Anderson, http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/tim-anderson
ISIS the Peacemaker
12/18/15 By Joshua Keating, http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/12/18/middle_east_foes_makin...
The world may be a long way off from defeating ISIS, which showed its resilience Thursday launching its first major offensive in Northern Iraq in months, but the chaos sown by the group is also putting pressure on longtime foes to resolve some seemingly intractable conflicts so as to be more united against the ISIS threat....
A lot of priorities are being reordered in the Middle East and North Africa now thanks to the new threats that have emerged over the past year...Unfortunately, given the scene in New York Friday, with major powers struggling to reach agreement on a plan to resolve the conflict in Syria, progress on the problem that most directly applies to fighting ISIS is still frustratingly elusive...
"We are going to have a war on terror which you can never win, and so you can keep taking people's liberties away. The media is going to convince everybody that the war on terror is real. The ultimate goal is to get everybody in the world chipped with an RFID chip, have all money be on the chips, and if anyone wants to protest what we do, we turn off the chip."
Nicholas Rockefeller to producer Aaron Russo - eleven months before the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks 2011
" The owners of the Washington Post long ago acknowledged the Post is the government's voice to the people. In 1981, Katherine Graham, who owns the Post and Newsweek announced that her editors would "cooperate with the national security interests." National security in this context means "CIA.""
-- John Stockwell, former CIA official, author
White House retools U.S. message on Syria strategy
Karen DeYoung, Washington Post associate editor and senior national security correspondent
Terrorist attacks in Paris and California prompted a White House message blitz after the president ordered US “uptick in communications tempo” efforts.
As he flew home from Asia aboard Air Force One in late November, he scolded his aides about how poorly the administration was communicating the U.S.-led strategy against the Islamic State... There had even been suggestions that France, with tough talk and a series of retaliatory airstrikes, was now leading the anti-terrorism fight. ordered what official called an “uptick in our communications tempo.”...
digest added NYT + 2 ‘France’ links & quotes (and as usual, all emphases):
Response to Paris Attacks Points to Weaknesses in French Police Structure
New York Times quote, unable to find op-ed author’s identity:
"If the New World Order agenda is not realized by the terrorist attacks on America and if Americans don’t agree to give up their weapons and relinquish their sovereignty to the New World Order, the next attack will be the use of chemical, biological and/or atomic warfare against the American people. The architects of the New World Order will not hesitate to use as a last resort an atomic or hydrogen bomb in a major American city."
Source: Reference Op Ed page, New York Times, 24 Sept. 2001 http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote/new_york_times_quote_e424
“We want to keep Europe from developing their unity as a bloc against us. If we keep the French hoping they can get ahead of the British, this would accomplish our objective... if they know we have another option, they might buck up”
To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal"
Henry A. Kissinger
Within days deputy national security (strategic communications) adviser Ben Rhodes [official title: "Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications and Speechwriting": digest- read his CV:] drafted a memo ... outlining specific tasks for officials at all levels, starting with the president...to talk more in public about all elements of the strategy...media need more briefings...all needed to become more comfortable with Twitter.
[ WaPo: Inside the surreal world of the Islamic State’s propaganda]
The campaign, beginning with firm presidential words at a news conference with visiting French President François Hollande and a public statement after a meeting with top national security aides, was barely underway when a terrorist couple burst into a public building in San Bernardino, Cal ... “With that, obviously, concerns about [the Islamic State] came much closer to home for Americans,” said the senior official, one of several who spoke on the condition of anonymity about internal administration discussions.
Since then, the new communications campaign has gone into overdrive....
Dec. 6, four days after the California attack, Obama made a rare nationwide address from the Oval Office to discuss the many-pronged campaign against the militants: coalition airstrikes in Syria and Iraq and military assistance to anti-Islamic State local forces; cutting off the group’s financing and stopping the flow of foreigners rushing to join it; counter-messaging to block the group’s online appeal; and humanitarian aid to the millions fleeing its brutality on the ground. All those efforts, along with intelligence collection, had already been expanded after an internal strategy review in the fall; a diplomatic push to end Syria’s civil war was also underway. Counterterrorism at home had been stepped up in the wake of the San Bernardino attack. “Let’s not forget that freedom is more powerful than fear,” Obama said in conclusion. “America will prevail.”
“The Sunday night address kicked off a new chapter,” the senior official said. Over the next two weeks, Obama would make highly publicized visits to the Pentagon and the National Counterterrorism Center for anti- terrorism briefings capped with public remarks. He began a series of media interviews and delivered a Dec. 12 radio address titled “Standing Strong in the Face of Terrorism.”
[ WaPo: In a propaganda war against the Islamic State, U.S. tried to play by the enemy’s rules]
In twice-weekly conferences with the communications officials across national security agencies, Rhodes has emphasized the need to step up their messaging activities. Early attention focused particularly on Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter, whose news conferences were considered lackluster and who tended to limit substantive media encounters on overseas trips. On a mid-December swing through Iraq, Turkey and Afghanistan, Carter was both visible and voluble, holding several news conferences and background briefings. “It’s fair to say that DOD will be doing more,” the senior official said of the Defense Department. “What you saw of Carter, you will see of other Cabinet principals...It’s something that we’re all going to be focusing on, certainly going into early [this] year.”...
The lack of comprehensive understanding of the strategy can also extend beyond U.S. shores, “Another thing that became really clear to us is that the 65-member” anti-Islamic State coalition is very different from previous international groupings. The Afghanistan coalition was organized by NATO, which provided a legal and bureaucratic framework. “We don’t have a coalition secretariat that can speak on behalf” of the current coalition...Secretary of State John F. Kerry is in near-constant motion, holding overseas meetings with his coalition counterparts. An additional attempt to remedy the problem came in mid-December, when Treasury Secretary Jack Lew traveled to New York to chair an unprecedented meeting of UN Security Council finance ministers
As the new communications effort began... Robert Malley, in charge of the Middle East for the National Security Council (NSC) became the president’s newly minted senior adviser for the Counter-ISIL Campaign in Iraq and Syria... consolidating ‘whole government’ efforts across departments and agencies in charge of military, diplomatic, intelligence, financing and other aspects of the communications strategy....Because Malley was not known as a prolific practitioner of social media... Malley inaugurated @robmalley44 on Dec. 11... Malley approves his own postings, most of what appears under the handle is compiled by the half-dozen members of the White House Office of Digital Strategy, which retweets virtually every other tweet, chart, release, speech and statement on anti-Islamic State efforts from across the government. The last week of the year sparked a virtual flood of emails, releases, tweets and retweets from the White House, State and Defense departments, and the military and coalition allies hailing the Iraqi military’s success in driving Islamic State forces from the city of Ramadi... Dec. 8 the NSC press office began emailing a long list of reporters a daily roundup [to] “aggregate key developments across the various lines of effort in our unyielding campaign to degrade and destroy ISIL.”
“You’re going to see more of all of it in the new year...see the president continue to be the chief messenger...also see Carter, Kerry, military generals, Lew, Szubin — the whole cast of characters...speak in a very concerted way... to ensure” the message is getting out.
So far there is little evidence the messaging campaign is succeeding in changing opinions of the overall strategy
As if that was the point, and not, as Kissinger said, perception is more important than objective reality
US knows itself well in advance:
ISIS WILL BECOME MORE DEADLY BEFORE IT DIES
When terrorists lose ground, they typically lash out with greater violence.
Nov. 2015 RAND U.S. Analysis by Seth G. Jones
Seth G. Jones director of RAND International Security and Defense Policy Center and author of the forthcoming Waging Insurgent Warfare.
As ISIS faces stepped-up air and ground campaigns in the aftermath of the Paris attacks, there is a good chance the it will lose more territory in Iraq and Syria. But if history is a guide, ISIS will resort to more terrorist attacks in the West as it loses ground, making it a more dangerous and unpredictable enemy in the months to come....
ISIS faces an uphill battle in the long run. It has to deal with a reinvigorated military campaign by the world’s major powers, neighboring states like Turkey and Jordan, local allies such as Kurdish militias, and the Iraqi and Syrian regimes. While ISIS has made some gains in such areas as Homs and Damascus, the trend lines are straightforward: ISIS is losing ground, and this decline will likely continue. Territorial control is the raison d’être for ISIS... establishing a loose Islamic caliphate that extends from Africa through the Middle East, South Asia, and parts of the Pacific...When insurgents lose ground, it frees up some resources to conduct terrorist attacks. Territory is critical for ISIS to operate the “state” its leaders envision, making it more like an insurgent group than a purely terrorist organization. It needs to govern local populations, establish sharia in areas that it controls, and finance itself through the local economy. ISIS has its own governance structure with committees that cover the media, administrative issues, military operations, Islamic law, and other matters. It raises money from such activities as smuggling oil, selling stolen goods, kidnapping, and seizing bank accounts—all of which require territory. But watch out if ISIS’s stronghold continues to shrink in Iraq and Syria. The history of insurgent groups is sobering: Most increase terrorist activity when they lose territory....
The lesson with ISIS is straightforward. Western populations should be prepared for an upsurge in violence if ISIS continues to lose territory. There has already been a growth in attacks and plots across the West with operational or inspirational ties to ISIS. These include the attacks in Paris last week; Garland, Texas, in May; Copenhagen in February; Paris in January; Sydney in December; Ottawa, Canada, in October 2014; and Brussels in May 2014.
ISIS leaders have now threatened the United States that it could be next. “I swear to God, as we struck France in its stronghold Paris, we will strike America in its stronghold, Washington,” an ISIS fighter declared in a video released this week. Chances are they mean it.
U.S. ISIS Influence on Web Prompts Second Thoughts on First Amendment
Cass R. Sunstein, Harvard law professor and former Obama administration official, broached the subject in November in an article on Bloomberg View. In view of Islamic State’s successful use of the Internet to nurture terrorists, it’s worth asking whether that test may be ripe for reconsideration.”
Obama information regulatory czar Sunstein: government should ‘infiltrate’ social network sites, chat rooms, message boards.
Just prior to his appointment as President Obama’s regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein wrote a lengthy academic paper suggesting government should “infiltrate” social network websites, chat rooms and message boards. Such “cognitive infiltration,” Sunstein argued, should be used to enforce a U.S. government ban on “conspiracy theorizing.”Among “conspiracy theories” recommended for ban by Sunstein :
“Global warming theory is a fraud.”
“Central Intelligence Agency was responsible for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.”
“1996 crash of TWA flight 800 was caused by a U.S. military missile.”
“The Trilateral Commission is responsible for important movements of the international economy.”
“ Martin Luther King Jr. was killed by federal agents.”
Cass R. Sunstein Harvard Law School, Adrian Vermeule Harvard Law School
Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 08-03, U of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 199, U of Chicago Law & Economics, Olin Working Paper No. 387
Jan. 15, 2008 Social Science Research Network http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585
Many millions of people hold conspiracy theories; they believe powerful people worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event. A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out by Israel or the United States. Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law. The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined. Such theories typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their self-sealing quality. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their beliefs; they may characterize that attempt as further proof of the conspiracy. Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology, in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration Various policy dilemmas, such as whether it is better for government to rebut conspiracy theories or to ignore them, are explored in this light.
2016: TO SURVIVE WE 7 BILLION MUST BURY THE POST WW2 GLOBAL WORLD ORDER THAT SURVIVES ONLY BY LIES AND GENOCIDAL TERROR
"... imperialism as the slave system of the West is called... It's one huge complex or combine, and it creates what's known not as the American power structure or the French power structure, but an international power structure. This international power structure is used to suppress the masses of dark-skinned people all over the world and exploit them of their natural resources."
"People who shut their eyes to reality invite their own destruction, anyone who insists on remaining in a state of innocence after that innocence is dead, turns himself into a monster."
"We think too small. Like the frog at the bottom of the well thinks the sky is only as big as the top of the well. If he surfaced, he would have an entirely different view."
Mao Tse Tung