Friday, May 29, 2009

The Associated Press's special report on Pentagon "influence operations"

knowbuddhau

Bravo, o brother my Brother. This is the most exciting potential of the Web (to me): busting myths, loaded with malign intent, even as propagandists deploy them.

With 27,000 "influence operators," a $4.7 billion budget, and the corporate media's obsequiousness (with a few notable exceptions), I wonder: what other attempts to jack our shared narrative are under way?

I'm still stunned by your 11 Feb 09 article in Harper's.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pentagon Targeted and Mistreated Journalists, AP Head Charges
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/02/hbc-90004359

The Associated Press's special report on Pentagon "influence operations" can be read here [ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29039384/ ]. The Pentagon's Public Affairs Office has been one of the last redoubts of the Neoconservatives. Burrowed Bush era figures remain in key positions in the office, which had responsibility for implementation of some of the Rumsfeld Pentagon's most controversial strategies in which

***the American public was targeted with practices previously associated with battlefield psy-ops.***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Doesn't that constitute our own military
firing on us? Are the influence operators any different than snipers? And the infamous "Message Force Multipliers"?

A) Hide intentions;
B) Fire "live" rounds at target audiences with high-power microphones etc. with the intention of forcing a change in behavior against the will of the target;
C) Make career-advancing killings.

Or we could see it as the attempt to hack into the psyches of Americans as if we were mere voting-machines on two legs.

My fellow psychologists have weaponized psyche itself, and the DoD has turned against us.

To our NSA-type fiends, with bodies to hide all over the world, are we, the sovereign citizens, now the enemy?

|
Reply
|
(1)

9:41 am, May 29, 2009
mblips

Thank you for drawing my attention to the Harper's piece. The MSNBC link does not work. Could you check and repost.

|
Reply
|
(1)

12:13 pm, May 29, 2009
knowbuddhau

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29060453/

There's a slight difference there at the end. Thanks for pointing it out, I've been habitually posting that dead link for months now.

The actual report is proving more elusive than I expected. Prof. Horton, a little help?

See also
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/05/pentagon-boosts-spending_n_1644 10.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/pentagon-propaganda

9:37 pm, May 29, 2009

No comments: