Monthly Archives: October 2007

USA Civilians Killed al Qaeda on the Internet

Reposted here because Internet Anthropologist recognizes the successes of the CIIDG/Civilian Information Militia / 101st Fighting Keyboardists / Cyber Vigilantes:

USA Government missed some things during the 6 yrs GWOT.

And to be fair the Army the Military branches of the Government have done an outsanding JOB of WAR. They adapted faster than any Corporation could have, the technology they have developed and deployed is awesome.

The KIA stats as compared to WWII and Vietnam show a clear focused effective Paradigm.

The USA Military are the most successful effective corporation in the world.

In gearing up for this war ( USA is always gearing up for the next WAR, its their job ) the Government missed the Internet effect and its capabilities as a force multiplier.

The civilian population were the first to experience, observe al Qaeda on the Internet, al Qaeda were the first to adapt the WWW paradigm. We found their Internet Risks and exploited them. The Internet is a force Multiplier, but also opens a back door to al Qaeda.

Just as the Americans on the jet liner took over the plane from the hijackers.
( On 911 it was Civilians that first stepped in and confronted al Qaeda face to face. )  American civilians saw the WWW void and stepped in, stepped up to serve.

Keyboard to keyboard.

Western Blogs stepped in to counter the Propaganda war, or the Infowar, and countered the lies and propaganda.

The thing that really amazed me and was unexpected is the quality of WAR analysis from the Civilian sector.

And I want to call this the “Brilliant civilian sector“.
It included the likes of Bill Roggio,Dancho Danchev, Douglas Farah, Ray Robison, team at Counter terrorism Blog, Jamestown, Laura Mansfield, Memri, Site, and many many others.And there have been Civilians leading the effort to shut down terror sites, when it was easier for Armed forces to get an approval to bomb a house and kill everyone than an OK to take down a server. The Civilian sector stepped in and took care of it. Thinking ‘leaving up’ or ‘taking down’ terror sitesEverytime al Qaeda screwed up the civilians were there to point it out, catch them and expose it.And there is another secret civilian sector with hacking abilities that regularly report to Government agencies.  Even Civilians to be-friend the terrorist on line and report their actionsWE all fight al Qaeda to the extent of our abilities and I salute you ALL.

Gerald
Anthropologist

Distributed, independent, non-hierarchical, agile.  Our non-state actors are better than their non-state actors.   

3 Comments

Filed under CNA, PSYOP Auxiliaries

VI Day?

RAMADI — The last parade held in downtown Ramadi was by insurgent forces in the fall of 2006 when the city was gripped in daily violence.

Times have changed now as government officials and city locals recently held a parade down Route Michigan here.

“The Iraqis were able to conduct this event without any attacks or influence from terrorist organizations because stability is to the point now where events like this can happen,”

 UPDATE:  Iraqi Islamic Party: “Al Qaeda is Defeated”

1 Comment

Filed under G-2

Democracies at 4GWar

Wolf Pangloss synthesizes Hammes and Claessen, and comes up with a great graphic

explaining the connection between the enemy and the more radical wing of the domestic opposition.  The self-described “moderate” wing of the domestic opposition cannot disassociate themselves from the enemy-sympathizing radicals because they need them to be the other bad cops in their good cop-bad cop-worst cop game of cut throat pool over the American domestic target audience.  But the good cop and the bad cop are in it together to clean the worst cop’s balls off the table

The counterinsurgent cannot start a war without justifying it to his electorate; he cannot include the opposition in the government and abandon the government’s political priorities for the entire duration of the war; and he cannot curtail the activities of the active minorities that oppose the counterinsurgency.

But active minorites that support the counterinsurgency can, perhaps not curtail, but expose, impede, demonize and degrade such activities.  These supportive minorities can do for the counterinsurgent what the counterinsurgent is forbidden to do.  The collusion between the ‘”moderate” opposition and the radical opposition, and that between the radical opposition and the enemy is a sledgehammer with which to impugn their patriotism. They hate that.  Throw the patriotism rock into that pack and listen to which dogs howl the loudest.

UPDATE:  See also
4GW Jihad and the role of the World Media and Conflict Map of the Counterjihad

4 Comments

Filed under Idea War

Who the hell is Glenn Greenwald?

The counterpropaganda technique of silence is overused, but does have one advantage:  silence does not call attention to the propaganda.

Made the mistake of looking at Instapundit, which took me to Patterico, which took me to to the moonbat in question, whose keyboard diarrhea wasted my time and whose commenters waste everybody else’s oxygen.  The port side of the blogosphere is now in bad need of Immodium.  I should never have come to the computer.  What little light has been shed by all this heat was not worth the sleep lost. 

Hard to know which moonbats to take seriously.  COL Boylan took him seriously enough to respond to him, if that was COL Boylan.

Comments Off on Who the hell is Glenn Greenwald?

Filed under Moonbats

The Best Explanation I’ve Seen

 . . . for why we are losing our ass in the infowar.

The Missing Component of U.S. Strategic Communications

by Colonel William M. Darley, USA, Director of
Strategic Communications for the Combined Arms
Center at Fort Leavenworth and Editor-in-Chief of
Military Review.

Read the whole thing, then go over to Swedish Meatballs and read the comments. 

Some of the best:

Not only does lack of consensus agreement directly impact our ability to develop a national strategic communications process to support agencies attempting to fight the current wars, but, more ominously, such agreement also is directly relevant to whether we as a nation will be able to survive the “Long War” now taking shape in the face of withering ideological challenges we can expect to those basic national values that have heretofore defined the United States as a nation and its citizens as uniquely American.

. . . we cannot agree among ourselves as to what we view as those cultural values of our own we are willing to openly assert are superior and preferable to those championed by our enemies as a reason for engaging in war, which by definition must be promoted and internalized by targeted  audiences in order for a war of ideas to be successful.  Yet the assertion of superiority of values as compared to those of an adversary must be, in fact, the essence of strategic communications messages aimed at achieving wartime political objectives.

The social pressure of a seemingly intractable war is polarizing in increasingly dangerous ways an already ideologically divided society, moving it toward another virtual domestic civil war among advocates of conflicting ideologies.

 . . . actual war between irreconcilable camps of ideological enemies who are increasingly gravitating to, if not openly rallying around, two inimical and antithetical sets of values as distinct as those that divide the Shia and Sunni factions in the Islamic world.

. . . the agendas of the domestic political parties have evolved to a point where they view the outcome of the war in Iraq less as an issue of homeland security than as a key factor in the success of their own parochial struggles to wrest domestic political power as a means to shape national values.  To this end, domestic political opponents increasingly appear to view the war as more about controlling future nominations to the Supreme Court than about defending American citizens or improving Middle Eastern stability.

 

16 Comments

Filed under Idea War, Info Warriors

Counterpropaganda Techniques

Lesson No. 8 in The School of the Counterpropagandist

A wide variety of techniques exist for countering propaganda. There is no “correct” or “best” technique; the techniques must be based upon the situation at hand.  More than one technique may be used in concert with another in a single product or action. The following are some of the more recognized techniques used:

Direct refutation. This technique is a point-for-point rebuttal of opponent propaganda allegations or themes.  This technique is best used in a very timely manner when Irregular PSYOP Auxiliaries have complete access to factual information regarding the allegation.  Personnel use this technique when they are confident that they can refute the propaganda with complete accuracy.   A disadvantage of using this technique is that direct refutation may draw added publicity, strength, and credibility to the opponent’s allegations. Additionally, this technique may draw additional publicity to the opponent’s propaganda by repeating and then refuting the information.  Irregular PSYOP Auxiliaries should avoid becoming involved in a “mudslinging” contest when using this technique to avoid damage to the supported force’s credibility.

 

Indirect refutation. This technique seeks to question the validity of some aspect of the opponent’s allegations or the source of the propaganda, thus challenging its credibility. This technique is often seen in courtroom trials where one side seeks to lower the credibility of “expert” witnesses. An advantage of using this technique is that indirect refutation does not bring added publicity or credibility to the propaganda by repeating certain aspects. Irregular PSYOP Auxiliaries should ensure that the facts used to damage the credibility of the propaganda are accurate and have some importance in the minds of the domestic audience. When seeking to lower the credibility of the source of the propaganda,personnel should avoid “name calling,” as this may potentially damage the credibility of the supported force.

Diversion. This technique involves the presentation of more important or relevant themes (in the eyes of the domestic audience) to draw attention away from the opponent propaganda. A critical factor in succeeding with this technique is to select an important topic to use as the diversion. The attempted diversion must be well planned and subtly executed. If the diversion is obvious to the audience, then the attempt will appear clumsy and consequently damage the credibility of the supported force.  Media selection is critical in using this technique, as the media used must be able to reach large numbers of the audience and divert their attention.

Silence. This technique does not respond to the opponent propaganda in any way. One exception to this technique is the use of remarks alluding to the opponent’s propaganda as being “unworthy of comment.” An advantage of this technique is that silence does not publicize the propaganda further or provide the opponent with potential feedback. This technique is used when the use of another technique may prove dangerous or when the situation and audience response is uncertain. One drawback of this technique is that the audience may question the absence of a response from the supported force. 

Restrictive measures. This technique denies the audience access to  the propaganda. Jamming, physical destruction, and occupation of media outlets are some examples of this technique.  Restrictive measures must be evaluated for their potential negative feedback potential before being implemented. This technique may also bring additional attention to the propaganda and encourage the audience to seek out the propaganda via covert means. When used in peacekeeping operations by U.S. forces, restrictive measures (such as shutting down radio stations) invite hostile propaganda against the supported unit concerning freedom of the media and freedom of speech. In addition, these measures are often used by repressive regimes, inviting the inevitable comparison.

 

Conditioning. Conditioning is a nonspecific means of eliminating potential vulnerabilities in the domestic audience before they can be exploited. This technique is preemptive in nature. Conditioning is very similar to a preventative action measure.  Irregular PSYOP Auxiliaries educate and inform audiences denied to Regular PSYOP forces concerning the supported force’s mission, intent, and operations. This technique does not specifically address potential themes that the opponent may use in a propaganda program against the force, but seeks to remove or reduce potential vulnerabilities before they can be exploited. A common Irregular PSYOP Auxiliary role using this technique is force entry to an area;  explaining the force’s reason for being there, legal justification for being there (UN resolution, and so on), and departure criteria. When using this technique, Iregular PSYOP Auxiliaries must avoid the use of specific end dates for operations, as political forces may change those dates.

Forestalling. This preemptive technique anticipates the specific themes the opponent may use in their propaganda and counters them before they reach the domestic audience. Irregular PSYOP Auxiliaries must know the opponent and be able to anticipate their reactions to an event or operation. This technique uses war gaming in analyzing the different possible outcomes from a planned event, from best-case scenario to worst-case.  Irregular PSYOP Auxiliaries then use counterpropaganda themes to bring the potential themes or issues to the domestic audience before the opponent does.   A detailed knowledge of opponent propaganda techniques and themes assists greatly when using this technique. This technique differs from conditioning in that Irregular PSYOP Auxiliaries preemptively address specific themes that the opponent may use.

Minimization.   Acknowledge selected elements of the opponent’s propaganda, but minimize the importance of the information.  A disadvantage of this technique is that opponent propaganda gains some credibility if counterpropagandists do not fully minimize its importance in the eyes of the audience. Minimization is an alternative to silence. This technique may also build some level of increased credibility in the eyes of the audience, as counterpropagandists appear to be acknowledging some truthful aspects and not just refuting them.

 


Regular PSYOP personnel often disregard counterpropaganda as there is not always an obvious threat or the task appears to be too difficult, or JAG has convinced them it is forbidden to them. They do not know or do not trust other organizations and agencies to fill the void in the absence of an overt PSYOP effort.

Direct Refutation is essentially fisking.  Subject Matter Experts can pwn most propagandists easily.   We have some of those.

Indirect Refutation is degrading the propagandist’s credibility with the audience.  We can do that.

Silence is what we’ve been getting from the Regulars.  Easy for them.  Hard on the morale of the American domestic target audience.  Silence means consent, agreement, acquiescence, or  emasculation.  We don’t need to do that.

Rusty Shackleford is having some success with Restrictive Measures.  Michael Tanji says Take downs make you feel good, but they accomplish little to nothing save for making it harder to monitor and disrupt online activity.   The possibility for IO fratricide is there, but the Regular InterAgency element that may be monitoring a site for its intelligence value could email guys like Rusty and ask them nicely to leave that site alone.  I think once the problem was explained, cooperation would be forthcoming.

Conditioning is the technique Irregulars can employ best.   That part of the domestic target audience that suspects the Main Stream Media of collaboration with the enemy is already conditioned.  We need to redouble our efforts to kill that messenger.

 

 

5 Comments

Filed under PSYOP, PSYOP Auxiliaries

The ‘cold civil war’

Mark Steyn piece here.

Free Republic thread here.

The Long War, the GWOT, the Third Jihad, the Eleventh Crusade, all hang in the balance until Western Christendom’s schizophrenic champion recovers it’s wits.

5 Comments

Filed under Idea War

Was I afraid of the liberal media back in the U.S.A? Yes.

 

 I have Lone Survivor.  Good day to start reading it.

The President of the United States of America, in the name of Congress, takes pride in presenting the Medal of Honor to Lieutenant Michael P. Murphy, United States Navy, for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his life, above and beyond the call of duty, as the leader of a special reconnaissance element with Naval Special Warfare Task Unit Afghanistan on 27 and 28 June 2005.

While leading a mission to locate a high-level anti-coalition militia leader, Lieutenant Murphy demonstrated extraordinary heroism in the face of grave danger in the vicinity of Asadabad, Konar Province, Afghanistan. On 28 June 2005, operating in an extremely rugged, enemy-controlled area, Lieutenant Murphy’s team was discovered by anti-coalition militia sympathizers who revealed their position to Taliban fighters. As a result, between 30 and 40 enemy fighters besieged his four-member team.

Demonstrating exceptional resolve, Lieutenant Murphy valiantly led his men in engaging the large enemy force. The ensuing fierce firefight resulted in numerous enemy casualties, as well as the wounding of all four members of his team. Ignoring his own wounds and demonstrating exceptional composure, Lieutenant Murphy continued to lead and encourage his men. When the primary communicator fell mortally wounded, Lieutenant Murphy repeatedly attempted to call for assistance for his beleaguered teammates. Realizing the impossibility of communicating in the extreme terrain and in the face of almost certain death, he fought his way into an open terrain to gain a better position to transmit a call. This deliberate heroic act deprived him of cover, exposing him to direct enemy fire. Finally achieving contact with his headquarters, Lieutenant Murphy maintained his exposed position while he provided his location and requested immediate support for his team.

In his final act of bravery, he continued to engage the enemy until he was mortally wounded, gallantly giving his life for his country and for the cause of freedom. By his selfless leadership, courageous actions, and extraordinary devotion to duty, Lieutenant Murphy reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

The hostile media in America adversely impacted tactical decisions in the field which led to the death of Lt. Murphy, Petty Officer Axelson, and Petty Officer Dietz. 

“Listen, Marcus.  If we kill them, someone will find their bodies real quick.  For a start, these fucking goats are just going to hang around.  And when these guys don’t get home for their dinner, their friends and relatives are going to head straight out to look for them, especially for this fourteen-year-old.  The main problem is the goats.  Because they can’t be hidden, and that’s where people will look.

“When they find the bodies, the Taliban leaders will sing to the Afghan media.  The media in the U.S.A. will latch on to it and write stuff about the brutish U.S. Armed Forces.   Very shortly after that, we’ll be charged with murder.  The murder of innocent unarmed Afghan farmers.”

To let these guys go on there way was military suicide.

“We’ve got three options.  We plainly don’t want to shoot these guys because of the noise.  So, number one, we could just kill them quietly and hurl the bodies over the edge.  That’s probably a thousand foot drop.  Number two is we kill them right here, cover ’em up as best we can with rocks and dirt.

“Either way we get the hell out and say nothing.  Not even when the story comes out about the murdered Afghan goatherds.  And some fucking headline back home which reads, ‘Navy SEALs Under Suspicion.’

“Number three, we turn ’em loose, and still get the hell out, in case the Taliban come looking.”

Lieutenant Murphy put it to a vote.  The goat herders lived.  The SEALs died.  The American media played a role in their deaths that you will have to research on your own.

7 Comments

Filed under Lawfare, Old Media

America seems to be under a glass dome which allows few hard facts from the field to filter in unless they are attached to a string of false assumptions

The situation in Iraq has drastically changed, but the inertia of bad news leaves many convinced that the mission has failed beyond recovery, that all Iraqis are engaged in sectarian violence, or are waiting for us to leave so they can crush their neighbors. This view allows our soldiers two possible roles: either “victim caught in the crossfire” or “referee between warring parties.”Hiding under the covers will not work, because whether it is good news or bad, whether it is true or untrue, once information is widely circulated, it has such formidable inertia that public opinion seems impervious to the corrective balm of simple and clear facts.

I believe we are witnessing a conspiracy of coincidences conflating to exert an incomprehensibly destructive force on the free press system that we largely take for granted.

Clearly, a majority of Americans believe the current set of outdated fallacies passed around mainstream media like watered down drinks at happy hour.

Go read Michael Yon’s Resistance is futile: You will be (mis)informed

Comments Off on America seems to be under a glass dome which allows few hard facts from the field to filter in unless they are attached to a string of false assumptions

Filed under Idea War

There are two ways to exercise power

The first is to make decisions for people who would be better off making them for themselves.

The second is to withhold information from people that would allow them to make better decisions for themselves.

Now that is just profound as hell.  The Blog Father linked to a site on which somebody calling themselves Chuck Pelto posted that comment.  Some of the best stuff in the blogosphere is in the comments. 

Witholding information, burying information, misinterpreting information, are all ways the public intelligence service voters depend upon in making their choices, AKA the Main Stream Media, attempt to prevent us from choosing “incorrectly”. 

Transparency and openly admitted biases allow the consumer to evaluate the reliability of the source of the information. 

Everybody has an agenda.  The closer your agenda is to what you perceive is the agenda of your information source, the more credibility you assign that source.  We have reached the point where the same event can be reported by opposing sources without either source reporting anything that is not true, but the truth that serves their agendas are amplified and emphasized and the truth that does not serve their agendas is ignored or minimized or obscured.  The analysis and conclusions drawn from one set of presented facts will be very different from an opposing set. 

Choose your sources wisely.

Comments Off on There are two ways to exercise power

Filed under Idea War

Plausibly Deniable Cat Herders

Pretty much everybody who is reading this knows that Morale Operations are being conducted in cyber space.  Judging from the commenters, I reckon most acknowledge the political and ideological impediments to victory in the Iraq Campaign and the wider struggles of which it is but a subset.  It gives me no pleasure to contemplate the bitter fact that millions of my countrymen want us to lose.  I really do not want a politicized military, but, the military knows who wishes them well and who wishes them ill.  Some people may consider me a bag of shit for bringing up the schism in the American domestic target audience that makes the successful projection of American diplomatic, information, military and  economic power ever more difficult, contentious, glacial and rare, but I call ’em like I see ’em.  America is a divided nation.  We do not present a united front to the enemy.   We were unified, briefly, in the fall of ’01, but we didn’t stay unified.  I wonder if we will ever be unified again.  Will the losers ever again be good sports in defeat, and act as a LOYAL Opposition until the next election? 

I want my Westphalian nation-state to  survive the 21st Century as the  representative Republic established under the Constitution of 1787.  That puts me in opposition to millions of my countrymen, to multiculturalists, to  Postmodernists, to Transnational Progressivists,  to radical environmentalists, and especially to the Politically Correct.   That also puts me in opposition to a number of powerful politicians who count many of the above among their constituents, and to some whose notions of non-partisanship preclude any overt appearance of agreement with me.  I am NOT non-partisan.  Not anymore.

The pro-Victory side of the blogosphere is picking up a lot of the slack in the domestic infowar.    Department of Defense is content to allow themselves to be lawfared out of the War of Ideas on the homefront, and the Other Government Agencies , IF they are really engaged, are OPSECing themselves out of any benefit of the doubt.  The lack of any reason to trust that the professionals are doing much counterpropaganda, added to the failure of the leadership to mobilize the people towards  a structured, controlled, useful contribution to the war effort, has resulted in the self-mobilization of private individuals, groups, nongovernmental organizations, and businesses to do for the government and the people what the government appears to be unable to do for itself, and us.  Much of this self-mobilization is being done online, in the domain of cyberspace.

Some  cyber “vigilantes”  or privateers  may have played a role in shutting down Obelisk, much to the consternation of some, and  IO Minutemen are conducting what amounts to Computer Network Attack against YouTube jihadis, and it’s all very uncontrolled and chaotic and Blue Force now has a friendly Brown Force to consider, and the friendly Brown Force has to concern itself with IO fratricide.  Michael Tanji recommends Brown

begin to lobby the gov’t to extend their relationship with independents/irregulars to go beyond exchanging public affairs-type data. Your functional peers on the inside know and see the value; you have friends and advocates (and peers). You need to get past the old school and the luddites. This could be very successful if you crack the code.

If the best effort is made and no hand is extended, by all means continue, but just understand that you run the risk of gumming up the few activities on the inside that are engaged (and there are some).

Lobbying .gov and/or .mil is politically unacceptable to the Majority in the Legislature.  Anybody who gets too cozy with the right side of the blogosphere will get burned.

If they get caught.

35 Comments

Filed under PSYOP Auxiliaries

I Don’t Think This Is Unintended

Doug Ross, via Glenn Reynolds

This is the kind of easily understood, graphic, powerful product the Office of War Information coordinated for the domestic target audience back in the day.  Self-mobilized volunteer information operators have to do now what the .gov has lawfared itself out of.

Go look.

2 Comments

Filed under PSYOP Auxiliaries

As violence falls in Iraq, cemetery workers feel the pinch

I shit you not.

H/T:  The Blog Father

2 Comments

Filed under Old Media

If you get this gig, hire me

As a public service to my readers, I pass along this tidbit I ran across.  I know some of you meet these requirements.

 We are seeking a Senior Strategic Psychological Operations (PSYOP)/Information Operations (IO) Planner, with Joint/Multi-National Command experience, to work in Baghdad, Iraq.
The candidate will provide strategic PSYOP/IO planning at the Multi-National Forces Iraq (MNF-I) Command level, with special emphasis in Trans-Regional PSYOP planning, support, synchronization and amplification of information operations effects and strategic communications strategies. The candidate will apply special operations (SO) imperatives in PSYOP mission planning and execution and assist and make recommendations to the commander and staff on PSYOP matters and requirements. The candidate will prepare appropriate PSYOP portions of operational plans and orders and coordinate with other MNF-I commands and PSYOP units.
Required Experience/Skills: Minimum 5-10 years experience as a PSYOP Specialist; Joint/Unified Command level Experience; Recent (with-in two years) PSYOP Strategic planning experience.Clearance Requirement: Current Secret clearance and able to obtain/maintain a Top Secret clearance.

I’m ready to go back.   Send me!

Comments Off on If you get this gig, hire me

Filed under PSYOP

Cherry Picking LTG Sanchez’s Speech to to Advance MY Agenda

The entire trancript is here.  Below I have selected some things he said with which I strongly agree. 

 I HAVE FIRMLY BELIEVED SINCE DESERT SHIELD THAT IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE STRENGTH OF OUR DEMOCRACY THAT THE MILITARY AND THE PRESS CORPS MAINTAIN A STRONG, MUTUALLY RESPECTFUL AND ENABLING RELATIONSHIP. THIS CONTINUES TO BE PROBLEMATIC FOR OUR COUNTRY, ESPECIALLY DURING TIMES OF WAR. 

IN SOME CASES I HAVE NEVER EVEN MET YOU, YET YOU FEEL QUALIFIED TO MAKE CHARACTER JUDGMENTS THAT ARE COMMUNICATED TO THE WORLD. MY EXPERIENCE IS NOT UNIQUE AND WE CAN FIND OTHER EXAMPLES SUCH AS THE TREATMENT OF SECRETARY BROWN DURING KATRINA. THIS IS THE WORST DISPLAY OF JOURNALISM IMAGINABLE BY THOSE OF US THAT ARE BOUND BY A STRICT VALUE SYSTEM OF SELFLESS SERVICE, HONOR AND INTEGRITY. ALMOST INVARIABLY, MY PERCEPTION IS THAT THE SENSATIONALISTIC VALUE OF THESE ASSESSMENTS IS WHAT PROVIDED THE EDGE THAT YOU SEEK FOR SELF AGRANDIZEMENT OR TO ADVANCE YOUR INDIVIDUAL QUEST FOR GETTING ON THE FRONT PAGE WITH YOUR STORIES! AS I UNDERSTAND IT, YOUR MEASURE OF WORTH IS HOW MANY FRONT PAGE STORIES YOU HAVE WRITTEN AND UNFORTUNATELY SOME OF YOU WILL COMPROMISE YOUR INTEGRITY AND DISPLAY QUESTIONABLE ETHICS AS YOU SEEK TO KEEP AMERICA INFORMED. THIS IS MUCH LIKE THE INTELLIGENCE ANALYSTS WHOSE EFFECTIVENESS WAS MEASURED BY THE NUMBER OF INTELLIGENCE REPORTS HE PRODUCED. FOR SOME, IT SEEMS THAT AS LONG AS YOU GET A FRONT PAGE STORY THERE IS LITTLE OR NO REGARD FOR THE “COLLATERAL DAMAGE” YOU WILL CAUSE. PERSONAL REPUTATIONS HAVE NO VALUE AND YOU REPORT WITH TOTAL IMPUNITY AND ARE RARELY HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR UNETHICAL CONDUCT.

GIVEN THE NEAR INSTANTANEOUS ABILITY TO REPORT ACTIONS ON THE GROUND, THE RESPONSIBILITY TO ACCURATELY AND TRUTHFULLY REPORT TAKES ON AN UNPRECEDENTED IMPORTANCE. THE SPECULATIVE AND OFTEN UNINFORMED INITIAL REPORTING THAT CHARACTERIZES OUR MEDIA APPEARS TO BE RAPIDLY BECOMING THE STANDARD OF THE INDUSTRY. AN ARAB PROVERB STATES – “Four things come not back: the spoken word, the spent arrow, the past, the neglected opportunity.” ONCE REPORTED, YOUR ASSESSMENTS BECOME CONVENTIONAL WISDOM AND NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO CHANGE. OTHER MAJOR CHALLENGES ARE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO BE MANIPULATED BY “HIGH LEVEL OFFICIALS” WHO LEAK STORIES AND BY LAWYERS WHO USE HYPERBOLE TO STRENGHTEN THEIR ARGUMENTS. YOUR UNWILLINGNESS TO ACCURATELY AND PROMINENTLY CORRECT YOUR MISTAKES AND YOUR AGENDA DRIVEN BIASES CONTRIBUTE TO THIS CORROSIVE ENVIRONMENT. ALL OF THESE CHALLENGES COMBINED CREATE A MEDIA ENVIRONMENT THAT DOES A TREMENDOUS DISSERVICE TO AMERICA. OVER THE COURSE OF THIS WAR TACTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT EVENTS HAVE BECOME STRATEGIC DEFEATS FOR AMERICA BECAUSE OF THE TREMENDOUS POWER AND IMPACT OF THE MEDIA AND BY EXTENSION YOU THE JOURNALIST. IN MANY CASES THE MEDIA HAS UNJUSTLY DESTROYED THE INDIVIDUAL REPUTATIONS AND CAREERS OF THOSE INVOLVED. WE REALIZE THAT BECAUSE OF THE NEAR REAL TIME REPORTING ENVIRONMENT THAT YOU FACE IT IS DIFFICULT TO REPORT ACCURATELY. IN MY BUSINESS ONE OF OUR FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS IS THAT “THE FIRST REPORT IS ALWAYS WRONG.” UNFORTUNATELY, IN YOUR BUSINESS “THE FIRST REPORT” GIVES AMERICANS WHO RELY ON THE SNIPPETS OF CNN, IF YOU WILL, THEIR “TRUTHS” AND PERSPECTIVES ON AN ISSUE. AS A COROLLARY TO THIS DEADLINE DRIVEN NEED TO PUBLISH “INITIAL IMPRESSIONS OR OBSERVATIONS” VERSUS OBJECTIVE FACTS THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL CHALLENGE FOR US WHO ARE THE SUBJECT OF YOUR REPORTING. WHEN YOU ASSUME THAT YOU ARE CORRECT AND ON THE MORAL HIGH GROUND ON A STORY BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT RESPOND[ed] TO QUESTIONS YOU PROVIDED [that] IS THE ULTIMATE ARROGANCE AND DISTORTION OF ETHICS. ONE OF YOUR HIGHLY REPECTED FELLOW JOURNALISTS ONCE TOLD ME THAT THERE ARE SOME AMONGST YOU WHO “FEED FROM A PIG’S TROUGH.” IF THAT IS WHO I AM DEALING WITH THEN I WILL NEVER RESPOND OTHERWISE WE WILL BOTH GET DIRTY AND THE PIG WILL LOVE IT. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOUR STORY IS ACCURATE. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THIS IS WHAT OUR FOREFATHERS INTENDED. THE CODE OF ETHICS FOR THE SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS STATES:
…PUBLIC ENLIGHTENMENT IS THE FORERUNNER OF JUSTICE AND THE FOUNDATION OF DEMOCRACY. THE DUTY OF THE JOURNALIST IS TO FURTHER THOSE ENDS BY SEEKING TRUTH AND PROVIDING A FAIR AND COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNT OF EVENTS AND ISSUES. CONSCIENTIOUS JOURNALISTS FROM ALL MEDIA AND SPECIALTIES STRIVE TO SERVE THE PUBLIC WITH THOROUGHNESS AND HONESTY. PROFESSIONAL INTEGRITY IS THE CORNERSTONE OF A JOURNALIST’S CREDIBILITY.

THE BASIC ETHICS OF A JOURNALIST THAT CALLS FOR:

1. SEEKING TRUTH,

2. PROVIDING FAIR AND COMPREHENSIVE ACCOUNT OF EVENTS AND ISSUES

3. THOROUGHNESS AND HONESTY

 ALL ARE VICTIMS OF THE MASSIVE AGENDA DRIVEN COMPETITION FOR ECONOMIC OR POLITICAL SUPREMACY. THE DEATH KNELL OF YOUR ETHICS HAS BEEN ENABLED BY YOUR PARENT ORGANIZATIONS WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH POLITICAL AGENDAS. WHAT IS CLEAR TO ME IS THAT YOU ARE PERPETUATING THE CORROSIVE PARTISAN POLITICS THAT IS DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY AND KILLING OUR SERVICEMEMBERS WHO ARE AT WAR.

MY ASSESSMENT IS THAT YOUR PROFESSION, TO SOME EXTENT, HAS STRAYED FROM THESE ETHICAL STANDARDS AND ALLOWED EXTERNAL AGENDAS TO MANIPULATE WHAT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC SEES ON TV, WHAT THEY READ IN OUR NEWSPAPERS AND WHAT THEY SEE ON THE WEB. FOR SOME OF YOU, JUST LIKE SOME OF OUR POLITICIANS,
THE TRUTH IS OF LITTLE TO NO VALUE IF IT DOES NOT FIT YOUR OWN PRECONCIEVED NOTIONS, BIASES AND AGENDAS.

IT IS ASTOUNDING TO ME WHEN I HEAR THE VEHEMENT DISAGREEMENT WITH THE MILITARY’S FORAYS INTO INFORMATION OPERATIONS THAT SEEK TO DISSEMINATE THE TRUTH AND INFORM THE IRAQI PEOPLE IN ORDER TO COUNTER OUR ENEMY’S BLATANT PROPAGANDA. AS I ASSESS VARIOUS MEDIA ENTITIES, SOME ARE UNQUESTIONABLY ENGAGED IN POLITICAL PROPAGANDA THAT IS UNCONTROLLED. THERE IS NO QUESTION IN MY MIND THAT THE STRENGTH OUR DEMOCRACY AND OUR FREEDOMS REMAIN LINKED TO YOUR ABILITY TO EXERCISE FREEDOM OF THE PRESS – I ADAMANTLY SUPPORT THIS BASIC FOUNDATION OF OUR DEMOCRACY AND COMPLETELY SUPPORTED THE EMBEDDING OF MEDIA INTO OUR FORMATIONS UP UNTIL MY LAST DAY IN UNIFORM. THE ISSUE IS ONE OF MAINTAINING PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND STANDARDS FROM WITHIN YOUR INSTITUTION. MILITARY LEADERS MUST ACCEPT THAT THESE INJUSTICES WILL HAPPEN AND WHETHER THEY LIKE WHAT YOU PRINT OR NOT THEY MUST DEAL WITH YOU AND ENABLE YOU, IF YOU ARE AN ETHICAL JOURNALIST.FINALLY, I WILL LEAVE THIS SUBJECT WITH A QUESTION THAT WE MUST ASK OURSELVES–WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE ETHICAL STANDARDS OF THE PROFESSION IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT OUR DEMOCRACY DOES NOT CONTINUE TO BE THREATENED BY THIS DANGEROUS SHIFT AWAY FROM YOUR SACRED DUTY OF PUBLIC ENLIGHTENMENT?

He has much to say about the failures of the Administration, but you can click on the link above on your own.  Perhaps his harsh criticism of the administration makes his even harsher excoriation of the media more palatable to the administration’s domestic enemies.  MY agenda is changing the minds of the American domestic target audience about the value and credibility of the information they receive from the Main Stream Drive By Media.   I seek to expose their bias and convince people not to believe the psychological operations products they partner with the enemy to disseminate.  The mind of the American voter is the key terrain in this Long War.  Nobody is doing much to protect and defend that key terrain.  We The People must Observe, Orient, Decide and Act, and there are plenty of forces at work to distort what we observe so we make the wrong decisions and act as they desire.

8 Comments

Filed under Old Media

Irregular Restrictive Measures — Blogospheric Computer Network Attack

One of the lessons in the School of the Counterpropagandist that I haven’t posted yet was the counterpropaganda technique of restrictive measures.   

This technique denies the intended Target Audience access to the propaganda. Jamming, physical destruction, and occupation of media outlets are some examples of this technique. Restrictive measures must be evaluated for their potential negative feedback potential before being implemented. This technique may also bring additional attention to the propaganda and encourage the TA to seek out the propaganda via covert means. When used in peacekeeping operations by U.S. forces, restrictive measures (such as shutting down radio stations) invite hostile propaganda against the supported unit concerning freedom of the media and freedom of speech. In addition, these measures are often used by repressive regimes, inviting the inevitable comparison.

Pressuring the host ISP to take down jihadi websites is also an example of restrictive measures.

Why does our government allow American internet service providers to host them?  My assumption is that the government agency tasked with tracking jihadi websites (and I’m not sure which one is) misses a lot of them and is too politically correct to take much action against the sites they do find.  I assume this because the government has done nothing to engender any warm and fuzzy feelings that they know what they are doing in the info war.  I’m not a defeatist. I support the war.  I want to help.  My perception has been managed, accidently or by design on somebody’s part, to assume that the Other Government Agencies are incompetent in fighting the War of Ideas.  On matters of efficiency, effectiveness,  judgement, agility,  speed, I don’t give OGA’s much benefit of the doubt.  My default position holds them as jacked up until proven otherwise.  But it is possible my negative assumptions are not as well founded as I think.

Michael Tanji is concerned about loose cannon cyber vigilantes shutting down fly paper sites that were providing good intel for network analysis.

Spook86 assures us the intel community knows far more about Al Qaida communications than most people realize–and that fact isn’t widely publicized, for obvious reasons.

The Good Guys, both Blue Force Regulars and friendly Brown Force Irregulars, want the same end result.  Blue Force failed to mobilize us, so we have come out of the mall and mobilized ourselves.  Blue Force failed to convince us that they had everything under control and didn’t need us, and now they have to live with a certain amount of IO fratricide.  The genie is out of the bottle.  Our non-state actors are engaging their non-state actors in cyber space and Blue Force  can influence, persuade and convince but they cannot command us.  I recommend they accept the fait accompli, learn to like it, and get people to believe it was their idea all along. 

UPDATE:  Lessons from the latest intelligence leak  We seem to be averse to penetrating networks as far as we can and then destroying the offending terminal or hub.

Tracking Jihadis Online Fox News video

DON’T MISS THIS: 

Inshallashshaheed Outted: North Carolina Jihadi in the News (UPDATED)

 

7 Comments

Filed under PSYOP Auxiliaries

Now THIS is PROPAGANDA at it’s finest!

“No Wonder They Call it the Holy Land” via Purpleslog

3 Comments

Filed under PSYOP

The U.S. still has a national military, it no longer has a national media

Robert D. Kaplan writes, in Modern Heroes,

The sad and often unspoken truth of the matter is this: Americans have been conditioned less to understand Iraq’s complex military reality than to feel sorry for those who are part of it.

The cult of victimhood in American history first flourished in the aftermath of the 1960s youth rebellion, in which, as University of Chicago Prof. Peter Novick writes, women, blacks, Jews, Native Americans and others fortified their identities with public references to past oppressions. The process was tied to Vietnam, a war in which the photographs of civilian victims “displaced traditional images of heroism.” It appears that our troops have been made into the latest victims.

Media frenzies are ignited when American troops are either the perpetrators of acts resulting in victimhood, or are victims themselves. Meanwhile, individual soldiers daily performing complicated and heroic deeds barely fit within the strictures of news stories as they are presently defined.

Fox’s war coverage is less right-wing than it is simply old-fashioned, antediluvian almost. Fox’s commercial success may be less a factor of its ideological base than of something more primal: a yearning among a large segment of the public for a real national media once again–as opposed to an international one. Nationalism means patriotism, and patriotism requires heroes, not victims.

Feeling comfortable with heroes requires a lack of cynicism toward the cause for which they fight.

When a war becomes unpopular, the troops are in a sense deserted.

An army at war and a nation at the mall do not encounter each other except through the refractive medium of news and entertainment.

That medium is refractive because while the U.S. still has a national military, it no longer has a national media to quite the same extent. The media is increasingly representative of an international society, whose loyalty to a particular territory is more and more diluted. That international society has ideas to defend–ideas of universal justice–but little actual ground. And without ground to defend, it has little need of heroes. Thus, future news cycles will also be dominated by victims.

Multi-culti PC pomo tranzie journos have been depriving us of our heroes because they don’t want us to have any.  Doesn’t fit their template or support their preferred narrative.  The party that profits from victimhood has recently shown it’s true feelings towards the military, yet they are the Majority and hold the power of the purse over every program and can give the kiss of death to any general’s career.  This is yet another political battle private citizen surrogates will have to fight on behalf of our apolitical military.  

Milblogs have become the interpreters, the interface between the boots on the ground and the folks back home who yearn for heroes.  A pitifully small percentage of the American domestic target audience has any worthwhile knowledge of military affairs.  Many really would like to know more, and they are relying on the public intelligence system, the Drive By Media, and it is failing them and us miserably.

Because modern American warfare now involves only a very small percentage of the population it has become a kind of spectator sport where the plays are actually called from the stands. One would hope on good information. Yet a news industry whose techniques were adequate to cover traffic accidents, murders or cumbrous wars in which armies moved a few hundred yards a day must now must cover events whose complexion can alter in hours. The difference is that this time there is no low-tech acetate overlay, maps, or timeline in battalion notebook. Battlefield events are still reported like isolated traffic accidents, conveying no sense of spatial location, temporal development or continuity. To the extent that any symbols are plotted on the public mental map, they remain there, hours or days after the information has been updated. Long after it became clear that the attack may not have been an attack on a wedding party at all, the original accusation soldiered on.

Some of us are already engaged in a proxy war within the American domestic target audience, attempting to uphold the values that produce the intelligent, physically fit, committed, PATRIOTIC young American NATIONALISTS this Republic cannot do without if it is to continue as a viable Westphalian nation-state.  Our heroes cannot legally do what must be done, and we really don’t want an overtly partisan military.  There are polite fictions that must be maintained.

 Relentless, destructive critique of MSM persons and publications is among the most important tasks of bloggers, commenters, and tipsters of the Right Pro-Victory side.  – Kralizec, in a comment at Hot Air.

They’re running down my country, hoss, and walkin’ on the fightin’ side of me.  And I’m Jacksonian enough to slap their jaws and force them to resent it.

11 Comments

Filed under Old Media

Effects Synchronization

  WASHINGTON, Oct. 3, 2007 – A multi-pronged approach to conflict resolution that includes military force coupled with a powerful social push is vital to winning over hearts and minds and countering insurgents’ lure, a U.S. Central Command official said today.During a news conference at the Foreign Press Club here, Air Force Brig. Gen. Robert H. Holmes, deputy director of operations for U.S. Central Command, told reporters that his command is exploring a counterinsurgency concept called “effects synchronization.”

“This is a new approach to looking at all of the national and international instruments of power that actually go beyond the military,” he said. “(They) look at the diplomatic activities, political activities, economic activities, social and cultural activities that really need to come together as we look at the particular conflict or activities we’re in.”

Holmes serves as chairman on U.S. Central Command’s effects synchronization committee. The group comprises headquarters staff members from areas that include operations, resourcing, intelligence, planning and public affairs. Other representatives hail from the departments of State, Justice and Treasury, plus the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the intelligence community.

“We sit and address the common goals and objectives for our region,” he said. “And in addition to just the kinetic, or those hardcore combat operations, … we say, ‘What do we need to do with non-kinetic operations? What might we need to do with humanitarian ops?’”

The general said military efforts that are married to those of interagency partners create a hybrid force that is more effective than if components were to operate independently. “It’s about what we as the military to do in synchronization and integrated with other elements of power,” Holmes said.

The military’s limitations and the need for additional problem-solving means are especially profound in asymmetric conflicts like Afghanistan and elsewhere, Holmes said.

“With regard to asymmetric warfare, what we’re in is, in a sense, a battle for hearts and minds, not for military objectives,” he said. “It’s about the hearts and minds of the people, not only of the Middle East, but of the world.”

Those engaged in asymmetric warfare around the globe eschew “values that are very important to peace-loving peoples of the world,” the general said.

“If these violent actors are able to pursue their vision, to pursue their end-states, then (victory) ultimately rests on being able to go after the hearts and minds of many of the world’s population,” he said.

By helping to build Afghanistan’s fledgling government, infrastructure and economy, U.S. efforts present a more promising future to Afghans than do Taliban or other extremist elements.

“What we do in Afghanistan gives a very strong signal; it communicates our intent,” Holmes said. “We don’t just come in and create a situation and then leave, but we stay. We stay there for the good of that nation, and we stay there for good of the international community.”

The American domestic target audience is part of the world population.  If there is a government agency going after our hearts and minds it’s doing a piss poor job.  A significant and powerful branch of our government would not allow it to do a good job anyway.  The solution to that problem lies outside of government.

Is IA Information Assurance or InterAgency? 

H/T:  SandRat

6 Comments

Filed under IA, IW

Cyber Mobilization

Spent a few hours googling the Israeli Cyber Soldiers, thinking that may be an example for how an American Virtual Information Militia could operate.  Learned a little about Megaphone , read some about Collactive.  This was news last year but it was new to me because I was decisively engaged last year and didn’t hear about it until recently.  So I keep reading and evaluating the information I can find, both pro and con, and killed an afternoon only to come to the conclusion in the end that this ain’t it.  The OSINT I could collect leads me to conclude that spamming the opposition with canned comments and sending form letter emails is not all that effective.  But YMMV, so FYI here is GIYUS.org

Coalition Against Terrorist Media looks promising.  Maybe we need a coalition against terrorist-sympathizing media.  On my blogroll are several sites that meet that description.  How do we grow them?

3 Comments

Filed under IW, PSYOP Auxiliaries